My understanding of the sources is that the Fredrickson argued that there are several explanations of “why the North won”, but “The problem with most of them os not that they are wrong but that there are partial or incomplete…”and McPherson argued that North won the war because of all of the advantages that they had in resources, manpower, and leadership. McPherson believed out off the explanations the “loss of the will to fight” for the South is what defeated them. He stated, “Defeat causes demoralization and loss of will; victory pumps up morale and the will to win.” Both Fredrickson and McPherson brought up that the North had the “advantages in manpower, resources, and industrial capacity.” Looking at the facts North had advantage in population of 2:1, …show more content…
In the North, businessmen knew that war and business worked well together and with the, “success of the industrial system in producing the goods required…” (Fredrickson), the home front were able to play a vital role in the North’s victories in battle. On the other hand for the Confederates, their general’s Lee and Jackson and with their need for “loyalty and respect of their men.”, contributed in the tension that erupted in the Confederacy, because of their southern characteristics, “The idea of obeying an officer simply because of rank went against the southern grain.” (Fredrickson) This then affected their development in the war, which allowed the, organized and innovative, North the time they needed to prepare and apply those skills to battle.For the Southern home front, with the realization of what they were up againist and the internal problems that they were facing, “The South suffered from a “weakness in morale,” a “lose of the will to fight.””(McPherson). The advantages of the North kept increasing, but for the South, more problems were adding up for them and in the end it became to much to