I don't disagree. I think the authoritarian left and right see each other in each faction, but the translation doesn't make any sense.

The Linconite change to the US was a major one, but to claim that Lincoln or the Radical Republicans were socialists or Leftists is a terrible misunderstanding of their different factions. Similarly, the Abolitionists were not nearly as moral as the establishment likes to paint them. Clearly industrial interests were going to be involved, and there is a clear division between industrialists and the plantation system, but the industrialists didn't need a war to acquire economic power in the south. That being said, I can't overstate the stupidity of any "conservative" or even paleo-conservative that would allege that the Confederates were some form of Libertarian or traditionalists who were being unjustly attacked. The Slaveocracy was quite real, quite powerful, and highly authoritarian as the Fugitive Slave Law shows. Meanwhile, the religious authoritarians of the north were also clearly having an effect and were a major moral and popular force in the war.

Many people want to ascribe the 1800's as if it were a time significant freedom in the US, but it's fairly clear it wasn't that free nor individualist. While Liberal Revolutions were taking place across Europe in the 1840's-1860's, Liberalism in America did exist on both sides of the north/south divide, and while any genuine Liberal must oppose enslavement, many were petrified of a race war. Liberalism, overall in the country, had seemed to partly dissolve after our initial revolution.

It appears, to me, that the spirit of 1776 had slowly faded away by the Jackson administration, and Liberalism itself had not fully taken root in every layer of the culture of the republic. It seemed that Authoritarianism was supposed to be tolerated everywhere except the federal government.