This is a difficult one to address because, in my humble estimation, a lot of the better historians have passed away.
I agree. Ever since the neo-Radical view once again became the dominant view among Civil War scholars a few decades ago, there has been a great deal of intolerance and group think in Civil War scholarship.
But, there are some living scholars who have shown a willingness to be objective on some key issues and to debunk some traditional myths. Three come to mind:
-- Dr. Michael Holt, University of Virginia -- Holt has produced tremendous research to prove that the issue of slavery in the territories was a bogus, phony issue. His 2005 book
The Fate of Their County: Politics, Slavery Extension, and the Coming of the Civil War drew sharp criticism, but also some praise, from mainstream scholars. Holt's criticism of Lincoln's refusal to compromise on slavery in the territories has drawn especially sharp attacks from traditional historians.
-- Dr. Tom Clemens, a retired professor of history who earned his doctorate in history at George Mason University -- Clemens has argued strongly against the traditional view of General George B. McClellan as a timid, incompetent general. Clemens debunks the main neo-Radical myths about McClellan in his extensive editorial notes in his edited version of Ezra Carman's old book
The Maryland Campaign of 1862, Volume 1. Clemens is still active in Civil War research.
-- Dr. Ethan Rafuse, professor of military history at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College -- Rafuse is another Civil War scholar who has challenged the neo-Radical version of General George McClellan's battlefield performance. But Rafuse has gone further than that: He has challenged the claim that McClellan was pro-slavery and disloyal to Lincoln. His 2005 book
McClellan’s War: The Failure of Moderation in the Struggle for the Union sent shockwaves through the traditional camp of Civil War scholarship. If you've read any of Rafuse's exchanges with neo-Radical historians, you know that he has more than held his own in those discussions.
Actually, I would add Dr. William Cooper to that list. He's retired now, and he published his last book on the Civil War in 2012, but he's still alive. He was a professor of history at LSU and earned his degrees at Johns Hopkins and Princeton. I met him in 2003 at one of his lectures on Jefferson Davis. His 2012 book
We Have the War Upon Us resurrects what was a solidly mainstream position for several decades from the '30s through the '70s, namely, that the war could have been avoided, that the Republicans and the Fire-Eaters sabotaged reasonable compromise plans (more so the Radicals), that Lincoln committed some tragic blunders in the lead-up to the collision at Sumter, etc.