Posted on 01/20/2014 1:42:16 PM PST by mhutcheson
President Lincoln has been all but deified in America, with a god-like giant statue at a Parthenon-like memorial in Washington. Generations of school children have been indoctrinated with the story that Honest Abe Lincoln is a national hero who saved the Union and fought a noble war to end slavery, and that the evil Southern states seceded from the Union to protect slavery. This is the Yankee myth of history, written and promulgated by Northerners, and it is a complete falsity. It was produced and entrenched in the culture in large part to gloss over the terrible war crimes committed by Union soldiers in the War Between the States, as well as Lincolns violations of the law, his shredding of the Constitution, and other reprehensible acts. It has been very effective in keeping the average American ignorant of the real causes of the war, and the real nature, character and record of Lincoln. Let us look at some unpleasant facts.
In his first inaugural address, Lincoln stated clearly that (1) he had no legal authority to interfere with slavery where it existed, (2) that he had no inclination or intention to do so even if he had the legal authority, (3) that he would enforce the Fugitive Slave Act, returning runaway slaves escaping to the North to their masters in the South, and (4) that he fully supported the Thirteenth Amendment then being debated in Congress which would protect slavery in perpetuity and was irrevocable. He later famously stated, Do not paint me with the Abolitionist brush.
Although there was some opposition to slavery in the country, the government was willing to concede everything the South wanted regarding slavery to keep it in the Union. Given all these facts, the idea that the South seceded to protect slavery is as absurd as the idea that Lincoln fought the war to end slavery. Lincoln himself said in a famous letter after the war began that his sole purpose was to save the Union, and not to either save or end slavery; that if he could save the Union without freeing a single slave, he would. Nothing could be clearer.
For decades before the war, the South, through harsh tariffs, had been supplying about 85% of the countrys revenue, nearly all of which was being spent in the North to boost its economy, build manufacturing, infrastructure, railroads, canals, etc. With the passage of the 47% Morrill Tariff the final nail was in the coffin. The South did not secede to protect slavery, although certainly they wished to protect it; they seceded over a dispute about unfair taxation, an oppressive Federal government, and the right to separate from that oppression and be governed by consent, exactly the same issues over which the Founding Fathers fought the Revolutionary War. When a member of Lincolns cabinet suggested he let the South go in peace, Lincoln famously replied, Let the South go? Where, then, would we get our revenue! He then launched a brutal, empirical war to keep the free and sovereign states, by force of arms, in the Union they had created and voluntarily joined, and then voluntarily left. This began his reign of terror.
Lincoln was the greatest tyrant and despot in American history. In the first four months of his presidency, he created a complete military dictatorship, destroyed the Constitution, ended forever the constitutional republic which the Founding Fathers instituted, committed horrendous crimes against civilian citizens, and formed the tyrannical, overbearing and oppressive Federal government which the American people suffer under to this day. In his first four months, he
Four months after Fort Sumter, when Lincoln finally called Congress back into session, no one dared oppose anything he wanted or speak out against him for fear of imprisonment, so completely had he entrenched his unilateral power and silenced his other many critics. The Union army, under Generals Grant, Sherman, Sheridan and President Lincoln, committed active genocide against Southern civilians---this is difficult for some to believe, but it is explicit in their writings and dispatches at the time and indisputable in their actions. Tens of thousands of Southern men, women and children---civilians---white and black, slave and free alike---were shot, hanged, raped, imprisoned without trial, their homes, lands and possessions stolen, pillaged and burned, in one of the most horrific and brutal genocides ever inflicted upon a people anywhere; but the Yankee myth of history is silent in these well-documented matters. For an excellent expose of these war crimes and their terrible extent, see War Crimes Against Southern Civilians by Walter Brian Cisco (Pelican Publishing Co. 2007, ISBN 9871589804661).
Only after the Union had suffered two years of crushing defeats in battle did Lincoln resolve to emancipate the slaves, and only as a war measure, a military tactic, not for moral or humanitarian purposes. He admitted this, remarking, We must change tactics or lose the game. He was hoping, as his original draft of the document shows, that a slave uprising would occur, making it harder for Southerners to continue the war. His only interest in freeing the slaves was in forcing the South to remain in the Union. His Emancipation Proclamation was denounced by Northerners, Southerners and Europeans alike for its absurdity and hypocrisy; for, it only freed the slaves in the seceded states---where he could not reach them---and kept slavery intact in the North and the border states---where he could have freed them at once.
The Gettysburg Address, the most famous speech in American history, is an absurd piece of war rhetoric and a poetry of lies. We were not engaged in a great Civil War, to see whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, can long endure. The South was engaged in a War of Independence from a tyrannical North, and after having legally seceded, wished only to be let alone. The North was engaged in a war of empire, to keep the South involuntarily under its yoke. Government of the people, by the people and for the people would not have perished from the earth had the North lost the war; on the contrary, it perished in the United States when the North won the war; for, freely representative government, by consent of the governed, is exactly what the South was fighting for and exactly what Lincolns military victory destroyed.
The checks and balances of powers, the separation of powers, the constitutional constraints so carefully and deliberately put into place by the Founding Fathers, had all been destroyed in Lincolns first months. The Republic which the Founders gave us had been completely destroyed and a new nation-state was set up; one in which the free and sovereign States would afterward be only vassals and tributaries, slaves to an all-powerful, oppressive Federal government. This new nation-state is completely different in both nature and consequence to the original American Republic. One only has to look around today to see the end results and legacy of Lincolns war, his destruction of freedom, and his institution of despotic, centralized governmental power and tyranny.
In retrospect, it is a tragedy that John Wilkes Booth did not act four years earlier. Slavery would have ended naturally, as it has everywhere else (except in African and Arab states); the American Republic, liberty, and 700,000 lives would have been saved, and untold thousands of those young men would have lived to contribute their ingenuity, inventions, creativity and talents to the political, economic, literary, scientific and social legacy of our people. And the greatest despotic tyrant in American history would never have gained the foothold of power or been able to establish the oppressive and omnipotent Federal government we all suffer under today.
BTTT
The fort belonged to the federal government. It didn’t matter where it was located. The aggression was on the part of the slavrocracy.
“The South wanted to continue in slavery. “
Sure, but so did some northern States. In fact, Jim Crow laws were alive and well in the North. Even Lincoln sought to keep freed slaves out of Illinois. The Northern States may have been a few years ahead of the southern States in ridding themselves of slavery, but they were not of clean hands by any means. That, and it wouldn’t have been long before slavery was a goner in the south, too.
It’s interstng that you do not mention John Brown and his followers. Terrorists, no?
“Now we have a mortar wall with fifty marbles embedded in it.”
Thank you...an interesting analogy...
Another person who spouts only what they were indoctrinated with in public skule.
I was thinking a bullet in the head for his tyranny.
Classic response to the truth by someone who doesn’t like it...
Every northern state either had abolished slavery or had a defined path to emancipation.
In fact, Jim Crow laws were alive and well in the North.
Jim Crow laws were uniquely southern. The north did have black codes that bore some similarity.
That, and it wouldnt have been long before slavery was a goner in the south, too.
Not when you permanently enshrine the Particular Institution into your constitution and the cornfederates did.
You’re a disgusting pig.
“What a better world this would be if the south would have picked their own dam cotton!”
John Deere does it for them now, and with machines made in the north (John Deere Des Moines Works)...
...guess that makes it all John Deere’s fault...they didn’t invent their cotton pickers soon enough!
Spot on!
And you are a effing retard with your head so far up your ass you need a window to see out of.
Well with any luck a little of what you wish for will come back on ya.
What AM I wishing for? Have I wished ill on anyone? Last time I checked, Lincoln was still dead.
Good grief. I was actully trying to help you out. When one habitually misuses a word one necessarily calls into question one’s basic argument. In other words, if you don’t know the proper words to use in making your point, your point is disregarded as immaterial, and is thus ignored.
Of course the south did. The sout SOS, Toombs argued against firing on the fort. If they had not, things would have been much different. Slavery was a great evil. Freeing the slaves would have changed a severely tainted cause and turned it into a moral and just cause.
I intensely dislike Øbozo but I would never wish him dead. One, because it's disrespectful and two, because its dazzlingly stupid. To wish assassination of ANY president is contemptible and the product of a diseased mind.
You do not belong among honorable people.
Excellent; kudos.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.