I have only learned of this thing we now call "Crony Capitalism" in the last decade or so. Prior to that, I had no inkling that there was in fact collusion between powerful government officials and powerful wealthy men of business.
Once I learned of it, and the Obama administration (that other race obsessed Liberal Lawyer President from Illinois) was a very good lesson on the subject, I started seeing evidence of it throughout history, and especially in the run up to the Civil War.
The subsequent corruption of the Grant Administration and the widespread corruption during the "Gilded Age", demonstrates that Lincoln was greatly responsible for expanding this back door influence selling scheme between government and business.
This thing that came to resemble what we later know as Nazism.
>>Kalamata wrote: “Lincoln was a crony-socialist, Joey, as was Buchanan.”
>>DiogenesLamp wrote: “I have only learned of this thing we now call “Crony Capitalism” in the last decade or so. Prior to that, I had no inkling that there was in fact collusion between powerful government officials and powerful wealthy men of business.”
The powerful in the Whig Party, such as Clay and Webster, were unabashed crony capitalists. Lincoln’s hero was Clay.
****************
>>DiogenesLamp wrote: “Once I learned of it, and the Obama administration (that other race obsessed Liberal Lawyer President from Illinois) was a very good lesson on the subject, I started seeing evidence of it throughout history, and especially in the run up to the Civil War.
LOL! Once you see it, you cannot un-see it.
****************
>>DiogenesLamp wrote: “The subsequent corruption of the Grant Administration and the widespread corruption during the “Gilded Age”, demonstrates that Lincoln was greatly responsible for expanding this back door influence selling scheme between government and business.”
The so-called “reconstruction” helped root-out any serious opposition to the cronyism. The remainder of the century was pure plunder by the “republicans.”
****************
>>DiogenesLamp wrote: “This thing that came to resemble what we later know as Nazism.”
Exactly. Obama is a devout fascist, relying on the legacy of Lincoln’s consolidation of power to implement his destructive policies. Does anyone know in whose pockets Obama’s $10 trillion in debt ended up?
Mr. Kalamata
Sorry, but both of you fellows have seemingly been driven to insanity by mere words, in this case the term "crony capitalism".
In fact, that term refers to nothing quantifiable:
"The first extensive use of the term "crony capitalism" came about in the 1980s, to characterize the Philippine economy under the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos.[4] "
Bottom line is that "crony capitalism" is just a form of corruption and standards for what is, or is not, "corrupt" can change over time.
So practices considered acceptable 200 years ago might be exposed and outlawed 100 years ago to be replaced with new technology & corrupt practices today.
But there is no quantitative measurement we can use to say if we today are any less or more corrupt than people of either 100 or 200 years ago.
DiogenesLamp: "The subsequent corruption of the Grant Administration and the widespread corruption during the "Gilded Age", demonstrates that Lincoln was greatly responsible for expanding this back door influence selling scheme between government and business. "
First of all, there's no quantifiable evidence that corruption overall under Grant was any more or less than any previous administration.
What we do have are anecdotal reports, some with all the reliability of today's fake news about President Trump's alleged collusion.
Second, blaming Lincoln for events long after he was murdered seems to me beyond even insane, it's just outright malicious lying.
Finally, the "Gilded Age" was the period of fastest economic growth in American history:
"Economic historian Clarence D. Long estimates that (in terms of constant 1914 dollars), the average annual incomes of all American non-farm employees rose from $375 in 1870 to $395 in 1880, $519 in 1890 and $573 in 1900, a gain of 53% in 30 years.[57] "
Now, suppose also that over the years our standards for what is, or is not, "corrupt" change, and so what we are actually measuring is not increasing corruption but rather ever higher standards applied to relatively constant behavior.
Of course, there is no such metric and even if there were, we couldn't be certain exactly what it measured.
My point is: there's no rational reason to let mere words like "crony capitalism" drive you to paroxysms of insanity and frothing at the mouth over your fantasies of "tyranny" and "oppression" by Lincoln decades after he was dead!