I had never heard of this before. You are telling me that Lincoln sent a fleet of warships to Charleston with orders to force their way in... because the confederates were planing to surround and overrun Washington DC?
Why has this never been mentioned before? I've read a lot of civil war history, and i've never heard of a plot to takeover Washington DC. Where did you get this information?
but when Governor Faubus directly challenged federal authority, Ike called out the National Guard. In this too, he was following in Lincoln's footsteps.
Using the military force of the United States against the people of America is indeed a Lincoln like tactic, but unlike Lincoln, Ike did it to support the rule of law in the US, instead of to force his own control on the people.
Lincoln did not believe in equality, and he very much wanted to induce and encourage black people to leave the United States. But this is the sort of stuff people nowadays do not talk about because it makes Lincoln look bad by modern standards.
Why has this never been mentioned before? I've read a lot of civil war history, and i've never heard of a plot to takeover Washington DC. Where did you get this information?
You may not be able to help being a fool, but you don't need to be snarky about it. Try to keep up with the conversation. You wrote: "Lincoln did not enforce the law as written. He suspended habeas corpus and locked people up willy nilly for simply criticizing him." That is what we were talking about. And while I think more was involved than simply criticism, Lincoln suspended habeus corpus to prevent rebels from taking over Maryland and keep the capital from being surrounded or overrun. He might well have had to do that even if he had let Sumter fall to the rebels.
Using the military force of the United States against the people of America is indeed a Lincoln like tactic, but unlike Lincoln, Ike did it to support the rule of law in the US, instead of to force his own control on the people.
For the segregationists of the 1950s what Eisenhower was doing at Little Rock was similar to or the same as what Lincoln was doing a century before in the eyes of the secessionists. Both stood up for the union and the rule of law.
Lincoln did not believe in equality, and he very much wanted to induce and encourage black people to leave the United States. But this is the sort of stuff people nowadays do not talk about because it makes Lincoln look bad by modern standards.
Lincoln came closer to believing in equality than 90% percent of his contemporaries and closer than some of Eisenhower's contemporaries.
And what do you mean by saying people don't talk about that now? Some people talk about nothing else. At this point the surprising thing is that he was as friendly to African-American aspirations as he was given his era and his background.
Do you know what "circular reasoning is"?
Do you? I have pointed out time and time again that you reject non-material motivations beforehand and then, when you don't see any, conclude that there weren't any. That is circular reasoning. But you never respond to this. It's nice that you've learned the phrase, but disappointing that you don't recognize it in your own postings.