Abe Lincoln was a dictator??? (Need Help combating loony argument)

[erod]

Hi FRiends,

I have two brothers who I love very much, they’re young and libertarian Ron Paul supporters, sigh. We get along and I’m hoping that one day they’ll come back to conservatism, but they have bought into a theory that I don’t think makes much sense:

Abe Lincoln was a dictator.

There are many websites dedicated to this nonsense you can Google "Abe Lincoln dictator" and get some weird stuff, if you want to check it out.

I need your help in busting this myth are there any books I can read on this subject to dispel this stuff? Do you know any of the arguments to combat this nonsense? Ie. Lincoln did not want to free the slaves.

Thanks for taking time out of your day to help me out, -Erod

[Non-Sequitur]

Nobody ever mentions the attempt by Connecticut to secede during the war of 1812.

Actually yeah, they did.

Editorial titled “The True Question” which appeared in the Richmond (Virginia) Enquirer on November 1, 1814.

"The Union is in danger. Turn to the convention in Hartford, and learn to tremble at the madness of its authors. How far will those madmen advance? Though they may conceal from you the project of disunion, though a few of them may have even concealed if from themselves, yet who will pretend to set the bounds to the rage of disaffection? Once false step after another may lead them to resistance to the laws, to a treasonable neutrality, to a war against the Government of the United States. In truth, the first act of resistance to the law is treason to the United States. Are you ready for this state of things? Will you support the men who would plunge you into this ruin?

No man, no association of men, no state or set of states has a right to withdraw itself from this Union, of its own accord. The same power which knit us together, can only unknit. The same formality, which forged the links of the Union, is necessary to dissolve it. The majority of States which form the Union must consent to the withdrawal of any one branch of it. Until that consent has been obtained, any attempt to dissolve the Union, or obstruct the efficacy of its constitutional laws, is Treason--Treason to all intents and purposes.

Any other doctrine, such as that which has been lately held forth by the ‘Federal Republican’ that any one State may withdraw itself from the Union, is abominable heresy – which strips its author of every possible pretension to the name or character of Federalist.

We call, therefore, upon the government of the Union to exert its energies, when the season shall demand it – and seize the first traitor who shall spring out of the hotbed of the convention of Harford. This illustrious Union, which has been cemented by the blood of our forefathers, the pride of America and the wonder of the world must not be tamely sacrificed to the heated brains or the aspiring hearts of a few malcontents. The Union must be saved, when any one shall dare to assail it.

Countrymen of the East! We call upon you to keep a vigilant eye upon those wretched men who would plunge us into civil war and irretrievable disgrace. Whatever be the temporary calamities which may assail us, let us swear, upon the altar of our country, to SAVE THE UNION.

My how times changed...

[Non-Sequitur]

I've always preferred the term tyrant.

Dictator...tyrant...one is just as inaccurate as the other.

....and a white supremecist.

So was Bobby Lee, Jeff Davis, and every other Southerner you would care to mention.

[Gurn]

I know that. But Lincoln met with freed blacks and told them that while he favored emancipation, he would NEVER support blacks' being able to vote, intermarry or serve on juries.

Just another facet of "Father Abraham" that never gets reported in the history books. He also in his first inaugural said he would support a constitutional amendment forever preserving the right to own slaves in the states it then existed.

[Retired Greyhound]

Google: Walter Williams and Abraham Lincoln.

“the Emancipation Proclamation applied only to slaves in states in rebellion against the United States and not to slaves in states not in rebellion. “

“Lincoln’s motivation for proclamation was the war was going badly for the Union and there was the possibility that England and other European powers, who had recently abolished slavery, might give the Confederacy economic and political aid, but would not do so if the war was seen as a war against slavery.”

[cripplecreek]

Its always seemed that the south paid huge sacrifices to preserve the nation in the war of 1812. Fighting from lousisiana to Michigan, only to fight to destroy the nation a generation later.

[equalitybeforethelaw]

You might want to do the same. Tariffs are applied to imported goods, not exports. Per Article I, Section 9: “No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.”

One more reason to leave the union. They financed the Fed on taxes of exports, they felt cheap cotton should go to New England rather than England. If Egypt did not have bumper cotton crops in 1862-64, the British would have allied with the Confederacy. Imagine the British Navy knocking heads with the Union Navy? A whole different outcome would have been possible.

This was a war that Lincoln caused, not one chosen by the people. It could easily be said that Lincoln was over his head as President and an entire generation paid the price. Sound familiar?

[WayneS]

Slavery was still legal in the City of Washington DC at that time, also, wasn’t it?

[Repeat Offender]

I read a book similar to this quite some time ago

http://www.amazon.com/South-Had-Won-Civil-War/dp/0312869495

It may have been this one at the link. It was pretty good. It went into soe of the politics and "feelings" of how the two countries ated toward each other now that the South had won.

Off topic, there was a movie "Fatherland" where Hitler won the war in Europe (we were still victorious in the Pacific). The movie has JFK as the hero that publicly embarasses Hitler after JFK learns of the concentration camps moments before the meeting.

It's interesting to see different takes on history in the "what if" sense...... the problem is the revisionist history passed as fact in the public skrewl textbooks....

[ml/nj]

It's not so loony. Lincoln destroyed the government bequeathed to us by Jefferson, Madison, et al. Read Charles Adams' When in the Course of Human Events. Check his references. Cross check what he says with other sources that you select. You will never think of Lincoln as a great man again.

I've always been a Yankee. I've just learned that all I learned in high school isn't all there is to learn.

ML/NJ

[gusopol3]

Make that about eight separate countries; What reason would the west coast have had to stick with the east. Plus you forgot about the slave rebellion that would have ripped through the south , aided and abetted by northern abolitionists, unrestrained by Lincoln's elaborate respect for the fugitive slave law, etc., which he announced he would uphold in the first inaugural. Plus, if states can secede from the union, presumably parts of states can secede, as in fact did happen in West Virginia, undoubtedly would have occurred in East Tennessee, probably western N.Carolina. Palin wouldn't have had to worry about the "I can see Russia from my house " jokes because her house would have been in Russia. But not to worry, one of the European powers, probably Britain, but maybe Germany, who knows, even Japan with a foothold in Hawaii, would have stepped in to clean things up. Aztlan anybody?

[ontap]

As far as I can tell any attempts to use communicable diseases came from one man DR Luke Blackburn...a civilian. Jefferson Davis isn’t even mentioned!

[equalitybeforethelaw]

Slavery was still legal in the City of Washington DC at that time, also, wasn’t it?

Yep. Revisionist history says it was a war to free the slaves. It was no such thing. If it was, somebody should have told Grant that he was breaking the law by owning slaves. This was not a problem for Lee. The war was fought to preserve Lincoln’s relevancy. He caused the split so he felt he needed to repair it. Funny how he went about it. An entire generation slaughtered.

[cripplecreek]

Don’t worry, I fully expected for you to look for a means of denial.

Typical

[dinoparty]

There are theories all over the place, but facts are facts. The fact is that the war was not initially a war to end slavery, that is true. It did, however, turn into a war to end slavery. Moreover, Lincoln’s position on slavery was THE fundamental cause of southern seccession. I don’t see how you can deny that.

[WayneS]

I couldn’t find any mention of it in the article you cited, so maybe you can tell us: How many U.S. troops did Jefferson send to Connecticut and/or Massachusetts to “put down” the secessionist movement?

[WayneS]

And yet, “Emancipation Day” is currently a City holiday in D.C.

I think that is at least somewhat ironic.

[Snickering Hound]

[cripplecreek]

How many U.S. troops did Jefferson send to Connecticut and/or Massachusetts to “put down” the secessionist movement?

He didn't need to send troops, the people where apparently a hell of a lot smarter than the south when they started the civil war.

[Non-Sequitur]

I know that. But Lincoln met with freed blacks and told them that while he favored emancipation, he would NEVER support blacks' being able to vote, intermarry or serve on juries.

Completely untrue. As early as 1864 he was suggesting that Louisiana may want to give some blacks the vote to a delegation representing that states loyal government. As late as April 11th Lincoln said publicly, "I would myself prefer that [suffrage] were now conferred on the very intelligent, and those who served our cause as soldiers..." He, like many others, realized that if the freed slaves did not get the vote then they would have no means of protecting their rights from the white populace.

He also in his first inaugural said he would support a constitutional amendment forever preserving the right to own slaves in the states it then existed.

Because it limited slavery to where it existed, and protected the right of Congress to halt its expansion to the territories. The very reason why the Corwin Amendment was entirely unacceptable to the South.

[Non-Sequitur]

Its always seemed that the south paid huge sacrifices to preserve the nation in the war of 1812.

Like?