Posted on 04/19/2010 8:18:35 AM PDT by 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
Simple, you could contrast a Jeffersonian democracy against an industrial plutocracy. My guess is slavery would have ended by the 1880s. Not because of northern meddling but because of economics. The South would have continued to develop their industrial centers versus being burnt to the ground, making them steadily more and more independent. The South would have allied themselves with England and maybe France for manufactured goods. The changes to the North under these circumstances would have been the most interesting. My guess is if the CSA were to have survived, the North would have been embroiled in nasty relations with England as a competitor for raw materials, finished products and available markets. The frontier west would likely have felt more at home with the Confederacy than the Union as the westward migration continued. I doubt Canada, Englands colony, would have become economically integrated with the North. Essentially, given this bleak picture for the North, I would imagine they would have invaded the South again within 20 years to secure raw materials and markets for their industries. The simple truth always was the South could do without the North, but the North could never make it without the South. For this reason the spousal abuse was instigated by the North and continued for a century. I guess the North believes wives should remain married to abusive husbands. Lincoln in a nutshell.
Hmm. You know our First socialist President, Woodrow Wilson wouldn’t have gotten reelected without the South. Food for thought.
no one knows what it would like like, it’s like anything in history, no one knows.
Maybe more states might have broken up or maybe in the south would be rich, leader of the world where as the north is run down due tot heir welfare programes, illegals, homosexuals having their agenda.
I guarantee that many yankees would be wanting to come down here like they still do.
Shame some of them are so thick they do not understand the south is not the north so don’t go try changing it as people get pissed off with you
Is N-S male or female? Or Both?
What’s your bet?
Is N-S male or female? Or Both?
Female on caffine.
No, my BS level doesn't approach the level of the Lost Cause brigade. But what the hell, I'll play his game too. Without the harm caused by Southern presidents like Wilson and LBJ and Carter and Clinton and Bush I think that FDRs excesses would have been reigned in by Congress and the Supreme Court - because we, at least, would have one. FDR would have been an anomaly and yes, I believe the U.S. would be a far more capitalist country than it is right now. Most likely far more free market oriented than the third world cesspool the confederacy would have become.
I could ask him a few questions to verify but he won't answer.
For instance: What characteristic made the the ships in Desron 4 different from the other squadron?
NS, LBJ, Carter and Clinton were nothing more than weak sock puppets of FDR (an industrial plutocrat with a populist streak). Had the CSA survived none of the known history would have occured. My guess is the North would have felt extremely vulnerable sandwiched between Canada, an English colony, and the Confederacy an ally of England. Given the North would have had to feed its urban centers through exports, exactly who would they have exported to? Latin and South America? Under these circumstances domestic history would have reverted to the frontier west and competition for new States. In foreign policy the North would have been squeezed out by England and France in Europe.
I think, an ex-naval officer that is on retirement. He was stationed, I think, at N.S. Charleston SC for a while in the 80’s.
So I was right, a female on caffine.
The last attempt was via a House Bill in 2009. It did not pass because, apparently because the Maryland Senate chose to "take no action" on it.
That makes no sense at all. FDR was president decades BEFORE all of the other men you listed except Woodrow Wilson. How did the harm they caused prevent FDR from being reined in by the Supreme Court?
I’m sorry but my crystal ball is on the blink right now but I will hazard a guess.
I imagine that if the seceding states had been allowed to go their own way in peace that over time the issues causing the separation would have been resolved and that there would be close cooperation, if not complete reunion, by now between the two nations. We would also still enjoy the constitutional republic(s) we once had instead of the mercantile empire Lincoln’s war imposed on us.
Okay, be nice!
;-)
Not possible!
---------------------------------------------------------
Question: What do you get when you cross a pig and a Yankees fan?
Answer: Nobody knows. There are some things even a pig won't do.
If the south had won a long and protracted war I speculate that the reparations required of the U.S by the Confederacy would have ruined them financially and that the most, if not all, of the former union states would have eventually either reunited with the confederacy or joined the Canadian union. They could not have survived as they then existed.
Southern hyperbole aside, Wilson and FDR did more to establish the concept of a big, intrusive government than anyone else. Without the support of the 'solid south' and it's leadership in the House and Senate would FDR have been able run amuck to the extent that he did? Without FDRs example, would LBJ or Carter or Clinton done the damage they did?
Since the rebellion we've had 9 Democrats in the White House. Five of them have been Southerners. A sixth wouldn't have been elected without the South. Without the damage done by them then the U.S. would be a much different place.
In my personal experience, although it often takes a long time, almost every discussion I have with someone who argues Lincoln was a tyrant ultimately comes down to a defense of slavery and to racism. I have yet to find an exception. There is no denying the Confed. Constitution went out of its way to protect slavery seven ways from Sunday. If the war wasn’t about slavery, you sure could have fooled the Confederates.
The did plenty to be sure but the fellow who opened the doors through which they walked is none other than Mr. Lincoln and his entourage of leaders of failed socialist revolutions in Europe half a generation earlier who had left their countries one step ahead of the hangman and came here. Unfortunately, they did not leave their ideologies behind!
Wow Impy, all discussion of Lincoln comes down to slavery, is pretty much saying that Lincoln is all light and goodness and anything he did is okay because he was against slavery. Don’t bother reading the last 670 posts. You know there are still alot of Russians who think Stalin was good because he was against capitalism and made Russia strong. How easily it is to avoid judging a man on the behavior of his acts by citing the ends achieved. Guess a generational slaughter caused by goodness and light was worth it? Pay no attention to world wide trend of slavery being abolished without killing an entire generation, Lincoln is good because he killed an entire generation to achieve that which would have been achieved naturally. Shoosh. Narcissism, paranoia and over reach are not a 21st century attributes. Lincoln was incompetent and an ideologue. He caused the split. He then spent four bloody years attempting to put the genie he released back in the bottle. He personally okayed making war on civilians. He personally okayed imprisoning his opponents based on allegations of “spying”. He personally okayed the maltreatment of prisoners. He personally disfigured the relationship between citizens and their government forever. Be honest and assign responsibility to those responsible. Lincoln was an ogre, a tyrant, and an embarassment to founders and the Constitution.
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.