REMEMBERING MR. LINCOLN

Powerline ^ | 12 Feb 2024 | Scott Johnson

[DiogenesLamp]

It was to tell Charlie’s mother that her son had been killed in action and buried up in Virginia.

I should have guessed that. There were a lot of such letters written in that era.

The war was a waste of life on both sides. It was avoidable, and the world would have been a better place had a more moral man become President.

[dfwgator]

It was to tell Charlie’s mother that her son had been killed in action and buried up in Virginia.

What a coincidence, Beau Biden was killed there too.

[cowboyusa]

Slaves could have been used for other purposes than picking cotton, like mining and other things. If the South had stayed in the Union, slavery might have lasted till the mide early 20th Century.

[ComputerGuy]

If not, he soon will be.

[cowboyusa]

Some have said that Lincoln was born again in office. Regardless GOD uses ungodly people all the time. Stonewall Jackson, I belive was a true beliver, but GOD removed him from the fight at the time he did, and Jackson bowedbefore GOD’S Sovereignty.

[DiogenesLamp]

But you’re reading of this is bizarre and off kilter.

If you mean it's contrary to the crowd, then yes, you are correct. I don't make up my mind about what to believe by following along with other people. I read and think on my own, and arrive at conclusions that make sense to me.

Lincoln has made "all men are created equal" the only five words that people know from the Declaration of Independence, and they are taken quite out of context.

The document is about freedom for the states from England. It is not at all about slaves or slavery.

Making people think it is about slaves or slavery is a deliberate misdirection. The Declaration of Independence is only about the right to leave a government that no longer serves the people's interest.

The perception of it has been warped to be about slavery, and it had nothing to do with slavery.

It supported what the Southern states did, but Lincoln portrayed it as supporting what he did. This is a deliberate misdirection.

It's the sort of thing a con man does.

And if you think i'm the only one who saw it this way, H.L. Mencken wrote a few words on the subject about a century ago.

"Am I the first American to note the fundamental nonsensicality of the Gettysburg address?"

[ifinnegan]

It means you don’t understand English. “Dedicated to the proposition”

[ifinnegan]

“ Thanks for the Declaration of Independence.”

Gettysburg Address.

[DiogenesLamp]

Slaves could have been used for other purposes than picking cotton, like mining and other things.

But they weren't. If you go to the Wikipedia entry for "New Mexico Territory", it points out that when "New Mexico Territory" extended all the way from Texas to California, there were less than a dozen slaves in the entire region over it's entire history up to the 1860s.

And this was a time when it was legal to have slavery in those regions. There just weren't any, and that's because there was no profit to it.

A slave was much more profitable working a plantation in the growing regions of the South.

So real world evidence shows that your theory that they would have been used, (and how many slaves do you need in a mine compared to a plantation?) is demonstrably incorrect.

If they could have made money with them, they would have used them. Since they didn't, it's evident that there was no profit in it.

[DiogenesLamp]

It means you don’t understand English. “Dedicated to the proposition”

So you are saying our "New Government" in 1776 was "dedicated to the proposition" that all their slaves should go free?

So why didn't they do that? The history doesn't show them to be dedicated to that proposition at all. It shows them to be dedicated to the proposition that they should be free of England, and able to govern themselves, much as the Southern states tried to do.

They kept their slaves. They didn't free them. It was years later before the first states even started trying to free them.

[cowboyusa]

The South was always going to be at a disadvantage to the free market North.

[DiogenesLamp]

The South was always going to be at a disadvantage to the free market North.

Well yeah, with the North keeping most of the 750 million dollars per year the South pumped into their economy, the South always was at an economic disadvantage, but it had nothing to do with the "free market."

Washington DC was *FORCING* the South to pay 72% of all the taxes, and *FORCING* them to hire Northeastern companies to handle all their shipping, banking, warehousing, financing, insurance and other needs, which is how so much Southern money kept getting pumped into the Northeaster economy.

This isn't a "Free market". It is closer to fascism.

[cowboyusa]

The Slavery System was a failure, semi ,- Socialistic and inherently anti- free market. Leading Southerners actually referred to the Slave Economy as Socialist. The US Government was small before before the war.

[DiogenesLamp]

The Slavery System was a failure,

If it was a failure, it would have collapsed on its own. It wouldn't need a million man army to stop it.

It was in fact, quite successful economically, but it wasn't going to be tolerated after it became a threat to the Washington DC establishment.

[libertylover]

Used to be a holiday. Lincoln’s birthday.

Only one American now has a holiday named after him/her - Martin Luther King, Jr., not to mention black history MONTH.

[ifinnegan]

Dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Proposition.

It’s the philosophical Christian foundation of the United States.

[ifinnegan]

Interesting. I’d never thought about that.

President Day is stupid.

[cowboyusa]

The North had better Indistry, manuerfactur8ng and Railroads.

[DiogenesLamp]

Dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Proposition.

It’s the philosophical Christian foundation of the United States.

You are reaching here. The country was indeed envisioned as resting on the natural law foundation of Christianity, but those people who considered themselves good Christians were interested in their own welfare, and had given not much thought to the welfare of the slaves.

Trying to make the Declaration of Independence about slavery is just misdirection. It was about Independence for states, which was the very thing Lincoln was fighting against.

[DiogenesLamp]

The North had better Indistry, manuerfactur8ng and Railroads.

The best that Southern money could pay for.