HISTORICAL IGNORANCE II: Forgotten facts about Lincoln, slavery and the Civil War

We call the war of 1861 the Civil War. But is that right? A civil war is a struggle between two or more entities trying to take over the central government. Confederate President Jefferson Davis no more sought to take over Washington, D.C., than George Washington sought to take over London in 1776. Both wars, those of 1776 and 1861, were wars of independence. Such a recognition does not require one to sanction the horrors of slavery. We might ask, How much of the war was about slavery?

Was President Abraham Lincoln really for outlawing slavery? Let's look at his words. In an 1858 letter, Lincoln said, "I have declared a thousand times, and now repeat that, in my opinion neither the General Government, nor any other power outside of the slave states, can constitutionally or rightfully interfere with slaves or slavery where it already exists." In a Springfield, Illinois, speech, he explained: "My declarations upon this subject of Negro slavery may be misrepresented but cannot be misunderstood. I have said that I do not understand the Declaration (of Independence) to mean that all men were created equal in all respects." Debating Sen. Stephen Douglas, Lincoln said, "I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes nor of qualifying them to hold office nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races, which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality."

What about Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation? Here are his words: "I view the matter (of slaves' emancipation) as a practical war measure, to be decided upon according to the advantages or disadvantages it may offer to the suppression of the rebellion." He also wrote: "I will also concede that emancipation would help us in Europe, and convince them that we are incited by something more than ambition." When Lincoln first drafted the proclamation, war was going badly for the Union.

London and Paris were considering recognizing the Confederacy and assisting it in its war against the Union.

The Emancipation Proclamation was not a universal declaration. It specifically detailed where slaves were to be freed: only in those states "in rebellion against the United States." Slaves remained slaves in states not in rebellion — such as Kentucky, Maryland, Delaware and Missouri. The hypocrisy of the Emancipation Proclamation came in for heavy criticism. Lincoln's own secretary of state, William Seward, sarcastically said, "We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free."

Lincoln did articulate a view of secession that would have been heartily endorsed by the Confederacy: "Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and form a new one that suits them better. ... Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can may revolutionize and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit." Lincoln expressed that view in an 1848 speech in the U.S. House of Representatives, supporting the war with Mexico and the secession of Texas.

Why didn't Lincoln share the same feelings about Southern secession? Following the money might help with an answer. Throughout most of our nation's history, the only sources of federal revenue were excise taxes and tariffs. During the 1850s, tariffs amounted to 90 percent of federal revenue. Southern ports paid 75 percent of tariffs in 1859. What "responsible" politician would let that much revenue go?

Wow. Too much irony and self-contradiction by you in that one. I will certainly fess-up to what you call "neener neener" behavior. But I like to be fair and give people what they ask for. And you were asking for neener-neener with your feigned naivety.

Not that I really care, but for your sake, you state the "we" don't give homework assignments around here (and then remind me that "you" told "me" to look up Rhett's speech). You say Rhett can't be a visionary and a bigot, but then it seems like you go on to say that Lincoln was a visionary bigot. I'm not really sure. And then it seems that you are informing me that the ACW is settled science around here and that the reasons for Southern secession are no longer open to discussion. (I am really trying hard to resist going tit for tat).

Let it suffice to say, that I hereby retract the question posed earlier to you and "all", (i.e., "If the South had won the war would it have freed the slaves?")

Just so you know, it was while searching golden circle that I came across Rhett's name. Funny how that works. I knew I had just heard that name and sure enough, you had said, (search Robert Rhett). At that point you hadn't yet mentioned his "Address to Slaveholding States". But I did eventually read it and about it, and even found a version that included explanation and commentary and fact-checking. That one said it was hogwash (specifically in regards to his claims about S.Carolina and ship building).

Thank you. That is sound and solid advice. I definitely get your point about our rich history. I have been an amateur CW buff for 50yrs and I would never even pretend to know even an eighth of what there is to be learned about it. While others maintain the complete elenchus-ness of the issue, I still have my own row to hoe. For example, my own younger sister found a Minnie ball on Little Round Top about 15yrs ago. Anyone would have thought that impossible after so many, many years of souvenir hunting, and that that ground had been gone over with the plow many times over. Of course, Gettysburg and most in particular Little Round Top was the high-water mark of the War for the Confederacy. Her Minnie ball was found where Joshua Chamberlain and the 20th Maine performed their swinging gate maneuver that may well have been the turning point of that battle, which was the turning point of the War. I told my sister that the Minnie ball she found was the shot that caused the turning point and Chamberlains decision.

I am new around here and enjoy the WBTS threads. I am learning that the threads teach more about the posters and who's who than they do about the War. Thanks again.

You'll generally find that WBTS threads follow one of three memes:

Civil War Battles

These are the most interesting because they focus on the players, the strategies, and the hard historical facts. It's too bad that they are so rare.

Was it Legal?

These threads center around the morality, legality, and consequence of the south's secession. These are more contentious, largely because they are so subjective. I know that some people seem to believe they hold the whole elenchu-lada, there have been dozens and dozens of these threads and no one has achieved concord yet.

Damn Yankees - or It Was Lincoln's Fault

This is the specialty of the lost causers. They find some lost cause mythology on the web that trashes Lincoln, Grant, Sherman, or some other northern person. Lincoln was bad. Lincoln was a tyrant. Lincoln was a homo. Lincoln was a vampire slayer. They are foolishly insipid but a lot of fun.

This last summer we introduced a fourth category:

That Damned Flag

These mostly center around the concocted controversy of the confederate battle flag, but also include Civil War memorials, schools, government buildings, or any other recognition of confederate soldiers. These threads shouldn't be controversial because the vast majority of FReepers are in agreement that banning the flag is stupid, pointless, and counter-productive. The lost causers often use them as bait to start fights with non-southerners. You'll soon enough learn that, to a lost causer, if you aren't from dixie you are a south-hater. Yea I know - it's stupid - but it can be amusing.

That's a very nice summary of the various ways in which these threads find their way to FreeRepublic. To me, the most interesting aspect of these threads concerns what motivates the people that you refer to as Lost Causers. Why would anyone go out of their way to advance the arguments that were made by and associated with the advocates of slavery?

Before too long, anyone who reads these threads becomes familiar with the 1861 "Corner Stone" speech of Alexander Stephens. In that speech, Stephens explained that there existed a fundamental difference of opinion between the secessionists and those people in the country who believed that slavery "was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically." According to Stephens, the Confederacy was founded upon a corner stone of a "great truth": "the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition."

In other words, the great corner stone of the Confederacy was racism. And, although there were many people in the US (North and South) who at that time agreed with this corner stone, it was feared by some that the historical sands were shifting and that the election of Lincoln constituted a threat to the corner stone of the culture that the secessionists wished to defend.

The corner stone of racism was a casualty of the Civil War. Since that time, it has been thoroughly repudiated. Today, the dominant culture (North and South) has become so hostile to those views that people who hold them are often afraid to even express themselves. And, these people know that the schools are teaching their children that racists are ignorant and backward. So, naturally, these people resent our current culture with all of its talk of "equality" and such.

In the long run, the Civil War effected a divorce between patriotism and racism. In modern America, a person can be a patriot or a racist, but it is very difficult to be both. In the view of some people, the great crime of the Civil War (and Lincoln) has been that over time our culture has been degraded because racism has been given the death penalty and has been replaced by notions of equality. The problem is that many of the people who feel that way do not feel free to share the real source of their frustrations. So, what we hear from them tends to sound crazy and disoriented. They talk about federal regulations, taxes, a generalized lack of freedom, etc., but they are rarely specific about any of these current issues and never clear about how in the world they can seriously claim that these current issues are the responsibility of Abraham Lincoln. I just wish that they could feel free to speak about what is really upsetting them.

What did the Declaration of Independence say about equality?

This popped up again at FR, and I am glad it did.

I noticed some discussion as to why War Between The States (WBTS) are posted. I can’t say in general, but I appreciate this article because I want to know the truth about things.

Tariff policy was very important and controversial in the early 19th century and may well have been a major contributor to the Civil War. I first read about this in a book on US tax history written by Charles Adams:
Those Dirty Rotten Taxes: The Tax Revolts That Built America

https://www.amazon.com/Those-Dirty-Rotten-Taxes-Revolts/dp/0684871149/181-8250648-8390154?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0

If memory serves, Lincoln said the south could secede provided it collected and paid the tariff. I often say context is everything. So Lincoln’s words could be taken at face value, presented as a “poison pill,” etc.

I think an individual state may have had as much right to secede then as Britain has today in the case of the European Union. Slavery was not the only cause for war. At the time it might have been a minor cause.

I certainly do not know the mind of God. Still, it is sometimes fun to attempt a theological perspective. The devil is sometimes presented at using our good inclinations against us; God as bringing good out of bad. Perhaps the “wrong side” won the Civil War, but this event was used to end slavery (win WWI, WWII, and the cold war).

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.