The Intellectual Bankruptcy of Claremont's smear of DiLorenzo (NR book review)

10/9 | myself

[GOPcapitalist]

Dixie bump. Here's my latest - a factual dissection of the Claremont smear of DiLorenzo in this week's National Review

[Twodees]

It coud have been more simply titled" The Intellectual Bankruptcy of Claremont". Matsugi is a whining little snot who doesn't have any ancestors who were here during the time frame. What he has to say about anything shouldn't interest anyone but a democrat or neocon.

[shuckmaster]

Aw, Shucks!

[Non-Sequitur]

Only one problem - DiLorenzo's book was never about the South's shortcomings and never sought to take up that issue in the first place.

No, you never do want to take up the south's shortcommings, do you? Jeff Davis abused power, trampled rights, and installed government intervention and socialistic policies in ways that Lincoln would never have dreamed of. But instead of looking at both sides in the same fashion, Tommy blames Lincoln for everything. DiLusional's agenda smacks of intellectual dishonesty.

[4CJ]

Excellent as always! Bump.

[Non-Sequitur]

DiLusional alert. Pass it on.

[WhiskeyPapa]

Dixie bump. Here's my latest - a factual dissection of the Claremont smear of DiLorenzo in this week's National Review

And here's a factual error right at the top:

Lincoln went to war to prevent the formation of a government by a clear majority of the southern people...

Sam Houston, as you know -- as you responded to my post where I quoted him:

"I believe a large majority of our Southern people are opposed to secession, and if the secession leaders would permit our people to take ample time to consider secession and then hold fair elections the secession movement would be defeated by an overwhelming majority." -- Sam Houston, 1861

President Lincoln is on the record also:

"It may well be questioned whether there is, to-day, a majority of the legally qualified voters of any State, except South Carolina, in favor of disunion. There is much reason to believe that the Union men are the majority in many, if not in every other one, of the so-called seceded States."

7/4/61

So how now your statement that a "clear majority" of southerner supported the formation of a new government?

Walt

[Maelstrom]

Of course he blames Lincoln for everything.

Lincoln won, nobody else is responsible for the utter lack of limitations on contemporary government.

However, the author does have a very good point.

Namely, that if we're critizing Lincoln, by definition, we aren't critizing Davis, or JFK, or Reagan.

[billbears]

Excellent as usual. I see the regulars are already here. Will respond more a little later

[stainlessbanner]

Great article GOPcapitalist. I noticed the detractors have not presented a factual or reasonable rebuttal. The usual insults ("Lincoln-hater") and emotion ("you lost, get over it!") will be rampant, facts and logic will be absent!

Nice work.

[WhiskeyPapa]

Great article GOPcapitalist. I noticed the detractors have not presented a factual or reasonable rebuttal. The usual insults ("Lincoln-hater") and emotion ("you lost, get over it!") will be rampant, facts and logic will be absent!

See #8.

He presented something as fact that is not fact. And of course you applaud him.

Walt

[TexConfederate1861]

Oh my God!

The South-Haters are mobilizing.....

Fix Bayonets!

[TexConfederate1861]

You sure do love to quote Texans don't you....

Well how about this little fact....

Sam Houston was opposed to secession, but loved TEXAS MORE!

That is why he wouldn't accept Caesar Lincoln's offer of troops, and that is why his son was an officer in the Confederate Army. He also reviewed the troops on occasion.

So smoke on that fact for a while......

[Non-Sequitur]

And the Davis apologists are out in full force as well. The dirty little southron secret that none of you will fess up to is that the crimes of Davis far outweigh anything Lincoln did. Someday one of you are going to take a stab at defending him and I'll don't know how I'll handle the shock.

[TexConfederate1861]

What you don't understand is that we don't NEED to defend him.

I highly suggest you visit the Jefferson Davis Presidential Library in Gulfport, Mississippi.....

I think you might change your mind about one of the greatest statesman in American History.

[Non-Sequitur]

What you don't understand is that we don't NEED to defend him.

Jefferson Davis ignored the confederate constitution, nationalized industries, siezed private property for government use, shut down newspapers, jailed dissidents, centralized government power in Richmond, and led the confederacy down the path of a destructive war just to mention an few of his crimes. Don't need to defend him? How could you possibly defend him?

[TexConfederate1861]

If I thought it would convince you, I would, but knowing how you are, it would be a waste of my time. Period.

Jefferson Davis did what he did with the approval of the Confederate Congress. And though some things were indeed regretable, he was not the born politician Lincoln was, nor the Dictator.

[STONEWALLS]

....."Sam Houston was opposed to secession, but loved TEXAS MORE!" ..

that's a good point and there were plenty that felt that way.....Albert Sidney Johnston comes to mind...

Good luck to everybody!

Stonewalls

[Non-Sequitur]

If I thought it would convince you, I would, but knowing how you are, it would be a waste of my time. Period.

Can't come up with anything to defend his actions, huh? That's OK. I honestly can't see how you or anyone else could.

Jefferson Davis did what he did with the approval of the Confederate Congress. And though some things were indeed regretable, he was not the born politician Lincoln was, nor the Dictator.

And if I tried to use that same justification for the actions that you criticize Lincoln for you would laugh me right off the forum. Davis did what he did in defiance of the requirements of the confederate constitution and in the face of opposition from those governors who actually believed that state's rights mattered. And as for Dictator, I would point out that Lincoln ran in and won two presidential elections. Davis, on the other hand, never once won an election where he had an opponent. Not for congress, not senate, not president of the confederacy.