You would know, for example, that Marx contradicted himself incessantly to prove whatever point he wanted to make; or that he constantly "modified" or altered his "theories." But what Marx thought of Lincoln is irrelevant. There is no serious scholar of whom I'm aware that sees anything "socialist" in the writings of Lincoln, unless it is DeLorenzo.
A proliferation of journal reading is no excuse for randomly calling various journals certain names and dismissing articles you have not read within them by the same means. That is what you did in your first response to this thread. Got it, "Dude"?
I still don't think Ec. Inquriy is top tier, and gave reasons for that;
Beyond first calling it names and then stating on your own authority that it was not top tier, no. Not really.
I also cited many top tier journals
You stated two, again on your own subjective judgment of authority, in your initial post on this thread.
(far from "shooting my mouth off")
No, not very far at all. More like the definition of shooting one's mouth off.
and have, unlike you, actually done research on and published on Lincoln.
Seeing as you know practically nothing about me or my own background, you are wholly unqualified to assert what I have and have not done in the past. It shows in the error of your statement.
You would know, for example, that Marx contradicted himself incessantly to prove whatever point he wanted to make
Such is typically the nature of any political theory that emerges out of a modernist jumble of nonsense and proceeds to breed with a postmodernist mush of relativism. If you look to marxism expecting anything differently you will walk away dissappointed...or perhaps delusional.
But what Marx thought of Lincoln is irrelevant.
No, to the consideration of history it is perfectly relevant. That you don't like the existence of what he said is no grounds to pretend it's not there, which is essentially what you just informed me about your intentions.
There is no serious scholar of whom I'm aware that sees anything "socialist" in the writings of Lincoln
Yet on the same note comparatively little due consideration has been given to Lincoln's economic theories where his labor theory of value ideas are most prominent. For the record, in no way do I hold that Lincoln himself was some sort of secret communist, but only that he shared in a fundamental economic theory with them known as the labor theory of value. That he does this is a matter of fact and one that I pointed out with documentation. It seems though that it is also one you do not wish to know, hear about, or discuss, therefore you pretend it is not there or not "relevant" in hopes of making it go away.