[My2Cents]

Excellent.

[cyborg]

bttt

[Rembrandt_fan]

So grateful to see an unabashedly pro-Lincoln article show up on Free Republic. This greatest of Republicans deserves all honor we can give him, particularly here.

[Arkinsaw]

What unites the right-wing and left-wing attacks on Lincoln, of course, is that they deny that Lincoln respected the law and that he was concerned with the welfare of all. The right-wing school -- made up largely of Southerners and some libertarians -- holds that Lincoln was a self-serving tyrant who rode roughshod over civil liberties, such as the right to habeas corpus. Lincoln is also accused of greatly expanding the size of the federal government. Some libertarians even charge -- and this is not intended as a compliment -- that Lincoln was the true founder of the welfare state. His right-wing critics say that despite his show of humility, Lincoln was a megalomaniacal man who was willing to destroy half the country to serve his Caesarian ambitions.

Well, I agree that he ran roughshod over civil liberties, expanded the government, bent the Constitution, encroached on areas that were not the purview of the Federal government. He was a revolutionary. But I cannot ascribe to him the meanness of purpose that most of his critics attempt to paste on him today. In this, I believe that his character can withstand the assaults, at least to those of reasonable mind. The Southern-partisan criticism of Lincoln started as a device to point out the ridiculousness of the modern Northern purist tactic of judging Confederate leaders by modern politically correct standards by applying those standards to Lincoln. A bit of a joke and turning the tables to point out that the tactic itself was nonsense. Unfortunately, the less wise amongst pro-Southern folks starting believing their own joke. So now we have pro-Southerners ignorantly judging Lincoln by modern politically correct standards and Northern purists (and potstirrers) judging Confederates by modern politically correct standards....and all thinking they are brilliant. Both sides now have so much invested in the tactic that they no longer care to think about it rationally. In fact, these historical figures should be judged within the context of their own times and the moral frameworks within which they were formed and operated. There is much to admire about Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant, there is much to admire about Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis. All of them are merit criticism of varying sorts. But this business of judging them as politically incorrect monsters depending on your affiliation is not rational.

[Rabble]

"And ultimately it was because of Lincoln that slavery came to an end. That is why the right wing can never forgive him. "

Pure Hogwash!

[Darkwolf377]

Great piece. Some would have us believe that Lincoln trampled on the law of the land. Such a proposition would lead to the conclusion that this country for the past 140 years or so has been on the wrong track. I don't buy that for a second; for whatever reasons, Lincoln was helping this country live up to its ideals. Christians, in particular, who rail against the current foolish secular hatred of all things Christian, should appreciate Lincoln's ending slavery, a sin, and value that great move over the squawking about the correctness of ending slavery.

[Iris7]

A while back I came across a compendium of Lincoln's writings. All through the war Lincoln talked about and worked toward deporting every last black in the United States. Deport them where? Haiti was one candidate, and Honduras another, but Africa seemed too difficult logistically to him..

[Drammach]

Excellent article..

I would propose, however, that Lincoln was indeed, "a man of his times".. as are all people who deal with great issues and events within their own lifetime..
It takes more than a couple of examples showing an anti-slavery position to claim that Lincoln could have made the great leap of abolition without the support of the people..

With the South defeated, however, and the Union victorious, the Emancipation Proclamation takes on even greater meaning..
Lincoln's successful execution of the war gave him the political power to do something even more useful and meaningful.. The elimination of slavery..

The article points out quite clearly, that Lincoln was indifferent, or at least ambiguous on the subject prior, and even during the war..
Yet, once the matter of secession was decided, he acted in a manner completely opposite of his previously stated inclinations.

I think he knew exactly what he was doing and saying the whole time.. His intent was abolition from the beginning, but he knew better than to express that aim publicly, especially when it could have cost him the presidency..
He was a politician, and told the people what they wanted to hear.. Then, when the conditions and the political climate were right, completed his intended mission..

You can fool all of the people some of the time...
Lincoln fooled them just long enough to save America and it's basic principles of Equality and Freedom..

[kipita]

Based on my experiences, Slavery (and its effect) is to America as Feudalism (and its effect) is to Europe. Within both regions there existed a perceived higher echelon and lower echelon with few people in the middle. Both Slavery and Feudalism existed (and still exists) throughout the world when Lincoln was alive. America the beautiful has been the world leader in ending both as other countries have followed our lead. At some point we have to give credit to American leaders who have lead the way. To say the very least, I think Lincoln deserves partial credit.

[iowamark]

It is so interesting that it often takes an immigrant like D'Souza to appreciate American democracy; which the native born often take for granted.

[Once-Ler]

Fascinating article. Thanx for posting it.

[Wilhelm Tell]

Calhoun's point is that the South had conferred on all whites a kind of aristocracy of birth, so that even the most wretched and degenerate white man was determined in advance to be better and more socially elevated than the most intelligent and capable black man. That's why the poor whites fought -- to protect that privilege.

One of the most sordid aspects of human nature is the tendency of people to gladly accept an oppressor as long as there is someone lower in the heiarchy fixed in the "order of things" to be more appresed still.

[raynearhood]

It's a good article but only touches on the socioeconomic issues that helped to cause the divide in the Union. One major factor was the Transcontinental Railroad. The South wanted to start in the South because they believed they would have the most use for it in transporting goods to the western territories. The North didn't want the Railroad in the south so that it was better used for commercial travel from the North for passenger transport and manufactured goods. A large portion of the Congress predominately from the North, felt, also, that by putting something as great as the Trans-cont. R.R. in the South it would be seen as promoting slavery and would stain further the integrity of the United States.
Also, Republicans in Washington were trying to destroy slavery indirectly, without all out abolition, by taxing goods produced by slave labor. These and other issues were the cause of the Civil War. Lincoln supported the Republicans in Washington during his campaign, yet at the same time was the uniting statesman that he had to be in order to try to keep the Union in tact. It was his need to be uniting as President that kept Confederate soldiers from being treated as deserter or traitors after the war was over.
In the end, Lincoln was opposed to slavery, however didn't want to end it at the cost of the Union (same as the framers, just under different circumstances). After the Union was inevitably divided he officially emancipated the slaves. But, unlike the South, Lincoln never saw himself as the President of the North, but President of the United States.

[Petes Sandy Girl]

"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled or hanged." ~~ President Abraham Lincoln

[Californiajones]

Well, the same God who allowed the statistical improbability of Jefferson and Adams, the only two Prezs who signed the Declaration (and the two who made it all work) die miraculously on the same day; not only the same day; but the fourth of July, the day the Declaration was celebrated, but the same day on the fourth of July on the Jubilee Year anniversary (fiftieth) of the signing of the Declaration.

This seeming supernatural fact was noted by Lincoln in extemporaneous remarks made by him from the White House on July 9th, 1863 -- whereas he was trying to see God's hand in the recent "victories" at Gettysburg on the 3rd of July and Vicksburg on the 4th - trying to see if the good Lord was still on the side of those who sought to free the slaves and against those who sought to eat the bread of another man's toil.

So, how ironic, or more statistically prudent, to note that Lincoln himself was shot on Good Friday after Lee's surrender the Palm Sunday previous, and mourned on Easter Sunday. God honors those who honor Him. No amount of quacking or sniping at his good name will take away his greatness. As Stanton said of him: 'There lies the greatest leader the world has ever known". I daresay, he was the greatest -- and the immediate peace between North and South after his death proved that the country was united in the death of a good man who did not deserve to be murdered.

I hear that Doris Goodwin's new book (and Spielberg's new movie) on Lincoln makes the point that Lincoln was the architect of his own legacy -- fully aware of how good leaders are made great in posterity if they manipulate things their way. (Sounds more like a mea culpa for Clinton). Now, this is a neat historical and intellectual trick to play on Lincoln. It reminds me of some anti Christian seventies book called "The Passover Plot" that tried to say that Jesus was the architect of his own Messiahness, because Jesus knew all the prophecies related to the coming messiah and simply fulfilled them. (The Passover Plot of course, has to ignore prophecies like how Judas would be paid thirty pieces of silver and hang himself in Potter's field -- because they were entirely outside Christ's purview.) In the same manner Goodwin asserts Lincoln simply created his own image and legacy for the sake of his legacy. Again, part of Lincoln's iconic position was the fact of the date of his murder -- Good Friday. Goodwin's insane argument has to loop around itself and somehow account for this miraculous fact.

Anyway, Tolstoy called Lincoln "A Christ in miniature" and his assessment was spot on. Speilberg is on the wrong side of history on this one.

[Gum Shoe]

Fascinating to me to see the same arguments being bantered today...150+ years later. Truly important 10th Amendment issues that still rouse sentiments! Wow! I love being an American!

[tkathy]

The left is trying to rationalize why the northern democrats wanted to let the South secede and continue slavery. (Which would have ultimately been disaster for the south as well as the north). The south would have turned into a disasterous South Africa sort of country.

[squirt-gun]

Relative to the Democrats attacking both the military and our presence in Iraq:

With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."

[Reaganwuzthebest]

This isn't to say Lincoln wasn't a great or even an intellectual president but let's face it, he's got the name recognition because of the situation he found himself in. If Millard Fillmore had been president during the Civil War with it ending as it did we'd always be talking about him and he'd be on the penny.

[Missouri]

That's why the poor whites fought -- to protect that privilege.

I don't believe this is true. Poor whites fought to keep the Yankees out of their hamlets, homes, and states. And as any good soldier, they fought for each other.