Let's not even talk about historical revisionism. While that accorded Lincoln is excessive, it doesn't come even close to the revisionist tales told of Lee or Jackson or Davis. Jackson owned slaves most of his adult life. Lee thought blacks were suited only for slavery, and said as much less than 4 months before surrendering at Appomattox. Yet one would think the confederate holy trinity walked on water. You want to hold Lincoln up to the racial standards of today? Fine. But do it to the rebel leaders, too.
Fool no, racist yes. Once more, unbeknownst to most who are told of Lincoln and do not read for themselves is that he was a white supremacist not some morally superior super human ahead of his time.
And at that, Lincoln's views were head and shoulder above Lee or Davis. So if Lincoln was a vile racist and an evil white supremacist then what does that make them?
You`re so naive it`s almost laughable.September 13, 1862 the day after, Lincoln said, “ Understand, I raise no objections against it [slavery] on legal or constitutional grounds ... I view the matter [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.”
And that's exactly what it was. It took the 13th Amendment to actually end slavery, both North and South, and Lincoln was primarily responsible for that, too.
Lincoln responding to an op-ed piece in the then NY Tribune,who called on Lincoln to immediately and totally abolish slavery,
Try quoting the letter in context, and include the whole thing. Including the line that Lincoln closed with: "I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free." Why do you all keep leaving that out?
Once again, Lincoln signed the proclamation as nothing more than war propaganda.
Complete BS. It was an effective tool for combatting the rebellion. It meant that each and every Southern slave who fled their owners could not be returned to that owner. It removed the Fugitive Slave laws from the picture.
Slavery was going to die a slow death being economically untenable.
So you say now with 20/20 hindsight. Surely you have a quote from some Southern leader or another who believed slavery was on its last legs as you do? Who didn't believe it was worth fighting for because it was dying anyway? Any leader, military or civilian, will do.
If Abe was truly the Messiah of his day then he would have abolished slavery through a scheme of compensated emancipation, end it peacefully, without war. The fact is slavery was irrelevant, tariffs were.
A couple of problems with that ridiculous statement. One, the Southern states launched their rebellion before Lincoln was even inaugurated so he could hardly have proposed any such plan. Two, compensated emancipation needs one key ingredient to work - the willingness of the slave owners to join in the scheme. There is absolutely no evidence that the Southern slave owners wanted their slaves emancipated through any means, compensated or otherwise. One reason why we know this is that Lincoln DID propose compensated emancipation on seveal occasions and was met with a deafening silence.
The fact is slavery was irrelevant, tariffs were.
Balderdash.
Lincoln ignored the right to secession, ignored the 10nth Amendment, ignored habeas corpus, committed war crimes by sacking and burning whole southern cities.
There is no right to unilateral secession. The right to secession is not defined in the 10th Amendment. Habeas corpus was suspended through constitutional means, and was suspended by Jeff Davis as well. And your comments about war crimes are idiotic, to put it mildly.
” Yet one would think the confederate holy trinity walked on water. You want to hold Lincoln up to the racial standards of today? Fine. But do it to the rebel leaders, too”
I`ve never ONCE defended inequality as opposed to those who errantly state Lincoln was not a supremacist who engaged in propaganda and political machinations for only one purpose, to win a war and create a Clay/Keynes central state.
“And that’s exactly what it was”
Indeed, emancipation was in fact a war propaganda measure to “ be decided upon according to the advantages or disadvantages it may offer to the suppression of the rebellion.”
His war strategy guaranteed the North to appear as liberators not only domestically but in Europe also thereby winning the propaganda war.
Salmon Chase, Abe`s Treasury Secretary on the emancipation propaganda strategy, “The proclamation has no constitutional or legal justification, except as a military measure,”
“Try quoting the letter in context, and include the whole thing. Including the line that Lincoln closed with...”
I`ve already quoted extensively his personal views and held beliefs in white supremacy and his political expediency of using the emancipation as war propaganda and feel that further quotes and citations is irrelevant to blind-faith revisionists such as yourself.
” Lincoln’s views were head and shoulder above Lee or Davis”
I`d say a hair, not a head. Even during the outbreak of the civil war Abe stuck to his policy before his war emancipation propaganda gambit. He countermanded orders by Union generals to free slaves.Gen. Framont in Missouri declared all slaves to be free, Abe immediately canceled the order.Gen. Hunter did likewise, Abe countermanded immediately. An irate Congress then only consisting of Northern States passed the Confiscation Act, freeing all slaves who`s owners dared to declare secession, Abe refused to sign the Bill until amended and then only signed it reluctantly stating his dissatisfaction and did not faithfully enforce either of the Confiscation Acts.
” It removed the Fugitive Slave laws from the picture.”
The same laws that Lincoln enforced faithfully to the point that Washington DC jails were filled with blacks. Abe felt the pressure from the abolitionists and did waht was politically expedient at the time, urging the United States to formally recognize the black republics of Haiti and Liberia with the object of removing blacks from the U.S.
“So you say now with 20/20 hindsight”
Only about 1/4 of white families in the South had direct connections to slavery so had no vested interest in the exercise. Agitation from the North incited fear as the South recalled Haiti and the New York riots.
Economically it easier to pay a person for their labor rather than paying for their well being, health, housing,etc. In essence slavery was economically untenable.
” One reason why we know this is that Lincoln DID propose compensated emancipation on seveal occasions and was met with a deafening silence.”
Not true:
Congress, 2nd Session, Public Laws of the United States 1861-1862, XII, p. 378.
On the contrary, once elected Abe was willing to sign an amendment sponsored by Sen. Crittenden allowing the institution of slavery, against federal interference, in those places where it was already established and Abe stated he would endorse it if it would restrict slavery to the states where it was already established.
Abe, in keeping with his supremacist policy, and Congress were willing to spend whatever it took to send them all home,whether it was the Chiriqui Resettlement Plan, Haiti, Liberia,etc.
” There is no right to unilateral secession. The right to secession is not defined in the 10th Amendment. Habeas corpus was suspended through constitutional means, and was suspended by Jeff Davis as well. And your comments about war crimes are idiotic, to put it mildly.”
No prohibition of secession exists in the Constitution.
Declaration of Independence describes the States: “ Free and Independent, they have full Power to levy war and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States, may of right do.”
Also: “ whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. “
Lincoln: “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.”
Hamilton:” To coerce a State would be one of the maddest projects ever devised. No State would ever suffer itself to be used as the instrument of coercing another.”
Before 1868 Americans were State citizens and not citizens of Washington D.C.
Congress the was not in session and Lincoln usurped all powers not delegated in the Constitution, including the power to suspend habeas corpus. In Ex parte MERRYMAN the USSC overruled the usurper YET the usurper IGNORED the Constitutional ruling !!!
You obviously don`t know what your talking about.
What`s a war crime? How about burning large southern cities to the ground, looting and pillaging.
Again, you`re dumb as a stump and the typical usurper apologist.