Skip to comments.Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the Iconoclast Frenzy
Posted on 06/27/2020 6:27:55 AM PDT by Kaslin
Prior to the Charlottesville debacle regarding a Confederate generals statue in summer 2017, I had been researching for some time on the life of Frederick Douglass. Before the uproar over the Robert E. Lees likeness in a public park in Old Dominion, I had taken up Douglass scholarship to learn about Americas slave past, the Civil War, and its aftermath, because so much in our current civic discussion has been affected by the historical reality of slavery. I was interested in developing a theatrical work about Douglass life, which I believed would entertain the audience, while elevating public discourse about race relations in America.
The first element of Douglass life that caught my attention, and which I had not known previously, was that he had a personal, albeit limited, friendship with Abraham Lincoln. They first met face-to-face during Douglass unannounced visit to the White House in August 1863, a few weeks after the Massachusetts 54th Regiment composed of black soldiers (recruited largely by Douglass himself) had fought a brutal campaign against the Confederates at Fort Wagner. Douglass had gone to the White House to complain to Lincoln that these troops were not receiving the same pay as white soldiers. Of this encounter, Douglass later reported that Lincoln was the first white man to treat him without either condescension or flattery, but merely as one man to another. A year hence in August 1864, Lincoln made a direct request to have Douglass come to Washington, D.C. to provide him counsel on a policy matter during his re-election run. Their final meeting occurred on the evening of March 4, 1865, when Douglass (despite police interference) managed to make his way into the executive mansion for Lincolns second inaugural ball.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Other than removing our history by removing statues, books, movies that tell our past; I object to the corruption of our language with using degenerate words like “woke” instead of awaken.....
If the Democrats destroy all their racist history did any of it really happen?
How long can this go one before this truth makes it to the top of the list of the media empires? The Democrat Party and their twisted militant arms and acolytes are the personifications of the book burners of Nazi Germany AND the basis for Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451.
Lincoln was a Republican. The Demokkkrats had always remained free of any taint for their more than century long war against black Americans, but in the past decade little glimmers of historical truth broke through here and there.
So a decision was made to destroy physical evidence of Demokkkrat guilt, and to say it was done as an attack on America’s “guilt.”
If the Republicans cared even a little bit about America and Americans, they (The Republicans) would every day demand that 1) the Demokkkrats pay reparations for their deliberate racial harm to this country which has lasted long after the Civil War, and for which they are not only the exact legal entity who committed the harm, but also the present beneficiaries; 2) demand that the Demokkkrats issue an abject and unalloyed apology, signed by every Demokkkrat office holder in America; and 3) demand that the vile and shameful name of “Democrat” be removed from the existing entity, and never used again, out of shameful repsct for the harm done in that name, harm far, far greater than any individual being attacked by the Demokkkrats today.
Fellow-citizens! there is no matter in respect to which, the people of the North have allowed themselves to be so ruinously imposed upon, as that of the pro-slavery character of the Constitution. In that instrument I hold there is neither warrant, license, nor sanction of the hateful thing; but, interpreted as it ought to be interpreted, the Constitution is a GLORIOUS LIBERTY DOCUMENT. Read its preamble, consider its purposes. Is slavery among them? Is it at the gateway? or is it in the temple? It is neither. While I do not intend to argue this question on the present occasion, let me ask, if it be not somewhat singular that, if the Constitution were intended to be, by its framers and adopters, a slave-holding instrument, why neither slavery, slaveholding, nor slave can anywhere be found in it.
Most excellent links—thanks!
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.