Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Author of the The Real Lincoln to speak TODAY at George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia

Posted on 04/16/2003 5:44:44 AM PDT by Lady Eileen

Washington, DC-area Freepers interested in Lincoln and/or the War Between the States should take note of a seminar held later today on the Fairfax campus of George Mason University:

The conventional wisdom in America is that Abraham Lincoln was a great emancipator who preserved American liberties.  In recent years, new research has portrayed a less-flattering Lincoln that often behaved as a self-seeking politician who catered to special interest groups. So which is the real Lincoln? 

On Wednesday, April 16, Thomas DiLorenzo, a former George Mason University professor of Economics, will host a seminar on that very topic. It will highlight his controversial but influential new book, The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War.  In the Real Lincoln, DiLorenzo exposes the conventional wisdom of Lincoln as based on fallacies and myths propagated by our political leaders and public education system. 

The seminar, which will be held in Rooms 3&4 of the GMU Student Union II, will start at 5:00 PM.  Copies of the book will be available for sale during a brief autograph session after the seminar. 


TOPICS: Announcements; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; US: Maryland; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: burkedavis; civilwar; dixie; dixielist; economics; fairfax; georgemason; gmu; liberty; lincoln; reparations; slavery; thomasdilorenzo; warbetweenthestates
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 981-991 next last
To: SCDogPapa
You don't expound enough of the record:

I confess that I hate to see the poor creatures hunted down down, and caught, and carried back to their stripes and unwarranted toils; but I bite my lip and keep quiet. In 1841 you and I had together a tedious low-water trip, on a Steam Boat from Louisville to St. Louis. You may remember, as I well do, that from Louisville to the mouth of the Ohio there were, on board, ten or a dozen slaves, shackled together with irons. That sight was a continual torment to me; and I see something like it every time I touch the Ohio, or any other slave-border. It is hardly fair for you to assume, that I have no such interest in a thing which has, and continually exercises, the power of making me miserable. You ought rather to appreciate how much the great body of the Northern people do crucify their feelings, in order to maintain their loyalty to the Constitution and the Union."

8/24/54

"If A can prove, however conclusively, that he may, of right, enslave B. -- why not B. snatch the same argument, and prove equally, that he may enslave A.?

-- You say A. is a white, and B. is black. It is --color--, then; the lighter, having the right to enslave the darker? Take care. By this rule, you are to be the slave to the first man you meet, with a fairer skin than your own.

You do not mean color exactly? -- You mean the whites are --intellectually-- the superiors of the blacks, and therefore, have the right to enslave them? Take care again. By this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with an intellect superior to your own.

But, say you, it is a question of --interest--; and, if you can make it your --interest--, you have the right to enslave another. Very well. And if he can make it his interest, he has the right to enslave you."

1854

My friends, I have detained you about as long as I desired to do, and I have only to say, let us discard all this quibbling about this man and the other man; this race and that race and the other race being inferior, and therefore they must be placed in an inferior position; discarding our standard that we have left us. Let us discard all these things, and unite as one people throughout this land, until we shall once more stand up declaring that all men are created equal."

A. Lincoln, 7/10/58

"I will say here, while upon this subject, that I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which in my judgment will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong, having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. [Loud cheers.] I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal in many respects---certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man."

August, 1858

"I do not expect the Union to be dissolved--I do not expect the house to fall--But I do expect it will cease to be divided. Either the opponents of slavery, will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is the course of ultimate extinctioon; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new--North as well as South. Have we no tendency towards the latter condition?"

1858

"The principles of Jefferson are the definitions and axioms of free society. And yet they are denied, and evaded, with no small show of success. One dashingly calls them "glittering generalities"; another bluntly calls them "self evident lies"; and still others insidiously argue that they only apply to "superior races."

These expressions, differing in form, are identical in object and effect. -- the supplanting the principles of free government, and restoring those of classification, caste, and legitimacy. They would delight a convocation of crowned heads, plotting against the people. They are the van-guard -- the miners and sappers -- of returning despotism. We must repulse them, or they will subjugate us. This is a world of compensations; and he that would -be- no slave, must consent to --have-- no slave. Those that deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves, and under a just God cannot long retain it."

3/1/59

"But to be plain, you are dissatisfied with me about the negro. Quite likely there is a difference of opinion between you and myself upon that subject. I certainly wish that all men could be free, while I suppose that you do not. ....peace does not appear as distant as it did. I hope it will come soon, and come to stay; and so come as to worth the keeping in all future time. It will have then been proved that, among free men, there can be no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet; and that they who take such appeal are sure to lose their case, and pay the cost. And then, there will be some black men, who can remember that, with silent tongue, and clenched teeth, and steady eye, and well-poised bayonet they have helped mankind on to this great consumation; while, I fear, there will be some white ones, unable to forget that, with malignant heart, and deceitful speech, have strove to hinder it. Still let us not be over-sanguine of a speedy final triumph. Let us be quite sober. Let us dilligently apply the means, never doubting that a just God, in his own good time, will give us the rightful result."

8/23/63

"I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong. I can not remember when I did not so think, and feel...

In telling this tale I attempt no compliment to my own sagacity. I claim not to have controlled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me. Now, at the end of three years struggle the Nation's condition is not what either party, or any man devised, or expected. God alone can claim it. Whither it is tending seems plain. If God now wills the removal of a great wrong, and wills also that we of the North as well as you of the South, shall pay for our complicity in that wrong, impartial history will find therein new cause to attest and revere the justice and goodness of God."

4/4/64

"it is also unsatisfactory to some that the elective franchise is not given to the colored man. I would myself prefer that it were now conferred on the very intelligent, and on those who serve our cause as soldiers."

4/11/65

sources: "Abraham Lincoln, Mystic Chords of Memory" published by the Book of the Month Club, 1984 and:

"Lincoln, Speeches and Writings, 1859-65, Library of the Americas, Don E. Fehrenbacher, ed. 1989

Lincoln clearly was preparing the way for black suffrage.

Consider these letters:

Private

General Hunter

Executive Mansion

Washington D.C. April 1, 1863

My dear Sir:

I am glad to see the accounts of your colored force at Jacksonville, Florida. I see the enemy are driving at them fiercely, as is to be expected. It is mportant to the enemy that such a force shall not take shape, and grow, and thrive, in the south; and in precisely the same proportion, it is important to us that it shall. Hence the utmost caution and viglilance is necessary on our part. The enemy will make extra efforts to destroy them; and we should do the same to perserve and increase them.

Yours truly

A. Lincoln

_________________________________________________________

Hon. Andrew Johnson

Executive Mansion,

My dear Sir:

Washington, March 26. 1863.

I am told you have at least thought of raising a negro military force. In my opinion the country now needs no specific thing so much as some man of your ability, and position, to go to this work. When I speak of your position, I mean that of an eminent citizen of a slave-state, and himself a slave- holder. The colored population is the great available and yet unavailed of, force for restoring the Union. The bare sight of fifty thousand armed, and drilled black soldiers on the banks of the Mississippi, would end the rebellion at once. And who doubts that we can present that sight, if we but take hold in earnest? If you have been thinking of it please do not dismiss the thought.

Yours truly

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon Soc of War

Executive Mansion

Washington

July 21, 1863

My Dear Sir:

I desire that a renewed and vigorous effort be made to raise colored forces along the shores of the Missippi [sic]. Please consult the General-in-chief; and if it is perceived that any acceleration of the matter can be effected, let it be done. I think the evidence is nearly conclusive that Gen. Thomas is one of the best, if not the very best, instruments for this service.

Yours truly

--------------------------------------

Lincoln also proposed --privately-- to the new governor of Louisiana that the new state constitution include voting rights for blacks. A year later, in April, 1865 he came out --publicly-- for the suffrage for black soldiers, because his great --political-- skill told him that the time was right.

It was a direct result of this speech, and this position, that Booth shot him.

President Lincoln, besides ordering the army (note that this is only a few months after the EP) to use black soldiers more vigorously, made many public speeches to prepare the people for the idea of black suffrage.

"

"When you give the Negro these rights," he [Lincoln] said, "when you put a gun in his hands, it prophesies something more: it foretells that he is to have the full enjoyment of his liberty and his manhood...By the close of the war, Lincoln was reccomending commissioning black officers in the regiments, and one actually rose to become a major before it was over. At the end of 1863, more than a hundred thousand had enlisted in the United States Colored Troops, and in his message to Congress the president reported, "So far as tested, it is difficult to say they are not as good soldiers as any." When some suggested in August 1864 that the Union ought to offer to help return runaway slaves to their masters as a condition for the South's laying down its arms, Lincoln refused even to consider the question.

"Why should they give their lives for us, with full notice of our purpose to betray them?" he retorted. "Drive back to the support of the rebellion the physical force which the colored people now give, and promise us, and neither the present, or any incoming administration can save the Union." To others he said it even more emphatically. "This is not a question of sentiment or taste, but one of physical force which may be measured and estimated. Keep it and you can save the Union. Throw it away, and the Union goes with it."

--"Lincoln's Men" pp 163-64 by William C. Davis

Lincoln's sense of fairness made him seek to extend the blessings of citizenship to everyone who served under the flag.

His great political skill made him realize that blacks --were--not-- leaving -- he played that card and no one was biting, black or white. That being the case, he knew he had to prepare for the future, and that future involved full rights for blacks.

Walt

81 posted on 04/16/2003 7:39:24 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa (Be copy now to men of grosser blood and teach them how to war!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: VoodooEconomics
what was the most prominent end result of the US civil war? The end of Slavery - right?

Actually, I believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution and the incipient decline in Stated rights was the most prominent aspect of the Civil War. Slavery would have ended within 30 years, e.g., the end of slavery (serfdom) in Russia.

The warping of the United States Constitution, however, might never have occurred had there been no impetus as the Restoration.

82 posted on 04/16/2003 7:39:26 AM PDT by Thommas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
"You don't expound enough of the record"

What was the point,,I knew YOU would!!

83 posted on 04/16/2003 7:41:50 AM PDT by SCDogPapa (In Dixie Land I'll take my stand to live and die in Dixie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac
!!!!!
84 posted on 04/16/2003 7:42:05 AM PDT by stand watie (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. : Thomas Jefferson 1774)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands; okchemyst
Yankee soldiers who captured Jefferson Davis were transporting him north, toward the prison where he would spend two years, not charged with a crime.

Passing some Confederate veterans traveling home, the blue belly taunted them: "Hey, Johnny Reb, we've got your president."

"Yessir," the butternut soldier replied, "and the devil's got yours."

85 posted on 04/16/2003 7:42:39 AM PDT by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
Most people are too patriotic these days to care about a book which trashes the savior of our nation politicion who waged war on our own citizens while in the treasonous attempt to preserve slavery, expand federal government power and usurp the right of the states to leave a union which had become unconstitutional and killed 100s of thousands of troops on both sides.

There, I edited it to show the other side of the coin.

86 posted on 04/16/2003 7:42:41 AM PDT by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: republicanwizard
You know what a bump is?
87 posted on 04/16/2003 7:44:04 AM PDT by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: SCDogPapa
someone, with more time to spend in the library than i've got this week, should post lincoln's racist/hatefilled comments on Jews, Roman Catholics,immigrants, Indians & "muddy-coloured people",i.e. those of "mixed race". (like ME for example!)

his comments on race/religion/ethnic groups will NOT be hard to find & source!

FRee dixie,sw

88 posted on 04/16/2003 7:47:48 AM PDT by stand watie (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. : Thomas Jefferson 1774)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Valin
How do you reconcile my statement? Simple he was a politician.

I'll ask you again.

Cite an instance where Lincoln made a decision to placate or assist a special interest group.

He didn't, although he often went out of his way to help individuals.

Consider:

Hon Secretary of War

Executive Mansion

Washington July 28, 1963

My Dear Sir,

A young son of the Senator Brown of Mississippi, not yet twenty, as I understand, was wounded, and made a prisoner at Gettysburg. His mother is sister of Mrs. P. R. Fendall, of this city. Mr. Fendall, on behalf of himself and family, asks that he and they may have charge of the boy, to cure him up, being responsible for his person and good behavior. Would it not be a grateful and graceful thing to let them have him?

Yours Truly,

A. Lincoln

Also consider:

"But there were limits to what Lincoln would do to secure a second term.

He did not even consider canceling or postponing the election. Even had that been constitutionally possible, "the election was a necessity." "We can not have free government without elections," he explained; "and if the rebellion could force us to forego, or postpone a national election, it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us." He did not postpone the September draft call, even though Republican politicians from all across the North entreated him to do so. Because Indiana failed to permit its soldiers to vote in the field, he was entirely willing to furlough Sherman's regiments so that they could go home and vote in the October state elections -but he made a point of telling Sherman, "They need not remain for the Presidential election, but may return to you at once."

Though it was clear that the election was going to be a very close one, Lincoln did not try to increase the Republican electoral vote by rushing the admission of new states like Colorado and Nebraska, both of which would surely have voted for his reelection. On October 31, in accordance with an act of Congress, he did proclaim Nevada a state, but he showed little interest in the legislation admitting the new state. Despite the suspicion of both Democrats and Radicals, he made no effort to force the readmission of Louisiana, Tennessee, and other Southern states, partially reconstructed but still under military control, so that they could cast their electoral votes for him. He reminded a delegation from Tennessee that it was the Congress, not the Chief Executive, that had the power to decide whether a state's electoral votes were to be counted and announced firmly, “Except it be to give protection against violence, I decline to interfere in any way with the presidential election.”

"Lincoln", pp. 539-40 by David H. Donald

Donald states (about Lincoln in August of 1864), "...Had he failed to to insist on abolition as a condition for peace negotiations, he explained, he would be guilty of treachery to the hundreds of thousands of African-Americans who had 'come bodily over from the rebel side to ours.' Such betrayal could not 'escape the curses of Heaven, or of any good man.'

According to Donald, this was interpreted the next day in the New York Times thusly:

"Mr. Lincoln did say that he receive and consider propositions for peace...,if. they embraced the integrity of the Union and the abandonment of Slavery. But he did not say that he would not receive them unless they embraced both these conditions."

"There have been men who have proposed to me to return to slavery the black warriors of Port Hudson & Olustee to their masters to conciliate the South. I should be damned in time & in eternity for so doing. The world shall know that I will keep my faith to friends & enemies, come what will."

Walt

89 posted on 04/16/2003 7:49:19 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa (Be copy now to men of grosser blood and teach them how to war!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Stop Legal Plunder; Protagoras; okchemyst; stainlessbanner; billbears
DiLorenzo's purpose was not to produce a serious, responsible work, but to make money off of gullible Lincoln-haters.

An observant person might suggest that the poster of that comment is out to make money by selling books to Lincoln-lovers.

90 posted on 04/16/2003 7:49:49 AM PDT by Constitution Day (Esse Quam Videri)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
Easy, there, Walt. First, (faint)praise from Non-Sequitur for the tagline, and now something nearly approaching civil discourse from you? This is one of those parallel universe Star Trek episodes, right? If it is, instead of discussing dead presidents all day, I'm gonna log some time on the Holodeck with Seven of Nine.

91 posted on 04/16/2003 7:49:59 AM PDT by Treebeard (Hey, babe, where's your sister, Sixty of Nine?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
And least the rebel had the sense to call the U. S. soldier "sir".
92 posted on 04/16/2003 7:50:26 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: SCDogPapa
The following is why they don't like DiLorenzo. He tells it like it was.

Actually you have shown, unintentionally I assume, why we find DiLorenzo so ridiculous. If it were not for false quotes, partial quotes, and misquotes he would have no quotes at all. Take, for example, your quote from the letter to Salmon Chase. Taken out of context, as it is, one might believe that President Lincoln thought his actions illegal. Look at the quote in full:

"Knowing your great anxiety that the emancipation proclamation shall now be applied to those certain parts of Virginia and Louisiana which were exempted from it last January, I state briefly what appear to me to be difficulties in the way of such a step. The original proclamation has no Constitutional or legal justification, except as a military measure. The exemptions were made because the military necessity did not apply to the exempted localities. Nor does that necessity apply to them now any more than it did then-- If I take the step must I not do so, without the argument of military necessity, and so, without any argument, except the one that I think the measure politically expedient, and morally right? Would I not thus give up all footing upon Constitution or law? Would I not thus be in the boundless field of absolutism? Could this pass unnoticed, or unresisted? Could it fail to be perceived that without any further stretch, I might do the same in Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Missouri; and even change any law in any state?"

President Lincoln is not arguing against the legality of the Emancipation Proclamation in areas it applied to, he is pointing out that he could not Constitutionally apply it to areas where military necessity did not require it. To end slavery in those territories, as Chase wanted him to do, would require a Constitutional amendment. The same 13th Amendment that Lincoln would work so hard to pass through Congress and send to the states. But if DiLusional had quoted the President in context then that wouldn't fit his agenda, now would it?

93 posted on 04/16/2003 7:51:38 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
Not fair at all. I criticize Abraham Lincoln plenty, mainly for allowing the Democrats to establish governments in the seceded states before the war was even over.
94 posted on 04/16/2003 7:52:01 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan; stainlessbanner
And least the rebel had the sense to call the U. S. soldier "sir".

Southern manners never go out of style.

95 posted on 04/16/2003 7:54:11 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (HHD, FRM, RFA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Comus
A yes - the end of the freedom to enslave other human beings and to sell them like chattels. Followed a century later by a monstrous Federal effort to end the freedom to deprive the descendants of those wrongly emancipated subhumans of political and economic rights. Will the injustices never stop?
96 posted on 04/16/2003 7:55:12 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine (Paleocons - like radical Islamists, long on heartfelt belief, short on facts or common sense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SCDogPapa
President Abraham Lincoln - (Racist,Destroyer of the Republic and Constitution) when asked "Why not let the South go in peace?" Lincoln replied: "I can't let them go. Who would pay for the government?"

Didn't happen. Apocryphal.

The vast majority of the federal revenue was collected in northern ports. Two southern collection houses actually lost money.

Here are the tariffs collected for the period June 1858 to June 1859 for the three largest Northern and the nine largest southern ports. The source is from "statement Showing the Amount of Revenue Collected Annually", Executive Document No.33, 36th Congress, 1st Session, 1860":

New York $35,155,452.75
Philadelphia $2,262,349.57
New Orleans $2,120,058.76
Charleston $299,399.43
Mobile $118,027.99
Galveston $92,417.72
Savannah $89,157.18
Norfolk $70,897.73
Richmond $47,763.63
Wilmington, NC $33,104.67
Pensacola $3,577.60

You've seen this before.

Walt

97 posted on 04/16/2003 8:00:37 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa (Be copy now to men of grosser blood and teach them how to war!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Lady Eileen
Could someone tell me if it is true that the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in areas that the U.S. government did NOT control? That slaves in other areas such as Maryland were freed later when the 14th Amendment was passed?

Also, is it true that Robert E. Lee freed his slaves before the War, but U.S.Grant's wife's slaves were freed only when the 14th Amendment was passed?

I have always heard these things but don't know if they are true. Remember, the victor gets to write the history.

A. Patriot, from the "Occupied South"
98 posted on 04/16/2003 8:06:00 AM PDT by A. Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
Not fair? You are trying to make money, correct?
Since Abe is the first picture on your book, it's a fair assumption that buyers of it would at least have a passing admiration of him.

I will say that I have not read your book, so I do not know how much you did or did not criticize Lincoln.

99 posted on 04/16/2003 8:07:15 AM PDT by Constitution Day (Esse Quam Videri)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: A. Patriot
Could someone tell me if it is true that the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in areas that the U.S. government did NOT control? That slaves in other areas such as Maryland were freed later when the 14th Amendment was passed?

That is correct. It did not affect the slave owning states that remained loyal to the Union.

100 posted on 04/16/2003 8:09:58 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (HHD, FRM, RFA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 981-991 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson