After Confederate statues fall, is Lincoln Memorial next?

https://www.reporternews.com ^ | March 9, 2019 | Jerry Patterson

[NKP_Vet]

“In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil in any country.” — Robert E. Lee 1856

Could Gen. Robert E.l Lee’s sentiments deter the “tear down those monuments” crowd?

Probably not.

Given their current success in removing monuments to Confederate generals, ignorant politicians and those whose hobby is going through life seeking to be offended, soon will run out of things to be offended by. Why not broaden the list of "offensive" symbols to include slave owners George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and a host of other founders?

Here in Texas you could add slave owning Texas heroes such as Sam Houston, Jim Bowie and William Travis.

Should we banish from public view all monuments to past historical figures who supported white supremacy, advocated secession or made racist comments?

Consider Abraham Lincoln. In addition to the Lincoln monument in the nation’s capital, there’s probably not a major city in the country without a school, street or park named after Lincoln (Abilene once had Lincoln Middle School).

What do Lincoln's own words tell us about “Honest Abe”, "the Great Emancipator?"

During one of the famous 1858 debates with Sen. Stephen Douglas, Lincoln explained to the crowd: “I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races . . . I am not now nor have ever been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people . . . there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”

Lincoln's prejudices weren’t limited to blacks.

During another debate with Douglas, Lincoln opined: “I understand that the people of Mexico are most decidedly a race of mongrels . . . there’s not one person there out of eight who is pure white”.

In Lincoln's 1861 inaugural address, he endorsed a constitutional amendment, known as the Corwin Amendment, which would forever protect slavery where it existed, telling the audience: “I have no objection to its (Corwin Amendment) being made express and irrevocable”. Lincoln's goal was to save the Union, writing to abolitionist Horace Greeley: “If I could save the Union without freeing any slaves, I would do it”.

Virtually all white men of that time were white supremacists. Lincoln was no exception, and his comments belie his reputation.

Was Lincoln opposed to secession?

Consider his remarks he made in Congress on January 12, 1848: “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 which suits them better. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much territory as they inhabit.” This is exactly what the seceding states did in 1861.

Another discomforting fact for today’s advocates of political correctness: In 2011 I sponsored a commemorative license plate for Buffalo soldiers, iconic black U.S. cavalrymen who served on the frontier. Couldn’t today's Native Americans claim buffalo soldiers participated in a genocidal war against an entire race of people - the American Plains Indians – enslaving them on reservations?

If we’re going to measure Confederates of 150 years ago by today’s standards, shouldn’t we do the same with Lincoln?

Today, it's Confederates. Who’s next? Buffalo soldiers? Our nation’s founders? Our Texas heroes? The possibilities are limitless.

Jerry Patterson is a former Texas land commissioner, state senator and retired Marine Vietnam veteran.

[DoodleDawg]

In defense of Brother Joe, I do not believe the quotes he provided were out of context. Your attack on him is unwarranted.

While I have the utmost respect for BroJoeK and frequently stand in awe of his scholarship I don't see anything wrong with my comments, which in any case were directed at you.

[jeffersondem]

“While I have the utmost respect for BroJoeK and frequently stand in awe of his scholarship I don't see anything wrong with my comments, which in any case were directed at you.”

When you wrote, “You all do love your partial quotes and quotes out of context, don’t you?” - I thought your remark was directed at Brother Joe as well as me. Especially since it was Brother Joe that found and published the quote.

I understand you don't see anything wrong with what you have said.

And I understand Gentlelady Omar from Minnesota doesn't see anything wrong with what she has said.

Liberals today!

[rockrr]

Liberals today!

Well in your case I just acknowledge the irrelevance and go on from there.

[jeffersondem]

“You are aware, are you not, that Buchanan was president when John Brown raided Harper’s Ferry? So how could Lincoln be responsible for those innocent lives taken?”

Your response brings to mind this oldie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHGXwQeUk7M&start_radio=1&list=RDpHGXwQeUk7M

[DoodleDawg]

Your response brings to mind this oldie:

LOL! About what I expected from you.

[BroJoeK]

jeffersondem: "Brother Joe’s post #125 references a couple of important quotes by Lee on this very topic.
I recommend you read them."

To be clear about this, on an abolitionist scale of 0 to 10, where, let's say Alexander Stephens' Cornerstone Speech is a zero and, oh, say, John Brown is a... 12, then Lincoln comes in at 7 or 8, RINO Senator Seward at 5, Lee and Founders like Jefferson at 3 and the entire Confederate hierarchy at one:

Abolitionist scale from 1 least to 10 most:

1. Most of Confederate leadership and Democrats pushing the so-called Corwin Amendment.
2. Jefferson Davis, but only at the very end, in 1865.
3. RE Lee reflecting traditional Southern Founders' desires for gradual abolition.
4. Noteworthy Confederate generals like Patrick Cleburne who early-on advocated enlisting slaves with the promise of freedom.
5. RINO/DINOs like Seward and Douglas who went along with restrictions on slavery, but not if they upset Southern Democrats too much.
7. "Moderate" Republicans like Lincoln and Grant who wanted restrictions on slavery even if they upset Southern Democrats too much.
9. Noteworthy abolitionists like 1856 Republican Presidential candidate John C. Fremont.
10. Black leaders like Frederick Douglas.
12. Violent revolutionaries like Nat Turner and John Brown.

[BroJoeK]

DoodleDawg: "“You all do love your partial quotes and quotes out of context, don’t you?”

jeffersondem: "In defense of Brother Joe, I do not believe the quotes he provided were out of context.
Your attack on him is unwarranted."

Thanks, DoodleDawg, for posting those same quotes in fuller context -- they help buttress my point, which is that RE Lee's views on slavery were basically the same as our Southern Founders, Thomas Jefferson most notably.

None of them asserted that slavery was a moral or positive good, all considered it a necessary evil which should, long term, be abolished.
Some like Jefferson took significant steps to restrict slavery and abolish it in certain regions.
Others like Presidents Madison & Monroe supported what all then believed the necessary correlation to emancipation, namely recolonization to Liberia, Africa.

RE Lee's opinions here can be considered "moderate" amongst Southern slaveholders of, say, 1860.
But when one real test came -- enlisting black Confederate soldiers -- Lee went along with opposition until very near the war's end.

In my 1 to 10 abolitionist scale, Lee and our Southern Founders fall around a 3.

[OIFVeteran]

That is an excellent scale. Wholeheartedly agree. It’s human nature to look at things as either right or wrong, black or white, but the real world is rarely like that.

[OIFVeteran]

From my readings almost all the founding fathers realized slavery was wrong and counter to the Declaration of Independence. However, starting around the 1830s many southerns started to advocate that slavery was a positive good. By the 1850s they had reached a point where being against slavery was evil and slavery was good. They had chased away, sometimes violently, any southern abolitionists.

There is a story I read once where a man was chasing a horse thief threw a southern town. He kept yelling stop that horse thief, to try and get help. Nobody help him. He then yelled stop that abolitionists and a few men then jumped him. I'll see if I can find the source of that story again.

[jeffersondem]

“From my readings almost all the founding fathers realized slavery was wrong and counter to the Declaration of Independence.”

That sure sounds good to my ear.

It makes me question what I read last month in Imprimis - 41 of 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence were slave owners.

[jeffersondem]

“From my readings almost all the founding fathers realized slavery was wrong and counter to the Declaration of Independence.”

That sure sounds good to my ear.

It makes me question what I read last month in Imprimis - 41 of 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence were slave owners.

[Pelham]

It was a good thread and then the usual band of haters showed up. That bunch would make the cut an antifa recruitment drive. Makes you understand why there was a desire for separation back when.

[BroJoeK]

OIFVeteran: "From my readings almost all the founding fathers realized slavery was wrong and counter to the Declaration of Independence.”

jeffersondem: "That sure sounds good to my ear.
It makes me question what I read last month in Imprimis - 41 of 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence were slave owners."

I once counted them up.
In 1776 all Southern and half of the Northern Founders were slaveholders.
By 1787 no Northern Founder owned slaves while all but two Southern Founders were slaveholders.

But in 1787 even Southern slaveholders, like Washington Jefferson & Madison, acknowledged slavery as a moral evil which should be gradually abolished.

As OIFVeteran pointed out, the dividing line between our Founders' somewhat weak abolitionism and 1860s Fire Eater pro-slavery came in roughly 1832, with the Virginia state debates on abolition.
In January 1832 the Richmond Enquirer editorialized:

"It is probable from what we hear, that the Committee on the colored population will report some plan for getting rid of free people of color [recolonization] —But is this all that can bedone?
Are we forever to suffer the greatest evil, which can scourge our land, not only to remain, but to increase in its dimensions?"

As late as 1832, even the Richmond Enquirer recognized slavery as "the greatest evil which can scourge our land", and yet long before 1860 Southern abolitionism had all but disappeared.

[BroJoeK]

Pelham: "It was a good thread and then the usual band of haters showed up."

Speaking of your fellow Lost Causers, of course.

Pelham: " That bunch would make the cut an antifa recruitment drive."

Well... Democrats, whether Antifa or slaveholders, have always been all about the Big Lie -- it's how they make their livings.
They are kindred souls, brothers in arms against the truth.
Only the lies change, the liars are all the same.

Pelham: "Makes you understand why there was a desire for separation back when."

Right... when the Big Lie of slavery confronted directly the truth of the Declaration -- "all men are created equal" -- the liars could do nothing except retreat and shoulder arms.
Bullets, they believed, make an effective argument against truth if truth's defenders are weak.

[OIFVeteran]

Not to go off topic, but you bring up a good point. We actually have two sets of founding fathers, with some overlap. The group that fought for our independence against Britain and the group that wrote the constitution.

[jeffersondem]

“I once counted them up. In 1776 all Southern and half of the Northern Founders were slaveholders.”

That is an interesting comment.

In your counting, was Delaware considered to be a northern or southern state?

And Pennsylvania? Was it counted as a northern state in your totals?

[OIFVeteran]

What are you trying to insinuate? That the founding fathers were all evil white supremacist that just didn’t want to pay taxes? Sounds like something an American hating Antifa member would say. You sure your at the right website?

[jeffersondem]

“Well... Democrats, whether Antifa or slaveholders, have always been all about the Big Lie — it's how they make their livings. They are kindred souls, brothers in arms against the truth. Only the lies change, the liars are all the same.”

By some accounts, almost three out of four signers of the Declaration of Independence were slaveholders.

One recognized history expert had this to say about the founders of our nation: “In 1776 all Southern and half of the Northern Founders were slaveholders.”

I think you need to walk back your angry talk about the founders of our country, especially the derogatory claim that as slaveowners 73 percent of them “have always been all about the Big Lie — it's how they make their livings. They are kindred souls, brothers in arms against the truth. Only the lies change, the liars are all the same.”

[bert]

Next come all the MLK idols that are proliferated all across America

[jeffersondem]

“What are you trying to insinuate? That the founding fathers were all evil white supremacist that just didn’t want to pay taxes? Sounds like something an American hating Antifa member would say.”

This is kid's stuff.

You better let Brother Joe carry your water - and your obscurants - until you get the hang of it.