The Other Lincoln
I've seen a lot of advertisements lately for the new movie, Lincoln. Since NBC Nightly News had a glowing "review" on the movie last night, I thought it fair to show the other side. Tom DiLorenzo has his say about Lincoln, with Chris Rossini following up. Both courtesy of Lewrockwell.com.
I was reminded while reading DiLorenzo of hearing the same sort of stuff back in the early 70s. Any of you older folks remember the TV show, Room 222? It was about a Southern California high school with a black history teacher.
One episode had a black student write a report on Abraham Lincoln that cited many of the things DiLorenzo does in his piece. His report concluded Lincoln was no friend of the black man. The teacher accepts the report but the school principal, a white guy, wants the report changed. It wasn't politically correct and Lincoln is supposed to be a hero.
I don't recall exactly how that episode ended, but it is funny how the two different versions of Lincoln survive with Lincoln the hero remaining dominant. America needs its heroes.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 7:26 AM
8 comments
8 Comments:
It's not really about hero worship. It's about holding up an ideal. Maybe the hero doesn't truly reflect the ideal, but that doesn't tarnish the ideal.
"Henchman Of Justice" says,
Good point on the "ideal" observation, but the ideal is still today "far from ideal" in the minds of many racists, bigots and such. Further, if "ideals are cherished", then why would any person decry the abuse of an ideal like "freedom of speech" violations, but turn right around and commit to censor any person, thus not allowing "free speech" by "denying the ideal".
Americans don't really understand "freedoms, liberties, rights, ideals, etc.." as they once did because of immigration bringing cultural changes based upon 21st century mindsets and life-styles, a growing government sector becoming more tyrannical, too many dumbed-down and greedy types who could never want to know knowledge, etc... the really good folks get screwed again and again and again, like clockwork. - HOJ
Lincoln personally believed in emancipating slaves. Politically he would do whatever kept the union together. Separating personal beliefs from the greater good of your constituents the the role of a politician.
This quote sums him up pretty well:
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. . . . 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."
[Source]
I'm not surprised a 1970s TV show failed to encapsulate the complexity of a great man.
Lincoln personally believed in emancipating slaves.
Not according to much of what he wrote.
Politically he would do whatever kept the union together..
Many of us don't believe in forcing anybody to maintain a union they're not happy in.
"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another,...".
Fred, that's flat wrong. Lincoln was exceedingly clear in his writings that he personally believed in freeing slaves, but politically would serve his constituents (who weren't slaves). He believed his constituents were better served by keeping the union together, but that's a separate issue from slavery.
You're essentially calling Lincoln a liar in the quote I provided for you.
...What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union;.
I read that to mean he only freed slaves because he had to. For example, he also supposedly said or wrote,
“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.”
Fred, what it means is that Lincoln personally believed slavery was wrong, but he was prepared to act whatever way necessary on slavery in order to save the Union. Before the Confederacy started, he advocated for slavery in order to preserve the Union. Once the Civil War began, it was more advantageous to free the slaves in order to preserve the Union.
Lincoln's personal feelings about slavery don't enter into the issue. I know it's difficult to imagine a politician separating his personal feelings from his leadership decisions, but there you have it. Lincoln had to look past his own emotions to do what he felt was best for the country.
Henchman Of Justice" says,
Anonymous, reading what you referenced partly shows Lincoln was a spineless ejaculator to say "save the union regardless of slavery!" It shows Lincoln would do anything for the power template of industrialized northern government as opposed to rural agribusiness of the southern states. (Lincoln is not as sincere a person as history buffs attempt to make out)
If Lincoln did not care about slavery "personally" either way, then he would have avoided the topic or stated appropriately a "disconnection to slavery" but maintained only "a connection to saving northern industialization".
The Civil War was a battle for power and control of emancipating territory (property) for the industrialists, slavery being a KEY political tool to deceive and "trojan horse the south with", just as today with the hispanic culture for votes! Ya see, not even African Americans today seem to get media justice in the explanation of the "Civil War". A result of the Civil War (slavery being abolished) did not stop the hate (something Lincoln had to have anticipated). The Civil War represents the end of one era (ruralisms) to create the new era for monied interests during the infancy of a fragment country! - HOJ
Post a Comment
<< Home