Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lincolnís Great Gamble
NY Times ^ | September 21, 2012 | RICHARD STRINER

Posted on 09/24/2012 11:57:08 AM PDT by iowamark

Countless school children have been taught that Abraham Lincoln was the Great Emancipator. Others have been taught — and many have concluded — that the Emancipation Proclamation, which Abraham Lincoln announced on Sept. 22, 1862, has been overemphasized, that it was inefficacious, a sham, that Lincoln’s motivations were somehow unworthy, that slavery was ended by other ways and means, and that slavery was on the way out in any case.

The truth is that Lincoln’s proclamation was an exercise in risk, a huge gamble by a leader who sought to be — and who became — America’s great liberator.

Since before his election in 1860, Lincoln and his fellow Republicans had vowed to keep slavery from spreading. The leaders of the slave states refused to go along. When Lincoln was elected and his party took control of Congress, the leaders of most of the slave states turned to secession rather than allow the existing bloc of slave states to be outnumbered.

The Union, divided from the Confederacy, was also divided itself. Many Democrats who fought to stop secession blamed Republicans for pushing the slave states over the brink; some were open supporters of slavery. And if the Democrats were to capture control of Congress in the mid-term elections of November 1862, there was no telling what the consequences might be for the Republicans’ anti-slavery policies.

The Emancipation Proclamation wasn’t always part of the plan. Republicans, Lincoln included, tried push their anti-slavery program by measured degrees, since they feared a white supremacist backlash. That was what made Lincoln’s decision to issue an emancipation edict, and to do it before the mid-term congressional elections of 1862, so extraordinarily risky...

After Lee’s invasion of Maryland was stopped in the battle of Antietam on Sept. 17, Lincoln made up his mind to go ahead...

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: History; Military/Veterans; Religion
KEYWORDS: butcherabe; butcherlincoln; civilwar; dishonestabe; gop; milhist; warcriminal; warmonger
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-215 next last
Richard Striner, a history professor at Washington College, is the author of “Lincoln and Race.”

The NY Times has been running a great history essay series: Disunion, on the 150th anniversary of the Civil War.

1 posted on 09/24/2012 11:57:09 AM PDT by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: iowamark

like lyndon johnson he got everybody killed for nothing


2 posted on 09/24/2012 12:00:04 PM PDT by turdhopper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

They are preparing us for the Second American Civil War. If Obama is a great leader, if he is a risk taker, if he is like Lincoln, then Obama will move swiftly and quell the uppity whities as soon as they say “He won?? Again?? This is rigged!!!”


3 posted on 09/24/2012 12:01:02 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (ua)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: turdhopper

Ah, no he didn’t. Jeff Davis and his Dixiecrats are responsible for the deaths of 660,000 Americans.


4 posted on 09/24/2012 12:02:02 PM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: iowamark
This is about Abe Lincoln? I assumed when I read the title that it was about the great Lincoln ~ Lincoln Chaffee.
5 posted on 09/24/2012 12:08:08 PM PDT by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa
Ah, no he didn’t. Jeff Davis and his Dixiecrats are responsible for the deaths of 660,000 Americans.

Absolutely. If those Confederates had simply not invaded Maryland, we never would have needed to slap them down.

6 posted on 09/24/2012 12:11:13 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa

It’s best not to reason with Lost Causers and apologists for the Slaveholder’s Rebellion. If you really want to make them mad ask them if they’re mad slavery isn’t still legal.


7 posted on 09/24/2012 12:16:34 PM PDT by chargers fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

If the North had not called up troops in Virginia for use in South Carolina, there was hope of working something out. Of course, before that, South Carolina fired on Fort Sumter when the Union would not leave. And before that, an Abolitionist fired on Virginians and Virginia militia.

Lincoln’s gamble worked; Lee’s foolish gamble on the third day of the battle did not. Victors write the history books.


8 posted on 09/24/2012 12:23:46 PM PDT by Ingtar (Everyone complains about the weather, but only Liberals try to legislate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

bump


9 posted on 09/24/2012 12:24:18 PM PDT by Delhi Rebels (There was a row in Silver Street - the regiments was out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa
That's the most ridiculous statements anyone on here has made in along time.

The Federal Government declared war on the South, invaded their homeland, murdered their wives and children, and burnt down their cities. I suppose you are a Holocaust denier also. Same thing.

10 posted on 09/24/2012 12:25:06 PM PDT by BubbaBasher ("Liberty will not long survive the total extinction of morals" - Sam Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: chargers fan

Reason? There was nothing reasonable about that statement. Or yours for that matter.


11 posted on 09/24/2012 12:27:00 PM PDT by BubbaBasher ("Liberty will not long survive the total extinction of morals" - Sam Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: chargers fan

Four of my GG-grandfathers fought for the Confederacy- none owned slaves (only about 5% of the southern population owned slaves). Virginia, my native state, voted against secession on April 4, 1861 and did not vote for secession until Lincoln called for troops to invade the South.


12 posted on 09/24/2012 12:29:44 PM PDT by wfu_deacons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: chargers fan
It’s best not to reason with Lost Causers and apologists for the Slaveholder’s Rebellion. If you really want to make them mad ask them if they’re mad slavery isn’t still legal.

The Legacy of Lincoln is still with us. Much of the problems we are now facing with out of Control Federal government began in Ernest under Lincoln. Who made the Federal government supreme over us all? Lincoln.

We haven't ended slavery, we've just changed masters and added more slaves.

13 posted on 09/24/2012 12:31:19 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jmacusa
Ridiculous. Davis was no fire eater, more moderate in fact - especially compared to Yancey and Rhett.

Lincoln gambled the states would acquiesce by sending troops and funds to support his war; he was wrong.

14 posted on 09/24/2012 12:32:25 PM PDT by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BubbaBasher
The Federal Government declared war on the South, invaded their homeland, murdered their wives and children, and burnt down their cities.

Aren't you forgetting that whole 'attack on Fort Sumter' thing?

15 posted on 09/24/2012 12:37:27 PM PDT by Delhi Rebels (There was a row in Silver Street - the regiments was out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar
If the North had not called up troops in Virginia for use in South Carolina, there was hope of working something out. Of course, before that, South Carolina fired on Fort Sumter when the Union would not leave. And before that, an Abolitionist fired on Virginians and Virginia militia.

Lincoln’s gamble worked; Lee’s foolish gamble on the third day of the battle did not. Victors write the history books.

Depends on what you mean by "worked". It had *A* result. Not sure I would call it a success. I grew up thinking Lincoln was a great President, and that he deserved a place of Honor in our National history, but as I learned more and more about the events which resulted in the civil war, I began to have less and less respect for the man.

Lincoln was the first to create and use the power of the almighty state, and the nation has never been the same. Yes, he accomplished a great good as a result of using this power, but he established the precedent for a lot more subsequent abuse of this power.

Woodrow Wilson merely built on Lincoln's established principles.

16 posted on 09/24/2012 12:39:07 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

“The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War” written by Thomas DiLorenzo in 2002.

An alternate point of view.....

your mileage may vary


17 posted on 09/24/2012 12:46:49 PM PDT by petro45acp (The question isn't "are you better off?" it should be "is it really the government's job?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: petro45acp

Here is a response to the Klan from an actual historian:

http://www.amazon.com/Vindicating-Lincoln-Defending-Politics-President/dp/B007K5FYIG


18 posted on 09/24/2012 12:50:12 PM PDT by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

What you say comes down to the last line of my post: Victors write the history books. It could be argued that if Lee had not fought the third day at Gettysburg, the South would have had time to finish implementing the changes they were working on. 300,000 Black soldiers, trained and fighting for the promise of land and equality would have changed things. Once the war began, whether Slavery was the prime mover or not, Slavery was finished. With the historical result, we moved considerably toward Federalism.


19 posted on 09/24/2012 12:55:22 PM PDT by Ingtar (Everyone complains about the weather, but only Liberals try to legislate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Delhi Rebels
Aren't you forgetting that whole 'attack on Fort Sumter' thing?

I would attack someone who wouldn't leave my property too. But the truth is that the action was provoked by U.S. President James Buchanan and then Lincoln attempting to add more guns and resupply the fort. Also remember that not a single soldier died in the battles.

If Lincoln had withdrawn from Sumter and not launched headlong into a war there wouldn't have been 660,000 deaths. All the casualties and the later abuses of power fall squarely on Lincoln's shoulders.

20 posted on 09/24/2012 12:59:32 PM PDT by BubbaBasher ("Liberty will not long survive the total extinction of morals" - Sam Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-215 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
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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