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

Skip to comments.

Lincoln's Strategy - Emancipation was an early goal - (American history buffs alert!)
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE.COM ^ | MAY 9, 2005 | MAKUBIN THOMAS OWENS

Posted on 05/09/2005 9:35:24 PM PDT by CHARLITE

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last
"Lincoln believed that if he could convince the legislatures of the loyal slave states to agree to compensated emancipation, he could end the rebellion, restore the Union, and begin the end of slavery."

The only fault I find with Owens' composition is that he seems to repeat this idea nearly verbatim, three times in the course of the article.

1 posted on 05/09/2005 9:35:25 PM PDT by CHARLITE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

Lincoln still considered African descended people inferior to Caucasians.


2 posted on 05/09/2005 9:37:22 PM PDT by paulmartin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE
Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare 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.

Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read:

Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.

Lincoln's First Inaugural Address. Maybe he forgot to read Owens in National Review Online.

3 posted on 05/09/2005 9:43:38 PM PDT by Pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paulmartin
"Lincoln still considered African descended people inferior to Caucasians."

Well, *DUH*! So did everybody who lived at that time - including some of the most ardent abolitionists.

That was an evil of their time - but their virtue in laying their lives down to free their brothers in Christ was their own, and was heroic.


4 posted on 05/09/2005 9:51:37 PM PDT by Al Simmons ("God Ain't Jive" - Mott The Hoople)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: paulmartin

IIRC, Lincoln also suggested to Frederick Douglass and others, that emancipated slaves be re-settled outside the US. Alexander Stephens reported that shortly before Lincoln's assasination, he told Stephens he had no plans for assisting freed slaves in adjusting to their new way of life. That was reportedly during a conversation they had at Hampton Roads. As Stephens relates it, Lincoln said, "I guess they'll just have to 'root hog or die.'" That would have fit Lincoln, since he followed black minstrelsy and "Root Hog Or Die" was popular at the time.


5 posted on 05/09/2005 9:53:20 PM PDT by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte
Lincoln was quite progressive for his time even in his early years. His second Inaugural address stands as his final testament.

All of the founding fathers were rank hypocrites yet still struggled with the issue of slavery.

Now lets move on to more pressing concerns....was Lincoln gay? < /sarc>

6 posted on 05/09/2005 10:17:48 PM PDT by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

In my simple mind, there was some relationship between Lincoln running as the Republican candidate, and the fact that party was recently formed based on abolition.

Let others dither until the end of time, about all the finer distinctions.

Slavery was abolished in Britain in the 1830s and the time was well nigh, for the US to do likewise, as it did.

Women eventually got to vote, too. Time marches on.


7 posted on 05/09/2005 10:38:14 PM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zarf
"...was Lincoln gay?"

Well, he let Walt Whitman in the White House. That should tell you something. ;-)

8 posted on 05/09/2005 10:44:58 PM PDT by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: paulmartin

So did almost every other Caucazoid in North America including the Radicals.


9 posted on 05/09/2005 10:50:02 PM PDT by wardaddy ( Lucchese Belt Raised)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE
Guelzo argues persuasively that Lincoln’s “face was set toward the goal of emancipation from the day he first took the presidential oath.”

Why is it I have a sneaking idea Guelzo was educated at a liberal institution of indoctrination? Lincoln's one goal was to maintain power anyway he could. He had just been elected President to a nation that had lost it's Southern States. If he wanted to free slaves why didn't he free slaves in the North with his Emancipation Proclamation?

I think some of you put these threads on FR just to get old folks like me rantin' and a ravin'. Not tonight friends. Peace!

10 posted on 05/09/2005 10:52:34 PM PDT by Luke (CPO, USCG (Ret), SCV, MOS&B, OSC, HISTORIAN AND REENACTOR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bttt


11 posted on 05/09/2005 11:54:00 PM PDT by Constitutionalist Conservative (Have you visited http://c-pol.blogspot.com?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truth_seeker
In my simple mind, there was some relationship between Lincoln running as the Republican candidate, and the fact that party was recently formed based on abolition.

A good guess, but the Republican Party was founded in opposition to the extension of slavery into the Territories, not its abolition where it already existed. The Republican position is spelled out in the first Republican Party platform, that of 1856. And Lincoln in his first inauguaral states his belief that he didn't have the Constitutional authority to interfere with the practice of slavery. Not that we should let his own words have any merit.

12 posted on 05/10/2005 6:36:21 PM PDT by Pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte

From Frederick Douglass' 1876 oration in memory of Lincoln:

"He was preeminently the white man’s President, entirely devoted to the welfare of white men. He was ready and willing at any time during the first years of his administration to deny, postpone, and sacrifice the rights of humanity in the colored people to promote the welfare of the white people of this country. In all his education and feeling he was an American of the Americans. He came into the Presidential chair upon one principle alone, namely, opposition to the extension of slavery. His arguments in furtherance of this policy had their motive and mainspring in his patriotic devotion to the interests of his own race. To protect, defend, and perpetuate slavery in the states where it existed Abraham Lincoln was not less ready than any other President to draw the sword of the nation. He was ready to execute all the supposed guarantees of the United States Constitution in favor of the slave system anywhere inside the slave states. He was willing to pursue, recapture, and send back the fugitive slave to his master, and to suppress a slave rising for liberty, though his guilty master were already in arms against the Government.

The race to which we belong were not the special objects of his consideration. Knowing this, I concede to you, my white fellow-citizens, a pre-eminence in this worship at once full and supreme. First, midst, and last, you and yours were the objects of his deepest affection and his most earnest solicitude. You are the children of Abraham Lincoln. We are at best only his step-children; children by adoption, children by forces of circumstances and necessity. To you it especially belongs to sound his praises, to preserve and perpetuate his memory, to multiply his statues, to hang his pictures high upon your walls, and commend his example, for to you he was a great and glorious friend and benefactor. Instead of supplanting you at his altar, we would exhort you to build high his monuments; let them be of the most costly material, of the most cunning workmanship; let their forms be symmetrical, beautiful, and perfect, let their bases be upon solid rocks, and their summits lean against the unchanging blue, overhanging sky, and let them endure forever! But while in the abundance of your wealth, and in the fullness of your just and patriotic devotion, you do all this, we entreat you to despise not the humble offering we this day unveil to view; for while Abraham Lincoln saved for you a country, he delivered us from a bondage, according to Jefferson, one hour of which was worse than ages of the oppression your fathers rose in rebellion to oppose."

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=39


13 posted on 05/10/2005 6:46:45 PM PDT by Pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: paulmartin
Lincoln still considered African descended people inferior to Caucasians.

So did just about every other white man in the U.S., North and South.

14 posted on 05/10/2005 6:49:20 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: paulmartin

He generally qualified any statements of the sort. See the chapter on the Declaration of Independence in Harry Jaffa's Crisis of the House Divided for Lincoln's view of equality.


15 posted on 05/10/2005 6:57:18 PM PDT by buridan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons
That was an evil of their time - but their virtue in laying their lives down to free their brothers in Christ was their own, and was heroic.

I take it you're talking about the Union army. Please show us where the Union army took up arms against the South to abolish slavery.

16 posted on 05/10/2005 6:58:58 PM PDT by groanup (http://fairtax.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte
Alexander Stephens reported that shortly before Lincoln's assasination, he told Stephens he had no plans for assisting freed slaves in adjusting to their new way of life. That was reportedly during a conversation they had at Hampton Roads. As Stephens relates it, Lincoln said, "I guess they'll just have to 'root hog or die.'" That would have fit Lincoln, since he followed black minstrelsy and "Root Hog Or Die" was popular at the time.

Lincoln related the circumstances behind the story in to Alexander McClure.

"You see," said he, "we had reached and were discussing the slavery question. Mr. Hunter said, substantially, that the slaves, always accustomed to an overseer, and to work upon compulsion, suddenly freed, as they would be if the South should consent to peace on the basis of the 'Emancipation Proclamation,' would precipitate not only themselves, but the entire Southern society, into irremediable ruin. No work would be done, nothing would be cultivated, and both blacks and whites would starve!"

Said the President: "I waited for Seward to answer that argument, but as he was silent, I at length said: 'Mr. Hunter, you ought to know a great deal better about this argument than I, for you have always lived under the slave system. I can only say, in reply to your statement of the case, that it reminds me of a man out in Illinois, by the name of Case, who undertook, a few years ago, to raise a very large herd of hogs. It was a great trouble to feed them, and how to get around this was a puzzle to him. At length he hit on the plan of planting an immense field of potatoes, and, when they were sufficiently grown, he turned the whole herd into the field, and let them have full swing, thus saving not only the labor of feeding the hogs, but also that of digging the potatoes. Charmed with his sagacity, he stood one day leaning against the fence, counting his hogs, when a neighbor came along.

"'Well, well,' said he, 'Mr. Case, this is all very fine. Your hogs are doing very well just now, but you know out here in Illinois the frost comes early, and the ground freezes for a foot deep. Then what you going to do?'

"This was a view of the matter which Mr. Case had not taken into account. Butchering time for hogs was 'way on in December or January! He scratched his head, and at length stammered: 'Well, it may come pretty hard on their snouts, but I don't see but that it will be "root, hog, or die."'"

Lincoln was talking to one of the Confederate commissioners, Hunter. Hunter was expressing his concern about what would happen to southren society without the slave labor that provided their wealth. Without slaves, Hunter complained, no work would be done. Nothing would be harvested. People would starve. So when Lincoln related the story it was to point out that the white population could no longer live off the labors of their chattle. The white population would have to work for a change. It was the white population that would have to 'root hog, or die' not the former slaves.

17 posted on 05/10/2005 7:01:33 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE
Civil War not necessary. The slavery would be abolished same way as serfdom was abolished in Europe. Sooner than later.

And on better terms - freed slaves would get the grants to stand on their own feet, same grants as white settlers were getting.

18 posted on 05/10/2005 7:05:39 PM PDT by A. Pole (Ukrainian proverb: "Iak buly moskali, buv khlib na stoli, a iak bude Ukraina, bude bida po kolina")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buridan

Doesn't Harry Jaffa like to claim "Lincoln didn't mean what he wrote here" when he comes across inconvenient statements by Abe? We mere mortals don't have access to "what he really meant" versus what he actually wrote.


19 posted on 05/10/2005 8:09:51 PM PDT by Pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
The white population would have to work for a change.

Lincoln, unlike modern south-haters, knew that only a small precentage of southerners owned slaves. Work was nothing new to the white population of the south, but that claim does have a continued popularity among the culturally marxist.

20 posted on 05/10/2005 8:19:21 PM PDT by Pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 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