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

Skip to comments.

Anti-Lincoln Gangs of New York
Lew Rockwell ^ | 1/4/02 | Thomas J. DiLorenzo

Posted on 01/06/2003 5:58:13 AM PST by billbears

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last
Hadn't seen the movie yet, but may have to give it a chance this weekend
1 posted on 01/06/2003 5:58:14 AM PST by billbears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Aurelius; GOPcapitalist; stainlessbanner; 4ConservativeJustices; sheltonmac
Another example of abe's 'peaceful' actions. Southern ping
2 posted on 01/06/2003 5:59:16 AM PST by billbears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billbears
Every one of those New York rioters was a Democrat, just as were their Confederate rebel pals in the South. See www.republicanbasics.com for the truth about the Grand Old Party.

3 posted on 01/06/2003 6:07:48 AM PST by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
Every one of those New York rioters was a Democrat, just as were their Confederate rebel pals in the South. See www.republicanbasics.com for the truth about the Grand Old Party.

LOL. I hate to break it to the party loyal but many things Democrats of that time espoused were what Republicans of today believe. See party flip-flop from 1940-1970. Thanks. Don't need to go to another worship abe site

4 posted on 01/06/2003 6:14:28 AM PST by billbears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
"Every one of those New York rioters was a Democrat."

And you know this because...? Are you implying that only leftist liberals would protest an unjust war?

5 posted on 01/06/2003 6:15:42 AM PST by sheltonmac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac
During the Civil War, if you were against the Constitution and the U.S. flag you were a Democrat. Patriots were Republicans. New York City has always been Democrat.

6 posted on 01/06/2003 6:19:03 AM PST by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: billbears
I saw it on Saturday. Three hours long: I don't think I blinked throughout the whole movie and wished it had gone on for another 3 hours. It was very un-PC as Rockwell says. Do not miss it.
7 posted on 01/06/2003 6:20:14 AM PST by Pharmboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billbears
Strange, I had the curious idea that if you came to this country and wanted to live here, you fought for it when you were needed. The Irish immigrants weren't forced to bear an unfair share of the fighting. Read McPherson's book; the Irish regiments on both sides fought extremely well in many notable engagements, but Irish immigrants actually constituted less of a percentage of the Union Army than their share of the population would indicate. Moreover, rich men fought in the war on both sides; often, ther richest man in a northern town would clothe, feed and arm his volunteer regiment from his town in return for leading it. A fine example is Robert Gould Shaw of Massachusetts, from one of the wealthiest families in the state, who died leading the 54th Regiment of free black men into battle in Charleston. If Lincoln was so unpopular with the troops "forced" into the Union Army, why is it that the Union troops were given leave to go home in 1864 to vote and voted for Lincoln in overwhelming numbers? In addition, the idea of New York's secession wasn't a sometime thing; the mayor of the heavily-cotton dependent seaport pushed for it before the war even began. In reply, Lincoln said "its like the doorstop of the home deciding its going to play house on its own".
8 posted on 01/06/2003 6:22:37 AM PST by laconic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billbears
The immediate cause of the draft riots of the workers was their conscription for military duty. The New York "World" of Saturday, July 18, 1863, editorially regards the riots as the "spontaneous outburst of popular passion, primarily at the draft, next at the $300 exemption clause..." which provided that the propertied class could shift the blood tax which the war demanded on to the shoulders of the working class. Section 80 of the Regulations of the War Department made provision for "Certificates of exemption (and discharge) from the draft by reason of having provided a substitute or of having paid commutation money," $300. As J. T. Headley recounts the situation in "The Great Riots of New York," "most of those drawn were laboring men, or poor mechanics, who were unable to hire a substitute....

This paragraph is from an article written in the 1930s and can be found at :"http://www.weisbord.org/FourSixSeven.htm". Some interesting reading at this website and gives one an insight into the liberal psyche.

9 posted on 01/06/2003 6:26:14 AM PST by scouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Ok, folks. Repeat after me:

"Lincoln was EEEEeeevvvvvvvvvilll.....Lincoln was EEEEEeeeevvvvvvvvvvvvvilllll....."

10 posted on 01/06/2003 6:26:42 AM PST by Sam's Army
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: billbears
bump .... hmm maybe I'll have to go check this one out.
12 posted on 01/06/2003 6:28:34 AM PST by Centurion2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: laconic
Fewer than 10% of Union soldiers were draftees, compared to nearly half for the Confederates. Also, when their three-year enlistments ended in the summer of 1864, 3/4 of the Union army volunteered to re-enlist for the duration. Rebel armies, on the other hand, started to melt away.
13 posted on 01/06/2003 6:30:02 AM PST by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: laconic
Absolutely...
14 posted on 01/06/2003 6:30:32 AM PST by joesnuffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sc-rms
"lincoln did not have a contract with the people to do what he did"

Sounds like a pro-reparations argument.

15 posted on 01/06/2003 6:31:10 AM PST by Sam's Army
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: billbears
What party flip? In 1940, most Democrats were against color-blind policies. Today, most Democrats are also against color blind policies.
16 posted on 01/06/2003 6:31:27 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: billbears
Martin Scorcese’s new anti war film....to awaken a sense of vietnam era draft resistance and rioting if GW tries to bring back the draft....
Re-vitalizing the lie...that only the poh be goin' off tuh war....
Most of the Vietnam vets were volunteers...white with two years of college...
California's white middle class hit the hardest....per capita
The whorlywood liberal elite.....strikes again..and dumb ass Americans line up and pay a premium for their brainwashing....
Heh though.....dats entertainment
18 posted on 01/06/2003 6:46:13 AM PST by joesnuffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billbears
This article is naive.

NYC secession was a dead letter by the time of the draft riot (Jul., 1863). The City's corrupt former mayor, Fernando Wood, had proposed NYC secession in Jan., 1861, 2 1/2 years earlier. In 1862 Wood was denied renomination by Tammany based in part on his extremism and he was defeated by a Republican, George Opdyke, in a three-way race that fall. Elsewhere, Democrats did very well in the election. The moderate Opdyke was mayor at the time of the riot.

At the time of the riot, Lee was retreating across the Potomac. Grant was besieging Vicksburg a thousand miles away. No New York regiments were serving with Grant. New Yorkers served with Meade in Maryland or garrisoned DC and other points.

The draft was a bigger factor in the manpower-starved South than in the North. Only 8% of Union soldiers were conscripted in the Civil War compared to 25% of Confederate soldiers. So if there's a draft bogey, it's Davis, not Lincoln. The governors of Georgia (Joe Brown) and North Carolina (Zebulon Vance) were bitter opponents of the draft, the Confederate national government, and Davis.

The level of violence in the riot is unknown. Estimates of deaths range from below 100 to above 3,000. Most historians lean toward the lower figure.

The riot was the most violent civil disturbance in U.S. history excluding the Civil War itself. The movie dramatizes it into a revolution. It wasn't. The civil authorities lost control of much of the City for two days. Elsewhere and outside the city, life went on normally.






19 posted on 01/06/2003 6:46:50 AM PST by Man of the Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billbears
Hadn't seen the movie yet, but may have to give it a chance this weekend.

I saw it last Friday, and the only surprise to me is that Tommy took this long to work it into one of his columns. I have no doubt that you will find it as 'historically accurate' as DiLusional did.

20 posted on 01/06/2003 6:54:09 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 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