Abe Lincoln: The Racist

[Gtrght77]

Abe gets the credit for freeing the slaves but he didnt do it so they could live side by side with whites. He wanted to send them back to Africa after they were freed.


Abraham Lincoln Quote

“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the 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. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”

by:

Abraham Lincoln
(1809-1865) 16th US President
Source:

Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858
(The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, pp. 145-146.)


Just a little History for Presidents day. Sounds a lot like a white sepremicist.

[Sgt.Slaughter]

But you can't bash Lincoln because thats the best President the conservatives have had other than Reagan.

You say he's racist, white supremacist.

Conservatives say: He freed the slaves.

You say Obama is trying to help this nation with the stimulus package.

Conservatives say: Lincoln freed the slaves.

You say Bush was the worst President ever.

Conservatives say: Emancipation Proclamation.

Abe was just going with the flow. He thought that hey if we set them free where will they go:
1. Either back to Africa. or 2. On the plantation and continue to work.

African american's weren't really free until 1965 with the Voting Rights Act. And you will hear plenty of blacks say that who grew up around that era. They were looked at as one-third (1/3) of a person before 1965 a good hundred years after Lincoln freed the slaves.

[McMadden]

I think it's unfair to quote Lincoln before he was in office. Remember he was unpopular in the south when he was nominated to run for president.

Remember this guys views before being president. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9SOVzMV2bc

In the log run, Lincoln did do the right thing after becoming Prez.

[Sgt.Slaughter]

I think it's unfair to quote Lincoln before he was in office. Remember he was unpopular in the south when he was nominated to run for president.

Remember this guys views before being president. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9SOVzMV2bc

In the log run, Lincoln did do the right thing after becoming Prez.

Wow...good video. its like everything Bush said he went opposite with. And it's funny because alot of those things are what Obama said during his campaign (not word 4 word but variations of it).

[McMadden]

Wow...good video. its like everything Bush said he went opposite with. And it's funny because alot of those things are what Obama said during his campaign (not word 4 word but variations of it).
Yeah I caught that too.

[Nevada_Ballin]

it should also be noted that before delivering his own, Lincoln rescinded an original emancipation proclamation made by a general in western territories.

I've always said that Lincoln isn't the saint history has made him out to be but no one wants to ever face that truth.

[resnor]

So, since Obama has been comparing himself to Lincoln ALOT lately, does that mean that Obama is a racist? I mean, is he a white supremecist also? Does he hate himself?

[theanalogkid]

But you can't bash Lincoln because thats the best President the conservatives have had other than Reagan.

You say he's racist, white supremacist.

Conservatives say: He freed the slaves.

You say Obama is trying to help this nation with the stimulus package.

Conservatives say: Lincoln freed the slaves.

You say Bush was the worst President ever.

Conservatives say: Emancipation Proclamation.

Abe was just going with the flow. He thought that hey if we set them free where will they go:
1. Either back to Africa. or 2. On the plantation and continue to work.

African american's weren't really free until 1965 with the Voting Rights Act. And you will hear plenty of blacks say that who grew up around that era. They were looked at as one-third (1/3) of a person before 1965 a good hundred years after Lincoln freed the slaves.

Uhhh...Lincoln was left-wing, not right wing.

[Sgt.Slaughter]

Uhhh...Lincoln was left-wing, not right wing.


No sarcasim intended: But last I checked Dem's, Liberal, Left Wing. Pubic's, Conservative, Right Wing. And Lincoln was Republican, right?

Or am I looking too far into your comment?

[Chomppig]

No sarcasim intended: But last I checked Dem's, Liberal, Left Wing. Pubic's, Conservative, Right Wing. And Lincoln was Republican, right?

Or am I looking too far into your comment?

I remember my political sicene teacher in high school once saying that back then, Republicans and Democrats were opposite of how we know them today. The ideas of Republicans back then is closer to what modern day Democrates believe and vice versa.

[TheRealist]

By todays standards, Lincoln would be considered a Democrat.

The "Solid" South was purely "Democratic" from 1860-1965 until they turned "Republican" by todays standards. Lots of things have changed party-wise. Republicans for instance (until Theodore Roosevelt) were also severe isolationists, protectionists, and in some sense socialist by standards of that day.

Still.

Lincoln WAS the greatest President ever. And he WAS as close of a saint as ANY U.S. President has ever come on a moral basis. He DID inevitably free the slaves, did he not? Whether you disagree with the basis doesn't make the act in itself any less meaningful.

Things change, one view doesn't repudiate the fact that he kept the United States united...even at the ultimate expense of his own life.

For the record...Democrat does not necessarily equal liberal, just as Republican doesn't necessarily equal conservative. Values (the latter) reflect variablility in party stances, so party principles will never hold in the long run.

**EDIT**

Imagine what Lincoln could have done if he were not killed. He would have single-handedly managed Reconstruction efforts in the South, which would have undoubtedly been better than the way history has been written. Congress (Republicans of the time) screwed whites in the South immediately following the Civil War (1865-1877) and then likewise sold out the black man (1877-1965) to these same angry white people for a President. (Compromise of 1877)

[theanalogkid]

No sarcasim intended: But last I checked Dem's, Liberal, Left Wing. Pubic's, Conservative, Right Wing. And Lincoln was Republican, right?

Or am I looking too far into your comment?

Republicans were a left-wing party during that time period, and Democrats were conservatives. Yeah Lincoln would be considered a Democrat, especially since he enjoyed smoking weed out of corncob pipe.

As far as Lincoln being "the greatest President", he was hardly anything close. He was the biggest erroder of states rights the country has ever seen, he the only reason he freed the slaves was because it would screw over the South's agricultural based economy, he didn't even come up with the idea, and he was very hesitant to even do it.

It's like making Woodrow Wilson into an American hero, it's another act of blind patriotism. Wilson was a racist who segregated the navy, a branch of the military which was never segregated. He also used the military an invaded multiple Latin American countries.

[Nevada_Ballin]

Republicans were a left-wing party during that time period, and Democrats were conservatives. Yeah Lincoln would be considered a Democrat, especially since he enjoyed smoking weed out of corncob pipe.

As far as Lincoln being "the greatest President", he was hardly anything close. He was the biggest erroder of states rights the country has ever seen, he the only reason he freed the slaves was because it would screw over the South's agricultural based economy, he didn't even come up with the idea, and he was very hesitant to even do it.

It's like making Woodrow Wilson into an American hero, it's another act of blind patriotism. Wilson was a racist who segregated the navy, a branch of the military which was never segregated. He also used the military an invaded multiple Latin American countries.

Many people do not realize this... it seems to get hidden when American history is taught in the classroom.

[NumenorBlader]

He DID inevitably free the slaves, did he not? Whether you disagree with the basis doesn't make the act in itself any less meaningful.


What you are essentially saying is this: The end justifies the means.

Does it really? Think about it.

One of the very many reasons such ideology can seem convoluted is by taking the example of torture. America, a country that has very many ideals of democracy, right to a fair trial and so on believes that torture is wrong (let's exempt Guantanamo for a second). Now if you torture a criminal for information, then sentence them to life imprisonment, you are JUST as bad as the criminal (under US Law), regardless of whether the criminal is guilty or not. EVEN though the criminal is done for life, even if he is guilty, the end does not JUSTIFY the means. Not by any democratic, free society and law.

Just a thought.

Blader.

[NumenorBlader]

Personally, when I see this issue I remember what I saw when I visisted Washington DC last summer. I went to Lincoln Memorial and all seemed well, but then there was this little bit underneath it all - a little historical memorial bit with stone engravings and other bits - a smallish room near the toilets.

Anyway, reading the stuff on it, reading about how Lincoln did what he did (i.e. freed the slaves) and interpreting his language made me realise a few things:

1) He seemed to do it not because the intrinsic value of the slaves, but because the promise of freedom is a MASSIVE cause to have mass numbers of slaves join his army, to fight for HIS cause, because................

2) Ultimately he wanted to save the Union. That was his quarry. He did not want the dissolution of it, and he needed more soldiers. He did not seem to want the freedom of slaves as an *intrinsicly* good action, but he used freeing the slaves as an *instrumental* good. Remember as in point 1), the promise of freedom to a slave, born to slave parents, from slave descendents is so empowering and would give Lincoln so much extra man power.

That's what I've picked up from a lot of different sources, but compounded by what I saw on those stone bits. Lincoln wanted to save the Union, at any cost. If that meant freeing the slaves, so be it. But it definetly was not to free the slaves first. I have a feeling things would have turned out differently if the war was heavily tilted in Lincoln's favour and it didn't turn out to be as bloody as he thought.

Blader.

[Sgt.Slaughter]

What you are essentially saying is this: The end justifies the means.

Does it really? Think about it.

One of the very many reasons such ideology can seem convoluted is by taking the example of torture. America, a country that has very many ideals of democracy, right to a fair trial and so on believes that torture is wrong (let's exempt Guantanamo for a second). Now if you torture a criminal for information, then sentence them to life imprisonment, you are JUST as bad as the criminal (under US Law), regardless of whether the criminal is guilty or not. EVEN though the criminal is done for life, even if he is guilty, the end does not JUSTIFY the means. Not by any democratic, free society and law.

Just a thought.

Blader.


Wow...:) Very nice, open-minded analysis Blader.



2) Ultimately he wanted to save the Union. That was his quarry. He did not want the dissolution of it, and he needed more soldiers. He did not seem to want the freedom of slaves as an *intrinsicly* good action, but he used freeing the slaves as an *instrumental* good. Remember as in point 1), the promise of freedom to a slave, born to slave parents, from slave descendents is so empowering and would give Lincoln so much extra man power.

That's what I've picked up from a lot of different sources, but compounded by what I saw on those stone bits. Lincoln wanted to save the Union, at any cost. If that meant freeing the slaves, so be it. But it definetly was not to free the slaves first. I have a feeling things would have turned out differently if the war was heavily tilted in Lincoln's favour and it didn't turn out to be as bloody as he thought.

Blader.

You have a point here...I heard this a couple years ago and it does make sense to free the slaves and have them fight for the Union for eventual freedom. Because in essence, when they enlisted and made it out they were technically free...Reminds me of the movie Glory.