question about linclon and slaves
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-08-2015, 11:15 AM
RE: question about linclon and slaves
(20-08-2015 10:16 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(17-08-2015 06:27 PM)BryanS Wrote:  Not really unusual at all. Slavery was the pillar holding up the agriculture based economy of the South. The emancipation proclamation was designed to attack the South at its core, both politically and economically. It also had an intended goal of encourage rebellion among the Southern slaves.

This is correct, though he also feared that the border territories (e.g. Missouri) would join the South, and he only made the Proclamation after Congress had already done two such proclamations, in the two prior years (1861 and 1862), and a Union general had made his own Proclamation, which Lincoln was forced to order rescinded; once it was clearly too late to worry about appearing politically neutral and just "keeping the country together" (not a quote), he also wanted to bang a drum for a Cause to rally dwindling support for the war effort, which everyone thought would have been over by the time he made the Proclamation. Instead, the South had handed him a string of pretty disheartening defeats, so he waited for a victory at Antietam (or as we call it in the South, Sharpsburg) to make the announcement.

Lincoln was extremely progressive-thinking, for his day, but he was still at his core a politician and a lawyer. He was much more in favor of gradual, legal emancipation, believing that even though it was morally wrong, the solution would be found in economics and laws that favored a non-slave economy, not forcing people to give up their slaves (the slaveholders' property and productive "equipment") at gunpoint, even rhetorical gunpoint. Once it became obvious through the war that his solution was not viable, he changed tactics to turn Abolitionism into a cause the Yankee public could be made to rally behind (for the South, it was always about slavery, no matter what revisionists say). He was a progressive thinker, but a pragmatic political moderate, who just happened to become the leader during radical times that allowed for little moderation.

Edit to Add: Lincoln also changed his mind about making the EP when the South began to make some headway toward getting support for their war effort from European nations that stood to benefit from the cotton and other agricultural products of the South, which the US Navy had been interdicting/blockading; by linking the US government with an anti-slavery stance, he highlighted for the Europeans (who had laws outlawing slavery, already) that they could not recognize the Confederacy as a legitimate government without violating their own laws.

There is a lot more to Lincoln than many realize. For several reasons, one, the history books are written by the victors, and lets be honest, few wish to paint themselves in a bad light. Two, as you pointed out, it was a different time then. Things he had said which by today's standards would be considered to be racist, were actually very progressive for the time. Three, as you also pointed out, there was a political and strategic reason he did it. But it looks so much prettier in the history books to paint him as the point man for racial equality. History writers have long exploited hero constructs. When you dig into our "historical heroes" you find out they were actually human, with all of the faults that go along with that. One of my favorite books is "Lies my teacher told me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong" by James Loewen.

Funny thing is I am actually stationed onboard the USS Abraham Lincoln CVN 72 at the moment Yes We are unfortunately fed the Lincoln hero dogma daily. Not saying he wasn't an overall good man, and did great things, just pointing out the reality is often different than the story pitched by the history books.

Reminds me of the valiant fight to overcome the vicious attack of the ignorant violent red man (Native Americans) as per our history books when in fact we committed genocide upon these peace loving people by biological, military and economic warfare until they were decimated beyond recognition.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2015, 12:52 PM
RE: question about linclon and slaves
(20-08-2015 11:15 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(20-08-2015 10:16 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  This is correct, though he also feared that the border territories (e.g. Missouri) would join the South, and he only made the Proclamation after Congress had already done two such proclamations, in the two prior years (1861 and 1862), and a Union general had made his own Proclamation, which Lincoln was forced to order rescinded; once it was clearly too late to worry about appearing politically neutral and just "keeping the country together" (not a quote), he also wanted to bang a drum for a Cause to rally dwindling support for the war effort, which everyone thought would have been over by the time he made the Proclamation. Instead, the South had handed him a string of pretty disheartening defeats, so he waited for a victory at Antietam (or as we call it in the South, Sharpsburg) to make the announcement.

Lincoln was extremely progressive-thinking, for his day, but he was still at his core a politician and a lawyer. He was much more in favor of gradual, legal emancipation, believing that even though it was morally wrong, the solution would be found in economics and laws that favored a non-slave economy, not forcing people to give up their slaves (the slaveholders' property and productive "equipment") at gunpoint, even rhetorical gunpoint. Once it became obvious through the war that his solution was not viable, he changed tactics to turn Abolitionism into a cause the Yankee public could be made to rally behind (for the South, it was always about slavery, no matter what revisionists say). He was a progressive thinker, but a pragmatic political moderate, who just happened to become the leader during radical times that allowed for little moderation.

Edit to Add: Lincoln also changed his mind about making the EP when the South began to make some headway toward getting support for their war effort from European nations that stood to benefit from the cotton and other agricultural products of the South, which the US Navy had been interdicting/blockading; by linking the US government with an anti-slavery stance, he highlighted for the Europeans (who had laws outlawing slavery, already) that they could not recognize the Confederacy as a legitimate government without violating their own laws.

There is a lot more to Lincoln than many realize. For several reasons, one, the history books are written by the victors, and lets be honest, few wish to paint themselves in a bad light. Two, as you pointed out, it was a different time then. Things he had said which by today's standards would be considered to be racist, were actually very progressive for the time. Three, as you also pointed out, there was a political and strategic reason he did it. But it looks so much prettier in the history books to paint him as the point man for racial equality. History writers have long exploited hero constructs. When you dig into our "historical heroes" you find out they were actually human, with all of the faults that go along with that. One of my favorite books is "Lies my teacher told me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong" by James Loewen.

Funny thing is I am actually stationed onboard the USS Abraham Lincoln CVN 72 at the moment Yes We are unfortunately fed the Lincoln hero dogma daily. Not saying he wasn't an overall good man, and did great things, just pointing out the reality is often different than the story pitched by the history books.

Reminds me of the valiant fight to overcome the vicious attack of the ignorant violent red man (Native Americans) as per our history books when in fact we committed genocide upon these peace loving people by biological, military and economic warfare until they were decimated beyond recognition.

If you look on my Facebook page, Lies My Teacher Told Me is the top right-hand book in my favorites list, after The Language of God (listed in #1 position in the vain hopes that my parents will read it, as I've asked them to do... even left a copy in their house) and The Tyranny of Good Intentions: How Prosecutors and Law Enforcement Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice.

Visible in row two are: Just Mercy, The Lucifer Effect, and Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
20-08-2015, 02:11 PM
RE: question about linclon and slaves
(20-08-2015 11:15 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Reminds me of the valiant fight to overcome the vicious attack of the ignorant violent red man (Native Americans) as per our history books when in fact we committed genocide upon these peace loving people by biological, military and economic warfare until they were decimated beyond recognition.

If you really want to curl your toes, download the e-book (or buy the book) A Great and Noble Scheme: The Tragic Story of the Expulsion of the French Acadians from Their American Homeland by John Mack Faragher.

It's about the governor of Massachussetts (which then also contained Maine) colony sending out a volunteer military force to forcefully dispossess my people, the Acadians, at gunpoint in order to get their more-profitable land (which was ironically profitable due to a technology we developed but which the Colonial Americans couldn't figure out how to operate, build, and/or maintain). After a century of trying to squeeze us out, they resorted to deliberate violence. Those who would not "voluntarily" board the disease-ridden death boats were killed if they could not be captured and arrested. The end result was the "reduction" of our population from 15,000 to somewhere around 2000, who managed to resettle in Louisiana, forming the Cajun people.

We call it Le Grand Dérangement, the Great Upheaval, and it resulted in the deaths of about 1/3rd of our population, with the rest scattered to the winds in whatever refuges they could find (or were forced into), until my direct ancestor, Joseph Broussard dit Beausoleil rounded up the ones they could find and brought them to live on the Spanish lands in Louisiana.

Along with the Spanish actions toward the French Hugenots in Florida, it is one of the first major acts of genocide in North America... most of those were religion-related. Such deliberate displacement-or-death policies were actively (rather than incidentally) applied to the Native Americans, starting around the time of the Seven Years War/French-and-Indian War, at the same time it was being done to us.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
20-08-2015, 02:16 PM
RE: question about linclon and slaves
(20-08-2015 02:11 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(20-08-2015 11:15 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Reminds me of the valiant fight to overcome the vicious attack of the ignorant violent red man (Native Americans) as per our history books when in fact we committed genocide upon these peace loving people by biological, military and economic warfare until they were decimated beyond recognition.

If you really want to curl your toes, download the e-book (or buy the book) A Great and Noble Scheme: The Tragic Story of the Expulsion of the French Acadians from Their American Homeland by John Mack Faragher.

It's about the governor of Massachussetts (which then also contained Maine) colony sending out a volunteer military force to forcefully dispossess my people, the Acadians, at gunpoint in order to get their more-profitable land (which was ironically profitable due to a technology we developed but which the Colonial Americans couldn't figure out how to operate, build, and/or maintain). After a century of trying to squeeze us out, they resorted to deliberate violence. Those who would not "voluntarily" board the disease-ridden death boats were killed if they could not be captured and arrested. The end result was the "reduction" of our population from 15,000 to somewhere around 2000, who managed to resettle in Louisiana, forming the Cajun people.

We call it Le Grand Dérangement, the Great Upheaval, and it resulted in the deaths of about 1/3rd of our population, with the rest scattered to the winds in whatever refuges they could find (or were forced into), until my direct ancestor, Joseph Broussard dit Beausoleil rounded up the ones they could find and brought them to live on the Spanish lands in Louisiana.

Along with the Spanish actions toward the French Hugenots in Florida, it is one of the first major acts of genocide in North America... most of those were religion-related. Such deliberate displacement-or-death policies were actively (rather than incidentally) applied to the Native Americans, starting around the time of the Seven Years War/French-and-Indian War, at the same time it was being done to us.

Awesome! I love learning history stuff Smile

I did an Native American history class in college....just heart wrenching.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2015, 03:16 PM (This post was last modified: 20-08-2015 03:19 PM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: question about linclon and slaves
When I was just getting to my first prison, there was a book in the Diagnostic center "book cart" that went around called I Have Spoken, quoting the magnificent speeches of the chiefs who accepted treaties with the United States, and in between each speech was a paragraph about the circumstances in which those treaties were broken by us (and brief time it took). If you ever want to weep like a little kid, that's the one.

(Edit to Add: "I have spoken" was the statement the chiefs made at the end of the speeches, akin to our "Thank you very much".)

There's a passage near the front of Lies My Teacher Told Me, where he quotes the journal entry of a European who is robbing the grave sites of Native Americans they find, and it shows the contempt for non-white culture:

"...we found a place like a grave. We decided to dig it up. We found first a mat, and under that a fine bow ... We also found bowls, trays, dishes, and things like that. We took several of the prettiest things to carry away with us, and covered the body again."

Like a grave!

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: