Tuesday, December 2, 2008

Abraham Lincoln: a cautionary note

Here's a good question, from John Stoeffler, writing for the Suburban Journals in the St. Louis area:

"He discriminated against certain groups and believed they should be deported. He favored a strong controlling central government. He jailed newspaper editors and judges and had his military commanders close down those newspapers whose editorials disagreed with his policies. He had one legislator* removed from office and banished from the country. He confiscated private property and firearms. Can you guess the name of this tyrant?

"Was it Saddam Hussein or North Korea's Kim Jong Il? Was it Adolf Hitler, Mao Tse Tung or Josef Stalin? No, he was one of America's most lionized presidents, Abraham Lincoln.

"Shocked? You should be, especially in view of a number of those in the media who, before he is sworn in as our next president, are comparing Obama to Abraham Lincoln."

President-elect Obama has expressed a great deal of admiration for the style and policies of Abraham Lincoln. This is understandable -- after all, Mr. Obama is from Illinois, and I am sure there is much about President Lincoln that would appeal to him.

However, before we move the Lincoln idolatry into high gear, we should heed this cautionary note.

Did President Lincoln free the slaves? Well, sort of. He freed the slaves in the Confederacy. Mr. Stoeffler quotes a London newspaper at the time: "The principle is not that a human being cannot justly own another, but that he cannot own him unless he is loyal to the United States."

As a member of the Illinois legislature, he urged his colleagues to appropriate money to remove all free blacks from the State of Illinois. The following year, in the Lincoln-Douglas debates, he said, "There is a physical difference between (blacks and whites) which ... will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality" As President, he had "no purpose to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists ... and [he had] no inclination to do so."

President-elect Obama's inaugural theme is said to be taken from President Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, "A New Birth of Freedom." Perhaps Mr. Obama should take note that when Maryland was preparing to vote on a resolution to let the South secede peacefully, President Lincoln arrested the leadership favoring the motion and prevented the assembly from even debating it. So much for free speech and peaceful assembly.

"A New Birth of Freedom"? Is this part of the change the President-elect promises, or will it prove to be Orwellian irony? We shall soon see.

* Congressman Clement Vallandigham, of Dayton, Ohio.

2 comments:

Barga said...

While Lincoln used the EP as a political ploy, his statements as gettysberg showed that he was intent on freeing the slaves once it was over. Remember, his views were racist, but he was trying to act in the best interest of the blacks

that said, he did everything constitutionally:
"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it. "

Ander said...

Can you find a leader in history who hasn't been full of hypocrisy when it comes to rhetoric, the implementation of policies, and their effect?

Bill Clinton championed peace between Israel and Palestine but did everything he could to sell them more weapons to oppress a defenseless population.

Will Obama's presidency be full of Orwellian irony? You bet. Why look to leaders he finds himself aligned with from the 1860's? Look to leaders he is aligning himself with now and the people he has surrounded himself with. None of these people represent any drastic change in US policy. The most we can hope for from this presidency is a more efficiently run empire. With a brand new domestic police force and renewed sense of national pride with the revival of the war on terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Obama has made it clear to the intelligence and military communities that he is committed to defending peace and stamping out all threats to it throughout the world.

What are those threats to peace when we have the largest, most technologically advanced, and well funded military in more places than you can think of?