Abe Loncoln, good or bad?

S

Snake_Six

New Member
As I stated in the fav. presidents thread, I don't think Lincoln was a good president.
I also stated that I thought he was a bigot
He did not believe that blacks were as good as whites.

The following is a expert from Lincoln's fourth debate with Douglas on September 18. 1858.
I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way 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.
Click to expand...

Here is a link to the full text of the speech.
http://www.learner.org/channel/workshops/primarysources/emancipation/docs/fourthdebate.htm

Lincoln was also a criminal. He violated the Constitution and the common law several times.
He also invaded a sovereign country for no reason whatsoever.
When the South secceded from the Union, they did the same thing as the Thirteen Colonies did in the Revolutionary War.
The Colonies seperated themselves from a government that was trampling on their rights and the South did the exact same thing. They had the legal right to do so and by invading them and forcing them to stay in the Union, Lincoln violated the very principles that this country was based upon.

On of the ways he violated the Constitution was the suspension of Habeas Corpus.

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=425
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus
http://www.civil-liberties.com/pages/did_lincoln.htm

That's all for now.
 
He also violated the spirit of the Constitution by now allowing the South to secede from the Union. The United States of America is constitutionally a group of 50 member nations with an overseeing framework. Basically, it's a co-op. Everyone has to agree on laws being changed, everyone has representation, and members could leave if the people of that state vote to do so.

In reality, Abraham Lincoln was a great abuser of power, a strong advocate of federal supremacy, and was clearly whitewashed over by history. On the other hand, his facial hair was MAJESTIC!
 
The USA is not a co-op under the constitution. It was under the Articles of Confederation, but we all know how that worked out.

And from the way things have progressed to modern day, I'm sometimes surprised we still have states at all.

Also, I posted this in the other thread too but it's relevant to the discussion here. There are certainly historians who feel that Lincoln was really quite a terrible person, but it's not what I would call a consensus.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand how you can simultaneously sympathize with the goal of the confederacy and condemn Lincoln as a racist.

What do you think of the French Revolution? Or the current situation in Iraq? These are conflicts in which the primary goal of the secessionist forces is one of ideological unity rather than stability. France went through several governments before they finally realized that stability is more important than freedom fighting. America fought for its independence for many reasons, but I think the one that caused the revolution's success was because the revolutionary forces had stability as one of their aims, intentional or otherwise. A colony-empire relationship is simply unstable, and similar bonds were severed between Cote d'Ivoire and France or between India and Great Britain.

On the other end of the spectrum, Iraq or the French Revolution are/were both dissolutions of already-established countries into multiple factions that warred. Wars like this are often long and bloody, and they often do not solve the problems that caused them. Reference the situation in West Africa today as an example. "Failed states," as Robert Kaplan calls them, are simply big messes and total wastes of human life. If the Confederacy had been allowed to secede there would be social compartmentation that, I believe, would have led to a situation like this, for at least as long as people refused to compromise.
 
Last edited:
Wow, for once one of snake six's claims makes an ounce of sense. However, I think he was a good president and why the heck do you keep claiming (see a debate on CCGR... long story) that the Confederacy was right?
 
Simply because the CSA believed in the government that the USA had started out as. The US government moved away from the principles upon which it was founded and was doing the same thing as England was to the Colonies.
The goal of the CSA was to go back to those principles.
 
k, to clarify, one of the main ideals of the confederacy was the state's sovereignty. basically, the CSA wanted the states to have more power than the federal government, which Lincoln and most of the North did not want. for an interesting view on this, i suggest Harry Turtledove's "Guns of the South." It's fiction, but based on a lot of history.
 
Having lived all my life in the south, I consider myself very much a southerner. I also agree with many of the ideals that the CSA stood for. However, above all that I consider the stability and unity of the USA to be of paramount importance. For maintaining those two factors I consider Abraham Lincoln to have been a good president, regardless of what I may think of his racial viewpoints.

As for the CSA secceding, I cannot recall the constitution, which they all signed, allowing for any action of the sort. I'm not completly sure about that though so feel free to point out where it says they can, if indeed it does exist.

Having lived all my life in the south, I consider myself very much a southerner. I also agree with many of the ideals that the CSA stood for. However, above all that I consider the stability and unity of the USA to be of paramount importance. For maintaining those two factors I consider Abraham Lincoln to have been a good president, regardless of what I may think of his racial viewpoints.

As for the CSA seceding, I cannot recall the constitution, which they all signed, allowing for any action of the sort. I'm not completely sure about that though so feel free to point out where it says they can, if indeed it does exist.

You pointed out that Lincoln temporarily suspended the right of habeas corpus. While this may not be entirely ethical, it does allow for decisive action without immediately overloading the courts. Such measures are at least partially justified in times of emergency so long as they are restored in a timely manner.
 
Snake_Six said:
Simply because the CSA believed in the government that the USA had started out as. The US government moved away from the principles upon which it was founded and was doing the same thing as England was to the Colonies.
The goal of the CSA was to go back to those principles.
Click to expand...

Those principles being what? If you mean the Articles of Confederation, we all know how THAT turned out...
 
When the states signed the Constitution, most of them said that they were resverving the right to leave if things went sour.

CS, the principles were Small Government (CSA) vs. Big Government (USA).
AS a result of the North winning, we have the crappy government that we have today. In fact, IMO, the current government is a bastard government as it is not the one that this country started out with.
We started as a Constitutional Republic, we moved into a Democracy, we right now have a Dictatorial Democracy (will of the people as long as it doesn't contradict the will of the government) and we are right on the edge of a full blown Dictatorship.
This country need to go back to the government we first had.
 
ChickenSoup said:
Do your language, won't you? I don't want to have to read that.

-10 respect for Snake Six
Click to expand...

The word bastard doesn't always mean something bad...

1# A child born out of wedlock.
2# Something that is of irregular, inferior, or dubious origin.
Click to expand...
Taken from dictionary.com
 
I am confused....you say Lincoln was a bigot and racist. Ok, then what was the south?! At least the north eventually stood up and said "Free the slaves!" And for your information, leading up to the civil war, the south was taking over FEDERAL Military bases. Finally, one lone base said "We will not surrender".... and what did the south do? They fired the first shot to start the war!

The southern states were quitters. "Boo hoo, a person we didn't want won the Presidential election. We quit" - lame. The south were also bullys and complainers. They got partial votes for slaves but wouldn't give the slaves any rights! They made every effort to make freeing slaves illegal. Ironically, Lincoln was undecided on the slave issue until the South made the decision for him :D

The CSA wasn't looking at going back to the basics; they were trying to get their way on everything. If they really were trying to go to the basics, they would have freed the slaves before starting the war. Also, if the south had won the civil war, we would be in a much worse position. A house divided cannot stand. How would we have entered WWI or WWII?

By the way, this is coming from a guy who lives in Georgia.
 
Do your language, won't you? I don't want to have to read that.
Click to expand...

I used it in proper context (illegitimate).
You're scaring me, man. What kind of conspiracy sites have you been reading?
Click to expand...

Dude, just listen to the news. This government is taking powers not given to it by the Constitution and misusing them.
 
I hate to say it but the News is totally controlled by the Democratic Party and there for only show you want they want you to see. I feel Bush is one of the Best Presidents we have ever had. If we kept haveing presidents like Clinton we would look like France in a few decades. We are not in Irag for oil (We have not bought a single drop from them) as the news tried to tell you and the loss of life is very small when compared to other wars. I have a friend who is a member of this community named Sherman you is about to go to Iraq a third time. He has told me half of the fatalities have been from Aciddents rather than being shot by the enemy. I will agree with you that our Government is not perfect and needs some serious change and Prayer but I feel we still have a LOT more freedom than any country in the world.
 
Also The ssue of Slavery was not a Big Issue in the South leaving the Union. They left for a lot of the same reason that the Colonies left England. But I believe that God was in control and did what was best for our Country and the Rest of the world. Their were some Amazing men of God that were leading the Southern Armies and if it was God's Will I believe the South would have won. Which leads to the Whole Stonewall Jackson think. God Killed Jackson because he was a praying man and he began to pray that the Southwould win :0). I am from Colorado South of the Mason Dixon line so I was born on Confederate soil and I am a Minority of Spanish decent :D
 
one2dredd said:
I hate to say it but the News is totally controlled by the Democratic Party and there for only show you want they want you to see.
Click to expand...

if you want a republican spin on things, watch fox news. for democratic, watch anything else. no matter what they say, there is no unbiased news in america.

makes me glad this world isn't Home... i'm just passin' through.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top