Yankee Myth # 2 - Lincoln the Humanitarian

[SouthernByGrace]

YANKEE MYTH # 2

Lincoln the Humanitarian

   The second Yankee Myth of history in this series deals with the one icon that has been shoved down the throats of every American, especially Southerners, since the days of the War itself. Everyone can remember how we have been "taught" of just what a Humanitarian Abraham Lincoln was because he "freed the slaves", and "saved our glorious Union." The first installment dealt with these myths rather well. But, the Yankee Myth tells us about Ole Honest Abe, the great humanitarian. Yet, when we look at the record, we find that instead of a humanitarian we find someone guilty of two unforgivable sins of modern times (unforgivable for Southerners, that is...) - a belief in white supremacy and a belief in a system of apartheid!!!
   Lincoln's white supremacist ideas are a well kept secret. (Let it be known at this point that these views are those of Abraham Lincoln, and not mine.) In an 1858 Presidential campaign debate Lincoln made the following statements:

   "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... I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

   We all know that the surest way to prevent a Southerner from holding a federal court position is for the candidate to be accused of having held white supremacist convictions. Even though the candidate may protest that these were views commonly held at that time and that he or she has since changed viewpoints, it will make little difference to Yankee myth-makers. Yet, when the reality of Lincoln the white supremacist is presented, we can expect the myth-makers to declare that it was not uncommon at the time. So Honest Abe joins the ranks of the Skin-Heads!
   Another sin for which the myth-makers have no tolerance is support for apartheid. How shocking is it to learn that Lincoln was planning a system of geographic separation similar to that which has been practiced in South Africa. Again, in a debate with Stephen A. Douglas, Lincoln made the following comments:

"Such separation if effected at all, must be effected by colonization:... what colonization most needs is a hearty will...
Let us be brought to believe that it is morally right, and at the same time favorable to, or at least not against, our interest to transfer the African to his native clime, and we shall find a way to do it, however great the task may be."

Again, allow me to explain that I have quoted Lincoln's personal views on white supremacy and geographical separation not in an effort to encourage said views but to demonstrate the difference between Yankee myth and REALITY.
People, you will NOT be taught these things in school! Our children are forced to believe this man to be somewhat of a demigod! All while our own Southern leaders have been portrayed as VILLAINS!

DEO VINDICE

[Ga.windbreak]

One of Lincoln's most representative public statements on the question of racial relations was given in a speech at Springfield, Illinois, on June 26, 1857.6 In this address, he explained why he opposed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which would have admitted Kansas into the Union as a slave state:
There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people to the idea of indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races ... A separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation, but as an immediate separation is impossible, the next best thing is to keep them apart where they are not already together. If white and black people never get together in Kansas, they will never mix blood in Kansas ...
Racial separation, Lincoln went on to say, "must be effected by colonization" of the country's blacks to a foreign land. "The enterprise is a difficult one," he acknowledged,
but "where there is a will there is a way," and what colonization needs most is a hearty will. Will springs from the two elements of moral sense and self-interest. Let us be brought to believe it is morally right, and, at the same time, favorable to, or, at least, not against, our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime, and we shall find a way to do it, however great the task may be.


I will go to my grave still being amazed that most people are of a mind to believe to this day that Abe Lincoln was anything more than what his own words declare him to be and he wants to get you to believe that it is morally right. He makes himself out to be not only your President but also your moralist judge and jury.

I'm not here to judge him right or wrong but to claim something about someone that is 180 out from the truth of the matter is, at the very least, untruthful and, at the most, dangerous. For to forget history is but to repeat it in the future and I feel we are well on the way in that regard.

As the attorney and legal scholar, James Ostrowski commented, for Lincoln's actions and his creative interpretation of the Constitution to have actually been legal, the Constitution would have had to state that: 1) No state may ever secede from the Union for any reason. 2) If any State attempts to secede, the Federal Government shall invade such State with sufficient military force to suppress the attempted secession. 3) The federal government may coerce all states to provide militias to suppress the seceding state. 4) After suppressing said secession, the Federal Government shall rule said State by martial law until such time as said State shall accept permanent federal supremacy. 5) After suppressing said secession, the Federal Government shall force said State to ratify a new constitutional amendment which gives the Federal Government the right to police the states whenever it believes those states are violating the rights of their citizens. 6) The President may, of his own authority, suspend the operation of the Bill of Rights and the writ of habeas corpus, in a seceding or loyal state, if in his sole judgement, such is necessary to preserve the Union.

Of course, if the Constitution actually said this, it would never have been approved by the legislatures of the sovereign States.

As Lincoln himself stated, as well as commentators at the time, taxation and secession were the issues, not slavery. And as many in the North realized, it was Abraham Lincoln who schemed to launch the most devastating war in American history.

I invite any and all to aquaint themselves with Federal laws enacted since 9/11/01

[littlecanoe]

Those itty bitty words are so hard to put back in the mouth once they are spoken.  I'm in wonder that people will read the words of the man and immediately fall all over themselves defending him.  Just another proof that many or most believe exactly what they want to hear.

Excellent food for thought SBG.  Do any of you fellas know of a web site that has Lincoln quotes listed by subject?  I'm feeling a need to load up some ammo..........................................what better argument than what the man said.

[williamlayton]

What is the soulution?
We caused the problem, if it is a problem, by our policy on immigration. It has proved a false fear with the Irish, Jews, Poles, Chezks.
We have had more than our share of seemingly less than substantial genes collide without so much as a case of influenced degregation of stock.
I would assume that when we speak proudly of our American Indian heritiage, Scottish/English/Italian/Spanish the list goes on forever, that we are not affected/infected by sub-human genes which cause any loss of worth.
I would challange anyone to show absolute racial purity, and, who can say that Morrican, Negro, Jewish, Arabian blood does ot have its place in our history.
Now the question is, really, should any man or woman not have the right too quit a job they don't like---especially if they didn't seek it to begin with but forced by arm into.
Blessings

[littlecanoe]

Hey WL, ya got a little off track there, OT I say........................

[williamlayton]

Just following GW's thoughts too end results.
Blessings

[littlecanoe]

Unless I'm really off track the issue is not so much what was said but WHO said it and WHOM it is that defends HE-WHO-SAID-IT. 

The double standard is appalling.  Were Lincoln to stand up today and say such the NAACP and Mainstream Media would crucify him.  On the other hand, we have the Wrong Reverend Wright standing up and spewing vile hatred and he is unchecked as it is his right to say it.  No challenge, at least not one that mattered.

What is in a mans heart comes out of his mouth.  Lets get into the Word on this.  Lincoln said what he said because that was in his heart.  I don't say such things because it's not what I believe.  He is given credit for starting a war for just and noble cause when the real reason was veiled tyranny. 

Now.  I'm not living in the past.  It's past and a mill doesn't turn on the water that's down stream.  I do want to learn and be honest about what that water accomplished though.  Much of that elusive thing called freedom that we've discussed was ground to meal. 

Let's regain our freedom.

[SouthernByGrace]

Gw and littlecanoe, thanks to you both for staying on track throughout these various topics. I know I'm relatively new to GBO and you guys have been here longer than me, but I'm sticking my neck out here because I have to ask a very serious question. And I ask it with the utmost respect and admiration...

WL, what the hell are you talking about? Again, I mean no disrespect. After all, you are a Senior member here and I'm but a wee babe, but I have read your last several posts and they have absolutely nothing to do with the topics at hand. I know these discussions can tend to stray a little and that's fine, but what does a single post of yours in this topic have to do with the topic itself? I come away from reading your posts and I don't know if you are Fer me or Agin me...
"We caused the problem, if there is a problem, by our policy on immigration," has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Yankee Myths of History as they relate to Abraham Lincoln, this specific topic of myths being taught as fact.
WE didn't cause the problem, and yes, there IS a problem. The Yankee myth-makers caused the problem by ignoring the TRUTH of what happened, and then teaching a completely different version to us and our youth.
Immigration or our policy concerning it is completely irrelevant. If it weren't for immigration, Not ONE of us, except for Native Americans, would be here today. Nobody in a Civil War forum needs to even be bringing up a subject like racial purity. Nobody else has ever mentioned it, not that I've seen, and I don't think it belongs here, not in that context.

If you'll re-read my comments at the beginning of this thread (now highlighted) you'll See the context in which this subject was even brought up, as it related to Lincoln's publicly stated beliefs on racial equality and the mixing of the races, and how we have had a totally fabricated and opposite view of him shoved down our throats.

Again, WL, I admire your wisdom and your knowledge of the "Civil War" and I intend no disrespect or offense. I welcome and appreciate any and all comments on any posts I make here, as long as they relate to the subject matter. And in the very words of President Davis, I end this by saying,
"In the course of my services here, associated, at different times, with a great variety of people; there have been points of collision, but whatever offense there has been to me, I leave here - I carry with me no hostile remembrance. Whatever offense I have given, which has not been redressed, I have only to offer you my apology for any pain which, in the heat of discussion, I have inflicted."

Y'all have a good night.

DEO VINDICE

[Graybeard]

WL, what the hell are you talking about?

I find myself frequently asking him the same question. The answer seldom helps in my understanding. 

[Ga.windbreak]

Just following GW's thoughts too end results.
Blessings

Nah WL you ain't gonna stick that OT on me !!! You better come up with something better than that, my friend, cause I don't say anything about slave labor or even thoughts of it or anything else you just pulled out o that hat coverin yo head!! in this thread!!

Peace

P.S. Mr. Greybeard you get a two thumbs up for that one.

littlecanoe try this one http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/young8.html  Sorry about the OT fellas

[williamlayton]

I re-read the post of GW and come too the same conclusions.
It screams at me that we are talking restoring some nationals too another land.
It seems too me that we are talking about being infected by them.
I see that. If I am wrong correct me don't just sit there and complain that I don't understand. Communicate with me.
I never said I was not dense--teach me what you are trying too propose.
I really thoght my post responded too Mr Lincoln very well.
I like you guys, let's not let this go beyond the pale.
Blessings

[littlecanoe]

WL, 

I'm reading the same thing in a sense.  However, the man that was speaking of restoring people to their native clime was Mr. Lincoln.  I haven't seen that anyone here is saying that.  Purely a historical context.  To me that's the hypocrisy.  He "fought an honorable war to free the slaves" is what we have had crammed down our throats when the fella wasn't the humanitarian that he's made out to be.

Should the slaves have been freed?   Yes. 

Were they ready for entry into mainstream life?  No

Did the war and freedom by that route do the more harm than good?  Yes, they weren't prepared to enter life as freemen.  A good method would have been citizenship training, education etc.   

[SouthernByGrace]

lc, I'm glad SOMEBODY gets it.

[williamlayton]

If that is the case what is the arguement for? If you think that these words are the context of what Lincoln advocated then why not stay in the Union and support it?
Lincoln said, also, that he supported the right of any man to quit a job.
It seems too me that we get back to a point of saying it is OK because that is what Lincoln really believed.
I don't believe that.
There was a strong movement, that could not be funded, to ship slaves back too Africa. It was an attempt to appease the South. the South really wanted the staus quo too continue.
You can pass it off anyway you chose but that is the truth.
Blessings

[Dee]

lc, I'm glad SOMEBODY gets it.

SouthernByGrace, littlecanoe, and GaWindbreak. I get it too. It was as clear as a church bell. GB, gets it too.

I have made this point numerous times about Lincoln, but have not taken the time as SBG has and researched the PROOF of Lincoln's elitism attitude toward not only the black, but the SOUTHERNER as well.
He was a "war-monger" and had he lived, should have been tried for treason in violating the Constitution and Bill of Rights against other Americans.
He is but a PRIME EXAMPLE of Socialism against FREE TRADE, which is what the 'War of Northern Aggression" was about in the first place.

SouthernByGrace, they did not teach this information where I went to school in North Central Texas, BUT WE KNEW IT TO BE TRUE. This area was very loyal to the South, and those that were not, were hung.

William as usual, you are trying to make GaWindbreak, "and others", statements say something they do not. The topic and the points made are very clear. Yours are for another thread, AND perhaps another forum. At least to me.

[Ga.windbreak]

What is the solution?We caused the problem, if it is a problem, by our policy on immigration. It has proved a false fear with the Irish, Jews, Poles, Chezks.
We have had more than our share of seemingly less than substantial genes collide without so much as a case of influenced degregation of stock.
I would assume that when we speak proudly of our American Indian heritiage, Scottish/English/Italian/Spanish the list goes on forever, that we are not affected/infected by sub-human genes which cause any loss of worth.
I would challange anyone to show absolute racial purity, and, who can say that Morrican, Negro, Jewish, Arabian blood does ot have its place in our history.
Now the question is, really, should any man or woman not have the right too quit a job they don't like---especially if they didn't seek it to begin with but forced by arm into.
Blessings

Thanks Dee.

"What is the solution? Well WL since this is a thread about Lincoln's Humanitarianism and Lincoln is now dead I guess there is none for him but I would be more than happy to debate you on this matter if you want to start a new post. I do feel its only right though to point out to you that Its bad manners to go OT in someone elses thread.

I'm sure that you'll get no arguement from anyone about a person having the right to quit a job so I guess a big "atta boy" for Lincoln is in order! By the way I've reread my post several times and nowhere do I find the words Job or work in what I said or for that matter what your Mr. Lincoln said. So we are back to square one, I believe, and check mate.

Peace

[littlecanoe]

WL,

I finally understand where you are coming from but I disagree with your premise.  You are right in that staying with Mr. Lincoln would have been right for the south, IF, the war was about slavery.  To me, this point further validated that the southern cause was states rights.

Very good point though.

Fella's, I don't think that he was OT now.  I just wasn't getting the drift.

[Gary G]

It was a "power thing"!
There was no income tax then. The south was under greater tariffs and excise taxes than the north. Lincoln, being previously a whig, was for big government which required more tax. The south was fed up with it and seceded. Lincoln stood to lose more than half his tax base which meant a loss of power to Lincoln. (The government extracts it's power from the people via taxes, that is why they like them so much.). So it follows that he killed 350,000 men for power. Slavery was only an excuse. He managed to increase the size of government greatly and it has been down hill ever since. Ironic, Obama has been reading Lincoln.

It was about states rights and the Constitution, because of unfair taxes and power.

http://www.fee.org/Publications/the-Freeman/article.asp?aid=3737


Looking back, the south should never have fired a shot. What could they do?

Those in the right don't always win, and has hurt all of us!

[williamlayton]

My thoughts, and I will let it rest, are the way I see a complex set of circumstances.
I have no doubt that Lincoln, as the rest of us do, has/had some amount of contradiction in his thoughts. The point is his contradictions are small and his actions speak over the contradictions.
Lincoln was ahead of his time. He was certainly for the right of men too create craft unions. He was certainly for individual freedoms, for everyone. That is the republican in him.
His vision, you can call it power or greed, was for a nation from sea too shining sea. One nation under God. A United States. He was not the first with this vision and the South also had this vision. Such was the conflict.
He did not abhor slavery as much as he recognized the futility of the system within the scope and boundaries of the Constitution.
Whatever your bent, it is an obvious fact that the Souths economy and power and wealth were/was built on slavery and they also wanted too keep and expand this system too gain more of it all.
It flew in the face of a system that was going too change, one direction or the other.
Too point out flaws in individuals proves nothing about the system that was being contended for. All of the individuals on both sides of any conflict are flawed..
One day the one that declares us unflawed will come on the clouds of glory and we will gladly consent too be under his form of slavery.
Blessings

[SouthernByGrace]

Thanks for the comments DEE. Some very good points there. I agree with you about knowing the truth, even though we weren't taught it that way.
Oh, By the way,
Good to see you back.

DEO VINDICE

[Dee]

The Souths economy was NOT built around slavery. To say it was, is a lack of knowledge concerning history and trying to spin something to support ones personal thought while ignoring history. Slavery had become too expensive to maintain, and was in fact on it's way out. There were less than 5% of the growers that owned slaves.
It is a feel good Northern myth, adopted by the uneducated.

[Ga.windbreak]

You are so right Dee, if there was any economy built around slavery it was the Northern Shipping industry. They were the ones making all the money on slavery. the Southern economy was based on Cotton, Rice, and Cane Sugar for the most part. As Dee stated less than 5% owned any slaves so anyone who speaks of slavery as the deciding factor is just unwilling to look at the facts of the matter and is only speaking from an emotional point of view.

[williamlayton]

I am sorry to defy you two but, you are incorrect.
Blessings

[littlecanoe]

Ga WB,

Is there a breakdown of slave ownership vs family run farms of the day?  Statistics that we can view on this?

[Dee]

Ga WB,

Is there a breakdown of slave ownership vs family run farms of the day?  Statistics that we can view on this?

Research the number of textile growers vs the approximate number of actual slaves per state, and also understand that about 3% of the total population of the slaves were in the north.
To be politically UNCORRECT, the slang word "nigger" comes from a Latin word "Niger" meaning BLACK. This was commonly used in later years as most southern gentlemen planters were schooled in Latin. It was a term used to differentiate from the black laborers and the white laborers. The white laborers were steadily taking the place of slaves as they were more motivated, as they worked for a wage, and the planters, or Plantation owners did not have to provide UPKEEP. As I said, slavery was dieing a rather rapid death at the time of Lincoln declaring war against the Confederacy. Lincoln was a "FACT SPINNER" extraordinaire in his day, and is revered for a lie.

[Ga.windbreak]

I am sorry to defy you two but, you are incorrect.
Blessings

Defy all you want, its still a free country (I think). That doesn't mean that you have a clue as to being correct. Much like the person in the club shouting "FIRE" when someone lit a match.

Right is right, even when everyone is against it; Wrong is wrong, even when everyone is for it. - William Penn

[Ga.windbreak]

Ga WB,

Is there a breakdown of slave ownership vs family run farms of the day?  Statistics that we can view on this?

lc you might want to get and read this as I feel that it will give you a much better understanding of life in the South as it was versus the story book (GWTW version):

http://eh.net/bookreviews/library/1218

"Contrary to depictions of the slave South as a prosperous economy devastated by war and abolition, these essays locate the roots of postbellum regional backwardness firmly in the antebellum period. This era was prosperous indeed for the slaveowners [but] ... the antebellum South is [more] appropriately grouped with the middling countries of that era, such as Spain, Austria, Norway or Portugal" (p. 123-24).

[SouthernByGrace]

WL, again, I will point you to the 1860 Census for the FACTS on what Dee and GW are talking about. It clearly shows the undeniable proof of what they are saying. You must remember, though, that slaves were "enumerated" at the rate of 3/5 of a person, by law (the Constitution). Therefore you only need to divide the total number by 3/5 (.60) to reach the actual number of slaves. Divide the total number of slaves in SOUTHERN states by the total white population and you get somewhere in the neighborhood of 5.72%.  Now, do the same for the NORTHERN states, and you will find the rate around 3.8% of their population.

I would also like to remind you that the top three slave owners in the south (in # of slaves owned) were in fact BLACK, with all three owning well in excess of 100 slaves each. Two of them actually operated slave breeding farms, which was outlawed in the Confederate Constitution, as well as all Confederate States, and held stiff penalties, including prison time for the offender and freedom of his slaves. One even went so far as to sell two of his own offspring. He was actually jailed on more than one occasion for cruelty to his slaves, because the state of South Carolina had very stiff laws against such treatment.

Dee is also correct on the phrase "nigger." Most Southern people never used this term until the Reconstruction Era, and only then because the Union troops used the degrading term "nigra," derived from the name of the race, negro. Only the elite, wealthiest Southerners, educated in the finest schools, where Latin was a requirement, used the term "nigger" and it was almost never used in a degrading fashion. It was simply a Southern slang derived from the region it refers to, Niger, just as Dee explained.

GW is also correct in that the slave trade was very lucrative in the North. They did not have to maintain their slaves because they almost immediately sold them south. Slaves were actually being bought and sold in Washington, D.C. DURING the War !!! D.C.'s per capita slave auction sites was among the highest in the entire country, North or South, and continued even AFTER Lincoln released his "Emancipation Proclamation", because its slaves were EXCLUDED from freedom!!!

A partial list of Southern leaders who were NOT slave owners includes such notables as:
Gen. Robert E. Lee, CSA
Gen. Joseph Johnston, CSA
Gen. A.P. Hill, CSA
Gen. Fitzhugh Lee, CSA
Gen. J.E.B. Stuart, CSA

Add to this evidence the testimony of a soldier who served in the Confederate army:

I was a soldier in Virginia in the campaigns of Lee and Jackson, and I declare I never met a Southern soldier who had drawn his sword to perpetuate slavery... What he had chiefly at heart was the preservation of the supreme and sacred right of self-government... It was a very small minority of the men who fought in Southern armies who were financially interested in the institution of slavery.

DEO VINDICE

[littlecanoe]

Gentlemen,  I enjoy your sharing of the things that you've read.  It shows me all the more those things that I'd like to study but which I don't have the time to enjoy right now. 

Thanks for the Reference to the book.  I'll make note of that for future purchase.

[williamlayton]

Any idea of what percent of the white South and North held slaves?
Blessings