Rate My Presidents Volume 1: Abraham Lincoln
Options
Comments
-
C
when you run with the notion that the war was caused by Northern elites ? with the South, which is the same kind of story peddled by people that call it the War of Northern Aggression, yeah, you're absolutely defending the South. you know, the guys that started the war. so if you don't want to get labeled as defending them...waterproof wrote: »LOL, i am defending the south?? that's what you call it...that's called stating the historical facts...
seems a LITTLE off considering that the war is around the time of a new political party rising on an abolitionist platform...waterproof wrote: »I can care less about the confederacy and the Union the Civil war was not about freeing my ancestors until late in the war and none of those devils gave a ? about my people so ? them...
what's funny, though, is that while you're claiming it was an "excuse" and that it somehow was clear Lincoln wasn't going to ? with slavery, i'm talking about what South Carolina EXPLICITLY STATED in their actual declaration of secession. which they followed up by attempting to secede from the Union. which would seem to say this was a little more than a phantom claim that never happened.waterproof wrote: »Was that an excuse that South Carolina used this time to secede because i could of swear that in 1832 South Carolina tried to secede from the Union because of the high tariffs, the only reason they didnt was because of Andrew Jackson..But of course they going to say that Lincoln was going to outlaw slavery because they need a boogey man even though as i stated aboved that Lincoln already said that he wasnt no going to Outlaw slavery and that the states have their rights.
Again Janklow i am dealing with facts, any Civil War Historian, College Professor will agree what i said about The North Economic Policies that wasn't favorable to the South was a big reason why the south wanted to secede from the Union and the South was hurt from it, Now if you want to call it "a story that was pushed by the south" then fine that's your opinion but when history says other wise,i go with that...,
Case in Point, South Carolina in 1832 almost seceded from the Union because of the North Economic Policy that was hurting the south, but hey, I guess that was some peddled by the south, ? historical facts right??? right. But like history pointed out that the civil war was about the North retaining and expanding their national territory, Natural and Man Made resource and Trade, Free Market ect...
But of course SC EXPLICITLY STATED (lol) in their actual declaration that it was because of slavery, i never doubt that they said that, all i did was asked a question knowing that Abe told the south that he have no intentions of outlawing slavery multiple times and Ran for President on that platform stating that and won the election, knowing the history of SC wanting to secede the Union for 40 years prior did SC use Slavery as an excuse and a reason that's it..
Abe is a masterful politician yes the 1860 Republican Platform had some Abolitionist platform issues but it was not their whole platform because the Liberty Party ran on that and because they had to pick off some votes from the Liberty party who was the abolitionist party and the Constitutional Union Party who was a sect of the Whigs who disagree with Abe and the Northern Democrats
But we all know about Politics say one thing to win the election then do the other because when Abe got elected even though the 1860 republican platform sounded real good when he made his Inaugural Address he said
I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.
Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them;
A Masterful Politician i say......... -
AGreat concept. The movie Lincoln was good as well, for those who haven't seen it..
The 13th Amendment and the struggle for its ratification, are why I gave him an A. -
FI don't care about this dead white man.
-
BLincoln suspended Habeas corpus and had a questionable stance on African Americans.......
But it seems like those were things he had to do at the time to keep himself from being assassinated/losing political clout.......
He played the middle and did what he could to keep from being murked........
However, he should have known that it was inevitable and went harder on the South...... -
A
why are you capitalizing "Civil War Historian" and "College Professor" if you're not going to even cite someone? because otherwise, this is just another way to claim some phantom level of support. oddly enough, i have also dealt with some historians and professors and they seemed to disagree with what you're saying. and now it's meaningless all around.waterproof wrote: »Again Janklow i am dealing with facts, any Civil War Historian, College Professor will agree what i said about The North Economic Policies that wasn't favorable to the South was a big reason why the south wanted to secede from the Union and the South was hurt from it, Now if you want to call it "a story that was pushed by the south" then fine that's your opinion but when history says other wise,i go with that...
so i guess you missed the difference the first time, but here's the difference: they DID secede in 1860 and cited slavery as the reason. so what you're arguing is the reasons given at the time that they ACTUALLY seceded matter less than something mentioned when there was no secession? all while claiming secession directly happened because of Northern Elites? right.waterproof wrote: »Case in Point, South Carolina in 1832 almost seceded from the Union because of the North Economic Policy that was hurting the south, but hey, I guess that was some peddled by the south, ? historical facts right??? right.
further, my understanding of SC's secessionist leanings in the 1830s and 1840s is that these were also actually promoted by their need to defend their slave-based economy. but clearly slavery is irrelevant somehow.
again, you're saying that Lincoln claimed he was hands-off on slavery as if this trumps the fact that states seceding said "we don't believe him." yeah, he may have said it and even meant it... but Lincoln's remarks don't mean that SC had to take him at his word and act accordingly. in fact, it's almost like we have historical evidence that they did not.waterproof wrote: »But of course SC EXPLICITLY STATED (lol) in their actual declaration that it was because of slavery, i never doubt that they said that, all i did was asked a question knowing that Abe told the south that he have no intentions of outlawing slavery multiple times and Ran for President on that platform stating that and won the election, knowing the history of SC wanting to secede the Union for 40 years prior did SC use Slavery as an excuse and a reason that's it.
it wouldn't be any party's "whole platform" because a platform covers many things. but we're talking about a party that had its origins in guys saying "the expansion of slavery is ? up." describing them as "having some Abolitionist platform issues" alone is unfair.waterproof wrote: »Abe is a masterful politician yes the 1860 Republican Platform had some Abolitionist platform issues but it was not their whole platform because the Liberty Party ran on that and because they had to pick off some votes from the Liberty party who was the abolitionist party and the Constitutional Union Party who was a sect of the Whigs who disagree with Abe and the Northern Democrats -
CLincoln allowed the Northern armies to forcefully free slaves when they came across them. Sometimes they raided plantations to take slaves (Confiscation Act).
As far as WHY the war started, it should be noted that the South was built on slavery, it was the lifeblood of their economy and their lifestyle. Northern industrialists threatened that with their expansions South and the elites responded by calling for secession. Lincoln as president had a responsibility to keep the union intact and he did so. Things took place that maybe shouldn't have (suspending habeus corpus, burning down Southern towns) but it happened because of the South's backwards anti-liberty mentality not because of any malice Lincoln had for them. -
CSouth Carolina statement of secession:
"The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation."
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp -
C[I wish I could edit]
Anyway. SC is talking about the North not holding up their end of the obligation to return runaway slaves:
"The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."
Source: same link already given.
-
BThe old economic v. slavery debate.....
A lot of white kids bring this up at school......
I always felt like the argument was intended to lessen the inhumanity of racism/slavery.....
Either way, the secession declarations (Mississippi stands out) illustrate their true purposes........
A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union.
In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.
http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html#Mississippi -
CGeorgia:
"For the last ten
years we have had numerous and serious causes of
complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate
States with reference to the subject of African slavery.
They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb
our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently
refused to comply with their express constitutional
obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the
use of their power in the Federal Government have
striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the
common Territories of the Republic. This hostile policy of
our confederates has been pursued with every
circumstance of aggravation which could arouse the
passions and excite the hatred of our people, and has
placed the two sections of the Union for many years past
in the condition of virtual civil war. Our people, still
attached to the Union from habit and national traditions,
and averse to change, hoped that time, reason, and
argument would bring, if not redress, at least exemption
from further insults, injuries, and dangers. Recent events
have fully dissipated all such hopes and demonstrated
the necessity of separation. Our Northern confederates,
after a full and calm hearing of all the facts, after a fair
warning of our purpose not to submit to the rule of the
authors of all these wrongs and injuries, have by a large
majority committed the Government of the United States
into their hands. The people of Georgia, after an equally
full and fair and deliberate hearing of the case, have
declared with equal firmness that they shall not rule over
them. A brief history of the rise, progress, and policy of
anti-slavery and the political organization into whose
hands the administration of the Federal Government has
been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict
of the people of Georgia."
I can't help but read these in country ass accents. -
CLincoln allowed the Northern armies to forcefully free slaves when they came across them. Sometimes they raided plantations to take slaves (Confiscation Act).
As far as WHY the war started, it should be noted that the South was built on slavery, it was the lifeblood of their economy and their lifestyle. Northern industrialists threatened that with their expansions South and the elites responded by calling for secession. Lincoln as president had a responsibility to keep the union intact and he did so. Things took place that maybe shouldn't have (suspending habeus corpus, burning down Southern towns) but it happened because of the South's backwards anti-liberty mentality not because of any malice Lincoln had for them.
I competely agree, and Abe responded with them the same why Andre Jackson was going to respond with SC..
But to continue on, the Abolitionist voice was heard in the North since 1803 if my memory is correct and the movement did some great things but the reason why they never was in successful for all those years was because the majority of the North Population who wasn't an elite descendants of the artistocrat's from England, or owned land, had a monopoly on land and resource's, a lawyer, Ceo ect...... was dirt broke peasants who was fighting their own war against the elites.
Those people didnt care about the slaves when they tried to earn higher wages, get housing, schooling and thier own land, may of them couldnt even vote......So they was not going to fight for slaves when they had their own problems, The Northern Whites was opposed to the free blacks working in the North because it took their jobs and they wanted slaves who escaped to the North to be shipped back down south, in fact they was snitching to the South where escaped slaves was working out.
When the war started to take it tool on the economics of the North and when the lower class seen that their sons was dying then they started to get behind the abolitionist and wanted the blacks to be free so they can fight instead of their own sons.
The Majority of the Northerner's was just as racist as the South, Abe did not renounce the Fugitive Act publicly, Abe didnt see blacks as equals to White's...
“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. I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor 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 ever 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.” – ABE LINCOLN -
A
which might make some of this thread's current debate(s) all the more ironic.A lot of white kids bring this up at school......
I always felt like the argument was intended to lessen the inhumanity of racism/slavery.....
see, this is what i mean: you will go to great lengths to bash Northerners for their racism, but don't want to admit that Southerners would make a decision like "let's secede over slavery" based on their racism.waterproof wrote: »The Majority of the Northerner's was just as racist as the South, Abe did not renounce the Fugitive Act publicly, Abe didnt see blacks as equals to White's...
surely no politician has ever been less than 100% honest while running for office!waterproof wrote: »“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. I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor 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 ever 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.” – ABE LINCOLN -
C
which might make some of this thread's current debate(s) all the more ironic.A lot of white kids bring this up at school......
I always felt like the argument was intended to lessen the inhumanity of racism/slavery.....
see, this is what i mean: you will go to great lengths to bash Northerners for their racism, but don't want to admit that Southerners would make a decision like "let's secede over slavery" based on their racism.waterproof wrote: »The Majority of the Northerner's was just as racist as the South, Abe did not renounce the Fugitive Act publicly, Abe didnt see blacks as equals to White's...
surely no politician has ever been less than 100% honest while running for office!waterproof wrote: »“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. I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor 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 ever 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.” – ABE LINCOLN
Then Surely the Politicians in the South was less then 100% honest when they said they are seceding because of slavery
Look here I aint here to list the offense's that the South done to my people, the world knows the wretchedness, sadistic, unhumane, savagery, devilish deeds the South done to my people, what i am doing is shedding the light on the North and to let those who didn't know that the North was full of racist just like the south, and the North and Honest Abe didnt have the interest of my people when they went to war.
Everybody knows that the Southerners is racist and some would make a decision to let's secede over slavery , they used slavery as an excuse because they learned from the first time SC tried to leave it, this time SC had other States to leave and used Slavery as the major issue.
The South seen the North as an oppressive goverment against them because of laws like Dred Scott, Missouri Comprise ect......
I am going to leave it like this THE NORTH didnt give a ? about my PEOPLE and The South sure did not give a ? about my people, i aint going to sit here and act like the North Loved my people, wanted to see us free, it was a small minority that did.
Abe Lincoln didnt free my People, THE MOST HIGHT freed my people..
ABE did what any president would of done to perserve the Union, Blood thirsty Andrew Jackson almost sent troops when SC wanted to leave the union, so Abe was doing his job -
A
the difference is that Lincoln said these remarks prior to one election and then preceded to actually do things that were, you know, anti-slavery, whereas the South mentioned their reasons for needing to secede for decades and then followed through on them.waterproof wrote: »Then Surely the Politicians in the South was less then 100% honest when they said they are seceding because of slavery
correct, you are apparently here to give them a pass because we need to blame the Civil War on the North for some reason.waterproof wrote: »Look here I aint here to list the offense's that the South done to my people-
why exactly would the South have been enraged by the decision in the Dred Scott case?waterproof wrote: »The South seen the North as an oppressive goverment against them because of laws like Dred Scott, Missouri Comprise ect...
also, the Missouri Compromise was, you know, about the debate over the power of slave states in Congress. but clearly this does not indicate that slavery was a major issue between the North and South.
as opposed to the South, which actively went to war to keep your people in ? , and yet somehow are not getting credit for being the cause of a war they started to defend their right to own slaves. got it.waterproof wrote: »I am going to leave it like this THE NORTH didnt give a ? about my PEOPLE and The South sure did not give a ? about my people, i aint going to sit here and act like the North Loved my people, wanted to see us free, it was a small minority that did. -
C
the difference is that Lincoln said these remarks prior to one election and then preceded to actually do things that were, you know, anti-slavery, whereas the South mentioned their reasons for needing to secede for decades and then followed through on them.waterproof wrote: »Then Surely the Politicians in the South was less then 100% honest when they said they are seceding because of slavery
correct, you are apparently here to give them a pass because we need to blame the Civil War on the North for some reason.waterproof wrote: »Look here I aint here to list the offense's that the South done to my people-
why exactly would the South have been enraged by the decision in the Dred Scott case?waterproof wrote: »The South seen the North as an oppressive goverment against them because of laws like Dred Scott, Missouri Comprise ect...
also, the Missouri Compromise was, you know, about the debate over the power of slave states in Congress. but clearly this does not indicate that slavery was a major issue between the North and South.
as opposed to the South, which actively went to war to keep your people in ? , and yet somehow are not getting credit for being the cause of a war they started to defend their right to own slaves. got it.waterproof wrote: »I am going to leave it like this THE NORTH didnt give a ? about my PEOPLE and The South sure did not give a ? about my people, i aint going to sit here and act like the North Loved my people, wanted to see us free, it was a small minority that did.
Oh i see what you want janklow, here you go the north free us blacks, they loved us so much that they went to war with the south to free us, the civil war was was about blacks being set free and nothing else, and after that in the UNITED STATES Constitution we are still 3/5ths man....
let me drop this one more time for you...
Look here I aint here to list the offense's that the South done to my people, the world knows the wretchedness, sadistic, unhumane, savagery, devilish deeds the South done to my people, what i am doing is shedding the light on the North and to let those who didn't know that the North was full of racist just like the south, and the North and Honest Abe didnt have the interest of my people when they went to war.
-
CProblem with your argument is I haven't seen anyone say Lincoln or the North DID give a damn about Blacks. They did all the things they needed to end slavery because it would ? the South economically and end the war, which it did. The primary goal was to maintain the Union...ending slavery, industrial expansion, all that played second fiddle to preserving the union. Lincoln personally believed Blacks were inferior but was also against the concept of slavery so he definitely promoted anti-slavery agendas but he wasn't going to war over the subject.
-
CProblem with your argument is I haven't seen anyone say Lincoln or the North DID give a damn about Blacks. They did all the things they needed to end slavery because it would ? the South economically and end the war, which it did. The primary goal was to maintain the Union...ending slavery, industrial expansion, all that played second fiddle to preserving the union. Lincoln personally believed Blacks were inferior but was also against the concept of slavery so he definitely promoted anti-slavery agendas but he wasn't going to war over the subject.
i didnt say anyone said Lincoln and the north give a damn about blacks, i said that i am showing how the North and Abe didnt give a damn about the slaves because we all was taught that well i did atleast in school that the North cared about the slaves and the slaves was safe in the north and Abe Lincoln was our savior and other things which is not true, yes his primary goals was to save the union by any means neccessary...
And i agree with you 100% that ending slavery (but industrial expansion did happen for the north like they wanted) and other things was 2nd fiddle on perserving the union...
and your last sentence is dead on -
A
no, what i actually want is for you to acknowledge that the South jumped into the war for their own reasons and not because of the conspiracy theory of NORTHERN ELITES making them do so. again, you're so busy trying to excuse the South for whatever reason(s) that you'll swing from "the Northern Elites were the cause of the war" to "oh, i guess i have to praise the North."waterproof wrote: »Oh i see what you want janklow, here you go the north free us blacks, they loved us so much that they went to war with the south to free us, the civil war was was about blacks being set free and nothing else, and after that in the UNITED STATES Constitution we are still 3/5ths man....
the North went to war to preserve the Union; the South went to war to preserve slavery. these two things are not mutually exclusive, no matter how much you want them to be. yet you are actively fighting back against the notion that the South wanted war to preserve slavery when noting this doesn't ascribe any positive motives to the North at all, and NOW i guess we're being pissy about it. -
CI gave Abe Lincoln a C. I do admire that he did risk his neck trying to flee UNION slaves and did make serious moves to free Southern slaves, which eventually cost him his life. On the other hand, Lincoln was no friend to Native Americans and cared little for stealing their land and kicking them out of their lands over and over again during his presidency.
He also suspended civil law for quite a awhile which was disturbing to me but overall he was more good than bad. A solid C -
waterproof wrote: »
which might make some of this thread's current debate(s) all the more ironic.A lot of white kids bring this up at school......
I always felt like the argument was intended to lessen the inhumanity of racism/slavery.....
see, this is what i mean: you will go to great lengths to bash Northerners for their racism, but don't want to admit that Southerners would make a decision like "let's secede over slavery" based on their racism.waterproof wrote: »The Majority of the Northerner's was just as racist as the South, Abe did not renounce the Fugitive Act publicly, Abe didnt see blacks as equals to White's...
surely no politician has ever been less than 100% honest while running for office!waterproof wrote: »“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. I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor 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 ever 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.” – ABE LINCOLN
Then Surely the Politicians in the South was less then 100% honest when they said they are seceding because of slavery
Look here I aint here to list the offense's that the South done to my people, the world knows the wretchedness, sadistic, unhumane, savagery, devilish deeds the South done to my people, what i am doing is shedding the light on the North and to let those who didn't know that the North was full of racist just like the south, and the North and Honest Abe didnt have the interest of my people when they went to war.
Everybody knows that the Southerners is racist and some would make a decision to let's secede over slavery , they used slavery as an excuse because they learned from the first time SC tried to leave it, this time SC had other States to leave and used Slavery as the major issue.
The South seen the North as an oppressive goverment against them because of laws like Dred Scott, Missouri Comprise ect......
I am going to leave it like this THE NORTH didnt give a ? about my PEOPLE and The South sure did not give a ? about my people, i aint going to sit here and act like the North Loved my people, wanted to see us free, it was a small minority that did.
Abe Lincoln didnt free my People, THE MOST HIGHT freed my people..
ABE did what any president would of done to perserve the Union, Blood thirsty Andrew Jackson almost sent troops when SC wanted to leave the union, so Abe was doing his job
yes many things led to the south seceding from the union and consequently the civil war ...but all of whom were directly or indirectly related to slavery lol
-
As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.
I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.
I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.
Yours,
A. Lincoln.
