Deal Johnny Reb - Part I

As I said, we are going to take a break from the political scene while the popular media whips itself into an frenzy. My sister in law just sent out an e-mail saying they had started to screen their calls because of the constant barrage of “vote for me” telemarketing calls.

Though I will note that I did receive a letter from Senator Dole’s Office about troop withdrawal from Iraq…which means there is some confused soul out there getting a letter about warrentless wiretapping. But from her. “The president is protecting us from the Terrorists!” tone of the letter I got, I can imagine what she said in the letter someone else got.

So…let take a break shall we.

The Civil War - Lincoln and Slavery.

One of the most common arguments I encounter on the internet is the “The Civil War wasn’t about slavery!”. I love this one. That combined with the “Lincoln started the civil war!” is always good for a pleasant hour or two of spearing-fish-in-a-barrel fun.

Usually the Confederate Wannabe begins by whipping this quote out:

“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.” ~Abraham Lincoln.

And that’s fine. Yes. As President, Lincoln’s main focus was preserving the Union lest a young struggling divided nation fall prey to the European powers they had struggled so hard to be free of.

BUT…

Would you like to read the entire letter from which this quote was drawn?

Hon. Horace Greeley:
Dear Sir.

I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable [sic] in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.
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 everywhere could be free.

Yours,
A. Lincoln.

Can you imagine President Bush even attempting such a letter?

When the founding fathers created this country, they left the issue of slavery alone for fear of alienating the southern states, which were the colonies’ bread basket. One observer at the time of the Constitutional Congresses noted that slavery, “was the serpent coiled up beneath the table.” The elephant in the room no one wanted to deal with head on for risk of destroying the fragile foundations they were laying down. While their reasoning is understandable, it remains their biggest shame.

The fact is almost everything in American politics leading up to Lincoln’s election had become about slavery. The Missouri Compromise in 1820. Nat Turner rebellion in 1831. The murder of Abolitionist Lovejoy in 1837. The wild popularity of the inflammatory “Uncle Toms Cabin” published in 1852. The Dredd Scott decision. John Brown. In 1856, Congressmen Sumner of Massachusetts gave a speech against the pro-slavery elements in Congress, three days later he was beaten unconscious by Congressman Brooks of South Carolina...on the Senate floor. The Mid-West was already being ripped about in violence as pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions fought over “Bleeding Kansas”. And these are just the some major events. It was the one issue the northern and southern states simply could not compromise on, though gawd knows saner heads had tried to prevail throughout the 1800’s

By 1858, slavery was the Iraq War/Terrorism of it’s time. It was *The* topic. During his campaign for president in 1858, Lincoln engaged his opponent Stephen Douglas in a series of debates across his home state of Illinois. (These were very different affairs than the debates we see on TV now. The candidates traded off speeches of an hour or more. On one occasion Dougals would give a speech, then Lincoln would give a speech, then Douglas would give a rejoinder/reply. The next time they would trade off who went first and got to reply last.) The seven debates were almost exclusively about slavery and topics relating to slavery such as racial equality and the Dredd Scott decision.

Prior to his run for president, Lincoln had served in the House and was noted for opposing Polk’s Mexican American war and opposing the Kansas-Nebraska act. Politically, while straddling the fence on the abolition of slavery, he had always stood firmly against the expansion of slavery into new territories. His private feelings on the matter were even more clearly defined.

“How can any one who abhors the oppression of negroes, be in favor of degrading classes of white people? Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes." When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty — to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be take pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy [sic]. ~ (Letter to Joshua Speed, 1855)

(No offense Irina.)

Now, Lincoln's feelings about slavery and what he acted on politically can be a muddle of things that either side can draw isolated acts and quotes from to support their argument, but I think his letter to Horace Greely was very representative of where he was coming from. Privately he abhorred slavery as a stain on American principles. He may have had doubts as to the full biological/intellectual equality of blacks, but he believed as Christians of mercy and charity the enslavement of another man was inherently wrong and as Americans, extremely hypocritical. But as President, he realized his duty was to the country as a whole, not his private principles. And 1/2 the country was slave states. Somehow he had to make it work. If he could find someway to eliminate slavery without ripping the nation to pieces, peachy keen. But he wasn’t about the destroy the nation to do so.

But then, someone made that choice for him…

To Be Continued later today with How The Civil War Started, to be followed by Yes, You Can Fly That Flag and The Real Steampunk - Civil War Stealth Technology.