Abraham Lincoln - The Un-Emancipator?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Location
Missouri
The problem is, you are getting hung up on semantics. Instead of using a dictionary, it is important to understand how the people of the era used the term.

I am a cancer survivor. To preserve my health and my lifespan, it was necessary to cut my body open and remove a part of it. I am not the same after that, but the big picture is, I will survive. I am better offer because this risk that was posed to my health is gone (I hope!).

To preserve the nation, Union people believed it was necessary to remove the threat, the cancer, of disunion, and to defeat those who perpetrated disunion. That removal involved involved the use of violence, the "cutting open" of the United States if you will, and the country is not the same after that. But the Union survived, and does survive. Many would say that the nation has not only survived, it has thrived.

I understand that you might not like this metaphor of secessionists being a cancer that had to be destroyed, at a cost, to preserve the health and lifespan of the United States. I am just trying to explain how they saw it.

- Alan


If "preserving" the union is a mathematical term ... by which, at gunpoint, the same number of states that made up the country before the election were present for roll call after the war, the union (in that mathematical sense) was, indeed, preserved. But only in that sense, similar to the way that North Viet Nam "preserved" the union of their once undivided nation. We fought for the south and lost that one, too.

BTW, I am a cancer survivor as well, and I have no problem with your analogy.
 
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Location
Missouri
If you cared a whit for history, you'd know that tens of thousands of slaves celebrated their freedom on 1/1/1863.

I care about history ... but only the actual history. I don't care a "whit" for the myths that have replaced much of it, though.

As to your tens of thousands of slaves celebrating their freedom on January 1, 1863, I think you are off by a couple of years. This is my source. Do you have one?
 

ForeverFree

Major
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Location
District of Columbia
The Union army's burning march through the south did create African American refugees and a subsequent amendment to the constitution did end the institution that once enslaved human beings. While the institution of "slavery" was no longer in place, former slaves were not "free" and would not be so for more than 100 years. Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation did not free a single slave.

I cannot answer this comprehensively without hijacking the thread. I will say this.

You have serious problem with intellectual consistency. You want to argue that the Union, and Lincoln, did nothing to free enslaved people. Yet, as a matter of fact, almost 4 million slaves were freed. Of course, the quality of their freedom is debatable. But in fact, those 4 million freepeople were no longer chattel property, as evidenced by the loss of billions of dollars in wealth for former slaveholders.

The idea that the Union did nothing to free the slaves, even as millions of slaves did in fact gain their freedom as a result of Union policies and actions of the Union, simply doesn't make sense. It is that simple. You're going through a lot of gyrations to try to make work - such as insisting that the slaves weren't free - but these are just making things look worse, not better. But of course you are free to voice your views.

- Alan
 

DanF

Captain
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
by which, at gunpoint, the same number of states that made up the country before the election were present for roll call after the war,

It wasn't Lincoln or the Union that pulled the gun and started shooting. Lincoln and the Union played the hand the secessionists dealt them when they decided not to seek any legal means to seperate from the Union and instead chose insurrection/revolution.

So any blame for "changes" brought about by the Civil War should be laid at the feet of those responsible for starting the war, the secessionists/insurrectionists.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top