The Imaginary Abe Lincoln

[jgoodguy]

For your reading pleasure!

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.


http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

Note the small letters of united. This document is an agreement between states for their independence from England only.

Line 5 it says United Colonies, not states, and should have the right of Independent States. There is NO union, just telling the English what they are going to do with every State agreeing. Note they are independent states.

Are you sure there was no union or are you thinking no Federal union?

There are several types of union. Federal and Confederacy are two main type with lots of variation on sovereignty of the Component States in each. A confederacy is a union of independent States with sovereignty divided between a central government and the States. Was there a national representative legislature-yes, was there a national army-yes,were diplomatic representatives sent to each State or to the united States-sent to the united States. Looks like, walks like sounds like a confederated union - a country to me.

confederation

A confederation (or confederacy), is a permanent union of political units for common action in relation to other units.[1] Usually created by treaty but often later adopting a common constitution, confederations tend to be established for dealing with critical issues (such as defense, foreign affairs, or a common currency), with the central government being required to provide support for all members.

The nature of the relationship among the states constituting a confederation varies considerably. Likewise, the relationship between the member states, the central government, and the distribution of powers among them is highly variable. Some looser confederations are similar to intergovernmental organizations and even may permit secession from the confederation. Other confederations with stricter rules may resemble federations. A unitary state or federation may decentralize powers to regional or local entities in a confederal form.

 

[Sid J.]

I recall, as do others I'm sure, celebrating the Bicentennial of the United States back on July 4, 1976. Didn't seem to be much controversy about it back then, but some folks here seem be saying that was some sort of error, that the United States did not in fact exist in July of 1776, as Lincoln stated. When should the Bicentennial have been properly celebrated?

 

[jgoodguy]

It was NOT a certified union yet. All the states were represented to SEND WORD TO ENGLAND, these states were going after independence.

What is a certified union? Did each State sent a representative to England or did Congress assembled send representatives? Then there are the Articles of Confederation with capitalized the U in united States to United States a few years later. Was that mere coincidence?

 

[jgoodguy]

I am afraid you are not with the program here. We are discussing the words of the DOI.

Good, then what exactly is your case? That the lower case u is significant is some way while the political realities were different. Does "united" " States" refer to 13 separate nouns for states or the collective noun "united States" a collection of States. What is your evidence that that it was referring to 13 separate nouns?. If you want grammar analysis to support your theory, you need a bit more than depend on just because.

 

[jgoodguy]

I recall, as do others I'm sure, celebrating the Bicentennial of the United States back on July 4, 1976. Didn't seem to be much controversy about it back then, but some folks here seem be saying that was some sort of error, that the United States did not in fact exist in July of 1776, as Lincoln stated. When should the Bicentennial have been properly celebrated?

I suspect that it became retroactive to 1776 when the last State ratified the Articles of Confederation and we won the Revolution.

 

[rpkennedy]

Good, then what exactly is your case? That the lower case u is significant is some way while the political realities were different. Does "united" " States" refer to 13 separate nouns for states or the collective noun "united States" a collection of States. What is your evidence that that it was referring to 13 separate nouns?. If you want grammar analysis to support your theory, you need a bit more than depend on just because.

Not to mention that capitalization was not exactly standardized at the time.

R

 

[NedBaldwin]

This document is an agreement between states for their independence from England only....

It is not an agreement between states. It is a declaration of Congress.

Line 5 it says United Colonies, not states, and should have the right of Independent States. There is NO union...

It says United but yet you say there was no Union ... um ok whatever.


The month before the adoption of the Declaration of Independence the same Congress formed a committee to draft a plan of confederation. The week after the adoption of the Declaration of Independence the committee presented the plan to Congress. It took a year of debate in Congress and almost more 4 years before this plan was ratified by all the states. Nonetheless Union was an understood agenda of Congress in July 1776.

 

[NedBaldwin]

It was NOT a certified union yet.

Certified? With the little green return cards from the post office?

It was a Union in fact.

 

[damYankee]

Lets beat this horse some more, who cares if its dead?

 

[ole]

Lets beat this horse some more, who cares if its dead?

There are some who don't recognize that it's most sincerely dead.

 

[unionblue]

An article by Joseph Sobran

http://www.theimaginativeconservative.org/the-imaginary-abe-a-reply-to-harry-jaffas-in-re-jack-kemp-v-joe-sobran/#more-7775

Nope, more like a fantasy by Joseph Sobran written up as an article.

However, not one to simply quote and run, I offer the following in rebuttal.

Springtime for Jeff Davis and the Confed'racy, by Timothy Sandefur.

http://sandefur.typepad.com/freespace/2011/04/springtime-for-jeff-davis-and-the-confedracy.html

Enjoy,
Unionblue

 

[wilber6150]

Lincoln said: "Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better."

I have never said, nor do I believe anyone else here has ever said that either side went to war over semantics in 1864.

"Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right, a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled with, or near about them, who may oppose their movements."

Abraham Lincoln, January 12, 1848

Again not using the last part of that quote or failing to acknowldge that in later speeches he stated that the cotton states did not have the same right to revolution.. So whos being misleading here?

 

[OpnCoronet]

It was NOT a certified union yet. All the states were represented to SEND WORD TO ENGLAND, these states were going after independence.

Well in fact though, in the absence of a certified union(whatever that means) the reps in the Congress Assembled of the union of colonies, of necessity became the de facto gov't of the union of colonie, that same union in congress assembled(the de facto gov't of the union of colonies) proclaimed that the union of colonies had, in fact, become a union of States. The first years of the Revolution was directed and fought by that same de facto gov't of the Congress Assembled of the united colonies and that same gov't authorized the writing and accepted the DoI including their(Congress Assembled) claim that the union was not longer a union of colonies, but were , in fact, a union of states.
There was never a time when the colonies were not a Union since before they had even renounced their loyalty to the Crown of England.

 

[KeyserSoze]

Where did Rebforever and CSA Today go? Did they concede?

 

[johan_steele]

Where did Rebforever and CSA Today go? Did they concede?

Comparing notes and calling for backup...

 

[Sagebrush]

Mrs. Gen. George Pickett's Memoirs (includes comments on Lincoln)

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=FB0713F83F5512738DDDAA0A94D1405B8985F0D3

 

[KeyserSoze]

Mrs. Gen. George Pickett's Memoirs (includes comments on Lincoln)

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=FB0713F83F5512738DDDAA0A94D1405B8985F0D3

The visit probably never happened, though it is a fact that Pickett was in Springfield living with his uncle when he was appointed to West Point and that Lincoln did know him. The story that Lincoln interceded on Pickett's behalf to obtain the appointment is probably apocryphal as well. The congressman at the time, while a former law partner of Lincoln's, was also a good friend of Pickett's uncle and no intercession would have been needed.

 

[CSA Today]

Again not using the last part of that quote or failing to acknowldge that in later speeches he stated that the cotton states did not have the same right to revolution.. So whos being misleading here?

I see nothing in the last part to indicate Lincoln had suddenly changed his mind, by the end of the speech, about: "Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. He is certainly not suggesting that heads of state have the right to make that decision for the people.


As for Lincoln's later speeches on the subject, no kidding, in 1848 he was a young idealist, but by the early 1860s he was an aspiring political ideologue unwilling to let the will of the people get in the way of his ambitions or legacy.

"Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right, a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled with, or near about them, who may oppose their movements."

Abraham Lincoln January 12 1848

 

[NedBaldwin]

.... by the early 1860s he was an aspiring political ideologue unwilling to let the will of the people get in the way of his ambitions or legacy.

The will of the people made him president and the will of the people supported crushing the rebellion.

 

[CSA Today]

The will of the people made him president and the will of the people supported crushing the rebellion.

I agree, by the time of his presidency, Lincoln had abandoned all idealistic notions of the will of the people to decide their own course of action and had opted for imperious aggression as the alternative.

"Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right, a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled with, or near about them, who may oppose their movements."

Abraham Lincoln January 12 1848