English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

slavery was a way a life for most plantation owners.
So pro-slavery has to fall under the conservative agenda dbefore and during the civil war.

conservatism-
1. The inclination, especially in politics, to maintain the existing or traditional order.
2. A political philosophy or attitude emphasizing respect for traditional institutions, distrust of government activism, and opposition to sudden change in the established order.

2006-08-17 18:12:38 · 8 answers · asked by dude 1 in Politics & Government Politics

8 answers

Trying to rewrite history I see. Lincoln would turn in his grave.

2006-08-17 18:20:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Labels. Sure abolition of slavery was progressive. It was about morality. And I'd say it was liberal. But the labels have become less about position and more about division. Really, think what JFK would say about the modern Democratic party. But I also agree Lincoln would not be too proud of the modern Republican party, either.

Just because something is labeled progressive doesn't mean is always a good thing. Sometimes people advocate change for change's sake. Sometimes the traditional method or issue is the right one. It's about common sense. Is the change a good thing, obviously slavery, yes. Necessary. And the right and moral thing to do.

But doesn't mean that all change is right.

2006-08-18 02:42:21 · answer #2 · answered by robling_dwrdesign 5 · 0 0

It's not rewriting history, it's stating the facts of history. The early Republican Party was more liberal and the party of labor and the Democratic Party was conservative and the party of business. This paradigm switched in the 1880's And yes Lincoln is probably turning over in his grave seeing how the Republican Party his changed.

2006-08-18 02:16:15 · answer #3 · answered by ggarsk 3 · 0 0

In a way, yes! It is strange that a man who suspended habeas corpus for the Civil War, had a more firm belief in individual liberty than our current office holder. Possibly a little known fact but Lincoln's views on Labor were also surprisingly progressive for their time! He was practically a "bomb throwing Socialist"!!!! The Republican Party up until about 1914 also had a fair amount of blacks in Federal employment like jobs such as Customs Collector for New Orleans and Minister to Haiti and Liberia. It was the administration of Woodrow Wilson which threw them all out of the government. Wilson for all his "fourteen points" and other comments on freedom was as rascist as they come!! Blacks only became Democrats because of F.D.R. and stayed because Truman was progressive (for the time) on civil rights.

2006-08-18 01:30:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Conservative in idealogy, yes. However, Lincoln is considered teh founder of the Republican Party as we know it, and blacks typically voted for Republicans until Johnson in the 60s.

2006-08-18 01:20:37 · answer #5 · answered by E 2 · 0 0

The neocons destroyed the Republican party, turning it into a 3 ring circus of party jingoism, racism and fiscal irresponcibility. They are the root cause of the nastiness that has come to represent American politics today. Nothing rational just "with us or against us" black and white thinking.

2006-08-18 01:34:26 · answer #6 · answered by GJ 5 · 0 1

yes... in fact many Republicans were liberal in many ways until the 60s... and Democrats conservative... just look at who voted against civil rights... democrats on a very liberal, at the time, bill...

in fact, when modern republicans slam liberals today, they are often mocking their party heroes as well...

2006-08-18 01:20:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

no

2006-08-18 01:17:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers