Do you think history will ever be correct in the recollection of Lincoln?

Question

The guy wrote each state governor promising slavery would be fine if they did not seceed from the union. The guy didnt care in the least about slaves. And even as the historical truth comes out this nation continues to think he was trying to free opressed people.
After reading this guys analysis of Lincoln I began to think there is hope.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ao6IniceylfOWvJ_KM0UanHsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20070913130038AA29KED&show=7#profile-info-aQno8QIWaa

Answer 1

~History has generally been correct in its assessment of Lincoln. Only fools, or the ignorant who choose not to read, would have ever believed Lincoln was an abolitionist. The man himself never claimed to be and he said repeatedly that he would be willing to allow slavery to continue if by doing so he could preserve the Union. All this is in the record and has never been hidden. He said, as late as August 1862: "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 do it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that." He preferred course of action, which he never tried to conceal, was the third option.

Why would you think otherwise if you know anything of the man or of his times? If you haven't learned anything about him, don't blame "history" for your failings.

Likewise, Lincoln is called "The Great Emancipator". While he did issue the Emancipation Proclamation, he freed no slaves with it. Read the proclamation. On its face, it was ineffective. It only purported to "free" slaves in those parts of those states he defined as "in rebellion". As such, it had no force of law - the areas in rebellion did not recognize the authority of the government in Washington. That is what the war was all about, remember? In any case, the Emancipation Proclamation simply repeated legislation that Congress had passed previously, in August, 1861 and July, 1862. As to whether either the acts of Congress or the Proclamation could have any legal effect is another matter that was never addressed by the Supreme Court, but it is unconstitutional for the government to take property without due process and the slaves were clearly property as a matter of statutory and constitutional law. The ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment resolved the constitutional issues without involvement by the Court, and it freed the slaves. Lincoln was long since dead when that happened.

The moral is, get your history from the documented record, not from the mythology espoused by chauvinists who have an agenda to push. "Honest Abe" was a railroad lawyer before he turned to politics. Read some of what he did in the former career. He was a man; he was human with typical human failings. History has put him on a pedestal for good reason, but that doesn't mean that history has ignored or forgotten his foibles.

It is incumbent on you to learn of him (and anything else historical) and if you choose not to, don't condemn history because of your own lack of effort. Those who are too lazy to learn the facts are easily duped by those in power. Thus, Georgie the Younger could garner a 98% in favor of his futile and illegal, immoral invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. The lessons of history shouted out that neither war could be won. Now, when the lessons of history have proven true, that 98% majority is reversing itself - not because of the immorality or illegality, but because of the futility. And history tells us what a mistake it will be to compound the error of launching the invasions by pulling out, but, once again, no one cares.

If you choose to accept the 'conventional wisdom' and the myths and obvious lies without doing some independent learning of your own, be willing to pay the price.

Answer 2

i think thats the fun of yahoo answers, the idea that i can have a lousy day and a troll question you give a flippant answer, i ask your question,

then thought provoking comes out of it, and we're disussing it on 360 and here

lincoln was a bastard its the truth he was a bastard and did what he had to do to stay in power

history is showing the past for what it is

john adams is now looked at as awesome for keeping us out of war with france in 1798

cost him his job but the french would have destroyed us

these things take the lens of 200 years

Answer 3

Are you forgetting he was a politician? Have you ever heard of a single one that spoke out of only one side of their mouth. Fact is he DID sign the Emancipation Proclamation. As to his motives, only he could tell and his assassination removed that option!

Answer 4

So, I take it that you're from the south.