Tuesday - January 06, 2004
Lincoln Biographies
I'm watching another biography of the tyrant
Abraham Lincoln on PBS now. It's another typical deification of him, with all
the regular apologists being interviewed, most notably the known plagiarist,
Dorris Kearns Goodman. Of course no one talks about why Lincoln was so hated,
no one mentions the politics which caused him to be elected, no one recalls the
corruption and no one ever considers that there might have been other ways to
resolve the secession of the deep south without
bloodshed.
It's just more biased
reporting by the victors.
What did Lincoln stand for? His political
background consisted of supporting the dying Whig party, which was the worst of
conspiracies between business and government. The Whigs believed that the
wonderful roads, canals and railroads being built could be done better if only
government designed and controlled it all. It was an early attempt at central
planning, complete with the corrupt contracts for impossible engineering feats.
These programs were so completely disastrous that most states revised their
constitutions to specifically forbid any collusion of government with building
projects.
Here are some facts
countering popular myths about Lincoln and his times (My source is DiLorenzo's
The Real
Lincoln):
The
Emancipation Proclamation freed no slaves. William Seward mocked it by saying,
"We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach
them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free." The London
Spectator wrote, "The principle [of the Proclamation] is not that a human being
cannot justly own another, but that he cannot own him unless he is loyal to the
United States." Of course this is because a President can't enact laws without
Congress, so it was a rare instance of him restraining his grasp of
power.
Most people are aware of the
suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus, allowing him to jail anyone at any time
without charging them with a crime. He jailed almost the entire Maryland
legislature, and every newspaper editor who disagreed with his decisions were
immediately rounded up and imprisoned for the duration of the war. No wonder he
got such good press!
The principle of
secession as a right was not questioned by anyone until Lincoln jailed his
detractors. DiLorenzo states that, "Until 1861 most commentators, North and
South, took it for granted that states had a right to secede. This doctrine was
even taught to the cadets at West Point, including all the top commanders on
both sides of the conflict during the War between the
States."
Unlike every other President,
Lincoln didn't even pretend to get a declaration of war. He simply mobilized
the State Militias and invaded.
The
United States is the only country in the world that fought a war to end slavery.
This is often crowed about, that we even fought a war to end slavery, killing
600,000 men in the process. Yet slavery was ended before and after this date by
all other countries of the world peacefully. Again we go to
DiLorenzo:
Lincoln did pay
lip service to various compensated emancipation plans, and he even proposed a
compensated emancipation bill (combined with colonization) in 1862. But the man
whom historians would later describe as one of the master politicians of all
time failed to use his legendary political skills and his rhetorical gifts to do
what every other country of the world where slavery once existed had done: end
it peacefully, without resort to warfare. That would have been the course taken
by a genuine statesman. Even though he assumed dictatorial powers to raise
armies and wage war during the first year of his administration, he did not use
them to spend tax dollars on compensated emancipation in even a few
states.
So what was Lincoln's real
agenda? Simply put, it is best stated in his own
words:
I presume you all
know who I am. I am humble Abraham Lincoln. I have been solicited by many
friends to become a candidate for the legislature. My politics are short and
sweet, like the old woman's dance. I am in favor of a national bank . . . in
favor of the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff.
Abraham Lincoln,
1832
Unfortunately, most people today
are in favor of a national bank, and surprisingly the other two main aims of the
Whigs, and later the Republican party which resuscitated their ideology, are
also accepted blithely today. But back in 1832, the idea of using government
money for "internal improvements" was recognized for what it was, pure pork and
corporate welfare.
His marriage to
Mary Todd Lincoln was political in nature, her family was close to Henry Clay,
his political mentor. Edgar Lee Masters described Clay as
follows:
Clay was the
champion of that political system which doles favors to the strong to win and to
keep their adherence to the government. His system offered shelter to devious
schemes and corrupt enterprises . . . He was the beloved son [figuratively
speaking] of Alexander Hamilton with his corrupt funding schemes, his
superstitions concerning the advantage of a public debt, and a people taxed to
make profits for enterprises that cannot stand alone. His example and his
doctrines led to the creation of a party that had no platform to announce,
because its principles were plunder and nothing
else.
Lincoln supported internal
improvements and his most notable achievements in the Illinois legislature were
colossal failures. According to his own law partner, William H.
Herndon:
The gigantic and
stupendous operations of the scheme dazzled the eyes of nearly everybody, but in
the end it rolled up a debt so enormous as to impede the otherwise marvelous
progress of Illinois. The burdens imposed by this Legislature under the guise
of improvements became so monumental in size it is little wonder that at
intervals for years afterwards the monster of [debt] repudiation often showed
its hideous face above the waves of popular
indignation.
George Nicolay and John
Hay, later Lincoln's personal secretaries in the White House
wrote:
The market was
glutted with Illinois bonds; one banker and one broker after another, to whose
hands they had been recklessly confided in New York and London, failed, or made
away with the proceeds of sales. The system had utterly failed; there was
nothing to do but repeal it, stop work on the visionary roads, and endeavor to
invent some means of paying the enormous debt. This work taxed the energies of
the Legislature in 1839, and for some years after. It was a dismal and
disheartening task. Blue Monday had come after these years of intoxication, and
a crushing debt rested upon a people who had been deceiving themselves with the
fallacy that it would somehow pay itself by acts of the
legislature.
Lincoln and his mentor
Clay were the principle architects of this disaster. In other words, the people
had to pay debts for monster projects that were failures except for one and to
Lincoln the only important aspect: Lincoln's business supporters got rich and
he was retained in office. It's a method of politicking that the Republicans,
who took on the policy of publicly financing internal improvements, used to
finance their own power base and keep them in office. In truth the strategy
failed because the Whig party was blamed for the calamities that occurred
through most of the northern states where the Whigs dominated, and they
collapsed as a party. But the people of the Whig Party just reformed into the
Republican party with all of the same
ideas.
Lincoln's election to the
executive branch marked the final victory of the Hamiltonian philosophy
epitomized by Hamilton's proposed constitution of a strong, mercantilist central
government with a permanent president and no state power. A strong, permanent
president with expansive power is exactly how Lincoln reigned as tyrant.
Despite the way that Lincoln is portrayed today, his brutal power grab was
completely predictable and consistent with everything he said he would
do.
This is getting long, so I'm going
to stop now. Let me just conclude that Lincoln ruined our federal system and
replaced it with a dictatorship, that was only undone by his timely (or should I
say tardy?) death. In the meantime, he was responsible for the slaughter of
more than half a million men, the destruction and impoverishment of half the
nation, and forever robbing us of the right of self-determination. He was an
astute politician, he knew that money could be pilfered only for so long, and
debt can only be relieved by plunder. I don't think it's too much of an
overstatement to say that the debts incurred by the Whigs from their Internal
Improvement and used to pay for the political support of corrupt business, with
requisite financial support to keep them in office, was only finally paid by
destroying the south and plundering their wealth. Taxing them didn't work
because they rebelled, he had to extract what he wanted with
cannon.
Lincoln was an astute
politician, who could have freed the slaves had that been his goal. Instead, he
accomplished the goal he promised he would accomplish, and likewise just as he
promised the slaves were freed only where he couldn't free them to maintain his
control over the nation. The Emancipation Proclamation's only purpose was to
encourage slave revolts in the states not yet conquered so that he might more
readily conquer them as well, while he used the slaves in the already conquered
states to further the war and his attempt at total
dictatorship.
So how many people know
any of these things about Lincoln? Not many. All we ever learn of him is how
mournful he looks in pictures and his pious, self-serving comments about saving
the Union which he was doing his level best to destroy. The ideals of the
American Revolution were mostly
lost.
Lincoln was not in the least bit
admirable. He was a tyrant only slightly better than Franco, another tyrant who
invaded his own people to overthrow an elected government. Someday, I hope,
maybe a few hundred years from now, the truth will be better known.
Go Back to the Start, Do Not Collect $200 Send me your two cents
|