DiscussMormonism.com

As I went through k-12, I was inculcated with the positive Carl Sandburg view of Abraham Lincoln. I never questioned it; I joined the idolatry. The Emancipation Proclamation. A man of principle, of a 'deep and abiding faith' in America and justice. And a melancholy soul, like Hamlet--very sympathetic. (Keep in mind, this was also in that part of my life that I was drinking the Mormon Kool-Aid.)

Only as an adult have I learned the following about old Honest Abe, from my own efforts. He:

• by executive order and without the consent of Congress, raised a 75,000 soldier army that he dispatched to invade the seven states which had then seceded from the Union--by that point in his presidency, Lincoln was already collecting large tariffs for the U.S. Treasury from Southern ports.
• Illegally suspended the writ of habeas corpus without the consent of Congress. (Constitutional Problems Under Lincoln by James G. Randall)
• Had most of the Maryland legislature imprisoned without due process along with a congressman and the mayor and police commissioners of Baltimore
• Put out an arrest warrant for the 84 year old Chief Justice Roger Taney of the United States Supreme Court when Lincoln did not like the justice’s opinion regarding the military arrests and takeover of the Maryland civil government. Ex parte Merryman 17 F. Cas. 144 (C.C.D. Md. 1861) (No. 9487)
• Imprisoned up to 13,000 political prisoners and political opponents from mostly Northern states (Fort Lafayette – Think Guantanamo) The Real Lincoln by Thomas J. DiLorenzo, P. 140, Freedom under Lincoln by Dan Sprague pp. 281-282
• Forcibly closed down over 275 Northern newspapers and arrested 3,000 Northern journalists, editors and publishers. “You will take possession by military force, of the printing establishments of the New York World and Journal of Commerce . . . and prohibit any further publication thereof . . . you are therefore commanded forthwith to arrest and imprison . . . the editors, proprietors and publishers of the aforesaid newspapers.” - Order from Abraham Lincoln to General John Dix, May 18, 1864 (As quoted in The Real Lincoln, p. 131)
• Put in a program to censor telegraph communications.
• Arranged for the secession of western Virginia from Virginia through unlawful means.
• Imprisoned and deported a U.S. Congressman (Vallandigham of Ohio) for responding negatively to his State of the Union speech, primarily regarding taxation issues. The Congressman was arrested at his home by 67 soldiers. Record of Hon. C. L. Vallandigham (Jackson, MS: Crown Rights Publishers, 1998); Lincoln Unmasked by Thomas DiLorenzo, pp. 163-166)
• Forcibly took arms from private citizens in northern states, en masse.
• Ordered martial law in cities across the Northern border states.
• ordered the military to bombard citizens in southern cities, executed civilians without trial, burned and pillaged courthouses, businesses, farms and homes. (Think Atlanta and General Sherman’s March to the Sea)

Many of these actions were ordered by Lincoln even when victory was apparent. Free speech, freedom of the press and the right to jury trial were suspended in the North during the war. Much of the U.S. Constitution was de facto null and void.

In many ways, Lincoln saved the Constitution and Union by destroying them during his presidency. Ah, the end justifies the means argument. It is not popular to oppose a popular president past or present. I am not a history revisionist. But I am a fan of history completeness, and history correction. The popular Lincoln legacy is worthy of our praise, but when it comes to the abuse of our Constitutional government, there is 'the rest of the story'.

I think the LDS imagery of JSJr suffers a like degree of inaccuracies as the popular notions of Lincoln. The LDS Church has tried vigorously, particularly before the internet came along, to keep JSJr from the stain of LDS sanctioned promiscuity ('polygamy', , :nod:), even if they could not keep the stain off of poor old Brigham Young--the one that didn't do polygamy as a secret combination like JSJr did.

I find the American history having whitewashed the hell out of Lincoln just as repugnant as the LDS Church having whitewashed the hell out of JSJr.

Is it okay for the the USofA to tell me it's my fault that I did not learn all of these things about Lincoln earlier, and accepted the version peddled to me in 13 years of public school? Or am I justified in being miffed at an arm of the government (public schools) shilling such a distorted view of Lincoln, to help shape me into a 'happy' taxpayer once I reached adulthood?

Thanks SP, interesting post.

Another one I forgot to mention is that prior to Lincoln's presidency, the U.S. made the Gadsden Purchase in 1854--the southern most parts of what is now New Mexico and Arizona. The Gadsden Purchase was for the purpose of the US's construction of a transcontinental railroad along a deep southern route.

After Lincoln was elected, the northern route was chosen by him. I am sure it was no minor coincidence that Lincoln owned land in Nebraska that had to be purchased from him for the transcontinental railroad to be built on that norther route. (Lincoln had represented railroads in his law practice, and acquired that land as a consequence.)

Was the northern route (connecting fewer cities) chosen for the good of the Nation, or for maximizing Lincoln's profits from his Nebraska property?

Abraham Lincoln was just a human. It is believed that he accepted Christ as His Savior about the time of Gettysburg. Unlike any other President, Lincoln was dealing with a CIVIL war in a rather young country. Martial law was an accept practice back then. Such would happen in the aftermath of The San Francisco Earthquake, where looters were shot on sight. This is how things were done, and under certain conditions it needs to be done. I'm not the President. Sometimes the President does what he has to do and not what he wants to do. This is to protect the majority and not for the sake of a minority.

LittleNipper wrote:Abraham Lincoln was just a human.

Not from the history books I was taught in public school. That Lincoln would have been more comfortable on Mt Olympus than in Illinois.

Seems like buying land from yourself would be very much for the sake of a (teeny tiny) minority...

LittleNipper wrote: Martial law was an accept practice back then.

I swear to God, every time I read your posts, all I can think of is how amazing it is that they trained a lobotomized orangutan to type.

No, martial law has never been just a normal part of life in the United States. You know Joseph Smith? That Mormon guy? He was in Carthage Jail on charges of treason for declaring martial law in Nauvoo after he and the city council destroyed the Nauvoo Expositor press.

There is no question that hagiography is not a problem limited to the history of religous leaders. I agree that "whitewashed" histories utlimately do more harm than good and that myths like George Washington and the cherry tree are unecessary and harmful. You could come up with a similar list regarding many historical figures. I, for example, can never think of Christopher Colombus with anything other than revulsion. I think everyone who wants a deeper understanding of American history should read Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States." It is extremely one-sided and has many flaws, but Zinn covers many issues and people that other general histories never even mention, and so it is a useful read just to gain additional perspective.

Lincoln, in particular, is a tricky case. Context is hugely important when considering historical events, and it is important to note the context behind many of those decisions. You have to remember that Lincoln was desparately trying to (i) prevent additional secessions and treason (which is why he restricted freedom of the press and suspended habeas corpus, (ii) cajole a large number of people in the North to fight a war that quickly became unpopular in the North (since a lot of Northerners were unwilling to fight a war to end slavery), (iii) appear strong to prevent foreign powers from recognizing and aiding the Confederacy. Did Lincoln go too far sometimes, and can we criticize certain things he did? Sure, but the context is important.

Despite his flaws and occasionally troubling decisions, I still believe that Lincoln was our greatest President.

sock puppet wrote:

LittleNipper wrote:Abraham Lincoln was just a human.

Not from the history books I was taught in public school. That Lincoln would have been more comfortable on Mt Olympus than in Illinois.

This is because that Republican freed the slaves to the chagrin of the Democratic South. This was a highly volatile religiously instagated turn of events. It has been said that the underground railroad would not have worked without those who were against slavery who lived in the South. Yet, it was consideration of States Rights that would drag everyone into a terrible conflict.

Sock Puppet, your OP reminds me of our ongoing discussions about the Nauvoo Expositor. The unconstitutional actions by the Lincoln administration you are describing are exactly the kind of after-the-fact justification Dallin H. Oaks tried to provide for suppressing the Expositor. From Oaks' 1965 Utah Law Review article:

http://content.lib.utah.edu/utils/getfi ... /14523.pdf

(page 897)

The action of the Nauvoo City Council in suppressing an opposition newspaper may have been the earliest example of official action of this type ( in a day when mobs were not infrequently employed for the same purpose) , but subsequent history shows that such official acts of suppression were not unique.

In 1863 General Burnside proclaimed the suppression of the Chicago Times and the Jonesboro Gazette "on account of the repeated expression of disloyal and incendiary statements," and took possession of the Times printing office with troops. Publication was resumed four days later when public pressure induced Lincoln to rescind the order, so the action was never tested in court.