Abraham Lincoln: Tyrant
When Abraham Lincoln launched his military invasion of the Southern States to prevent their peaceful and democratic assertion of independence, he ushered in a radically different Union than the one the Founders intended. Whether it was slavery, tariffs, or a redefinition of Federal powers matters little. The question of whether we live in a voluntary government or a compulsory one, enforced at gunpoint, was answered with the death and maiming of almost a million Americans from 1861 to 1865. At the heart of the ever-encroaching State that we find ourselves living under is the legacy of Abraham Lincoln. Every tyrant, from Karl Marx to Woodrow Wilson, FDR to Adolf Hitler, George W Bush and Barack Obama, have embraced the Lincoln mantle in both their writings and their actions. For Liberty to reemerge, the Lincoln myth must be shattered and exposed. Thanks for watching.
Related Blogs
- karl marx illuminati | Marx
- Commentary » Blog Archive » They Don't Have George W. Bush to Kick …
- Cats that Resembles like Adolf Hitler | WorldThisSecond.com
- Did Abraham Lincoln Use Faith to Overcome Depression? | World of …
- Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars: Fellowships in …
@SteamboatPolar – There is absolutely no reason to be such a prick. I had not previously read those declarations. Georgia made strong references to the tariffs and other protective measures. Texas made a more vague reference to the biased legislation being used to impoverish the South, but you are correct in that all of the seceding States made slavery a central issue. It seems that the confederate writers who tried to downplay this as a factor in secession were being disingenuous.
@SteamboatPolar – It is a historical fact that agriculture was the predominant industry in the South and the North benefitted more from manufacture. The tariffs would have had a much more deleterious effect on the South and would have transferred wealth from the South to the North. Your points about the “Declarations of Secession” are well taken. This still, however, does not explain why the North did not simply free the slaves as Lysander Spooner advocated, instead of subjugating the South.
@BullshipDetector – The South overwhelmingly opposed ALL tariffs as can be seen in the Confederate Constitution’s prohibition of tariffs:
” nor shall any duties or taxes on importations from foreign nations be laid to promote or foster any branch of industry; and all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the Confederate States.”
I must point out that I am no Civil War buff. I am only trying to look at it from an economic perspective, which usually points to the root of wars.
@SteamboatPolar – Although the South did not had morally sound reasons for secession, it doesn’t explain why the North wanted to force them back into the union. Lincoln, in a letter to Horace Greely, said it was not about slavery. What then? American manufacturers couldn’t compete with Europe. If the South was separate, they would by cheap goods from Europe and become completely agrarian (not a big stretch for them). For the North, this would have spelled disaster. They had much less farming.
@BullshipDetector – Again, my argument is not that tariffs were the South’s main reason for seceding. My argument is that inability to compete with European manufacturers (hence the need to force the South to accept the tariffs) was the reason that the North invaded the South, instead of simply freeing the slaves by supporting a guerrilla war. You still haven’t explained why you feel the need to be so crude and insulting instead of just presenting your points.
@BullshipDetector – Take a deep breath and look at what I wrote. I’m talking about the North’s motive, not the South’s. Being married to a black woman, I certainly have no sympathy for those who promoted the institution of slavery, but I’m not talking about that at all. I was simply trying to have a discussion about the economic drivers behind the war. You seem very obsessed with the Civil War, like it’s still going on today. Why can’t you just have an intelligent conversation?