Lincoln's Other Legacy
America celebrates the bicentennial anniversary of Abraham Lincoln's birth this year. Some people believe him to have been the nation's greatest president. Lincoln lived from l809 to l865, when the 16th president of the United States was assassinated. Indeed, he is among the beloved, but it seems that with a new, intriguing book written about him, he may become one of the most controversial presidents because of his beliefs about freedom. What did it mean to him exactly?
Lerone Bennett Jr., the historian and author of Forced Into Glory: Abraham Lincoln's White Dream, provides critical analysis and a new perspective on Lincoln. He argues that Lincoln was racist. He forces a rethinking and reconsideration of Lincoln the emancipator. It is a challenging read but a necessary one for readers to get a comprehensive view of the man.
A clear view of Lincoln has to be conducted in historical context. He certainly faced challenges and made critical decisions that determined "freedom." He freed the slaves, but the real question is why did he free the slaves? Did he do it because it was morally and politically correct? Did he save the nation in doing so, not really caring about the evils of human bondage? Was he or was he not a racist? What were the forces that influenced his decision?
Abraham Lincoln's own words in an 1858 debate with Stephen A. Douglas make you wonder:
"I will say then, that I am not nor never have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races; that I am not nor never have been in favor of making voters of the free negroes, or jurors, or qualifying them to hold office, or having them to marry with white people. I will say, in addition, that there is a physical difference between the white and black races, which, I suppose, will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of social and political equality, and inasmuch as they cannot so live, that while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, that I as much as any other man am in favor of the superior position being assigned to the white man."
What is crystal clear to me is that Lincoln signed The Emancipation Proclamation and that in doing so he saved the nation. What is also very clear is that Abraham Lincoln gave us the rationale for American racism. He advocated the notion that blacks were inferior to whites. He promoted white superiority. He questioned whether blacks should have the right to vote. He questioned the equality. He questioned white rule and was absolutely in favor of it, realizing that black voters could alter the equation. He realized that "freedom" would bring about change in America if we gave the Constitution a literal interpretation. Lincoln kept America united and avoided a Union split.
Negroes fought the war and proved their loyalty, if not love, for their country. Frederick Douglass, the great abolitionist, raised questions in his speech, "What the Black Man Wants," delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society in Boston, April 1865. The speech was made days after the close of the Civil War and the assassination of President Lincoln. He said:
"What have you asked the black men of the South, the black men of the whole country to do? Why, you have asked them to incur the enmity of their masters, in order to befriend you and to befriend this Government. You have asked us to call down, not only upon ourselves, but upon our children's children, the deadly hate of the entire Southern people. You have called upon us to turn our backs upon our masters, to abandon their cause and espouse yours; to turn against the South and in favor of the North; to shoot down the Confederacy and uphold the flag -- the American flag. You have called upon us to expose ourselves to all the subtle machinations of their malignity for all time. And now, what do you propose to do when you come to make peace? To reward your enemies, and trample in the dust your friends?"
Douglas said in that same speech:
"I have had but one idea for the last three years to present to the American people, and the phraseology in which I clothe it is the old abolition phraseology. I am for the "immediate, unconditional, and universal" enfranchisement of the black man, in every State in the Union. [Loud applause.] Without this, his liberty is a mockery; without this, you might as well almost retain the old name of slavery for his condition; for in fact, if he is not the slave of the individual master, he is the slave of society, and holds his liberty as a privilege, not as a right. He is at the mercy of the mob, and has no means of protecting himself."
Lincoln discussed the "freedom" of blacks in a variety of ways. One was freedom with limitations. Another Lincoln consideration was to send slaves to Africa. This met strong objections from Frederick Douglass, the premiere voice of black America at that time. He argued this was our country and we had fought for the right of America's freedom, which included our very own.
Indeed, Lincoln was faced with hard questions of his day and his decisions were tough ones. He saved the union, and as a result, blacks were freed. But the debate demonstrates Lincoln was never convinced that blacks were equal and worthy. A primary question the gentlemen of Illinois argued was what the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence meant to the Negro. The thoughts were to nationalize slavery, to reduce how widespread it was, or to end the slave trade but not the institution of slavery.
The Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858 are an interesting read. There were seven debates between Lincoln, the Republican, and Douglas, the Democrat. The overall theme of the debates was the peculiar institution of slavery.
They were running for the U.S. Senate from Illinois.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
http://www
Lincol was a racist. Stop making excuses for it.
No one's making excuses. They're just putting his racism in context for the times he lived in. When you're surrounded with a way of thinking all your life, with no (or precious little) encouragement to think another way - and in fact even punishment if you dare to - then racism has a completely different "color" than it would if Lincoln were raised in late 20th century America.
People are looking for a balanced perspective on the man, rather than a knee jerk reaction to a man's views from another century. In fact, from another world.
Lincoln was a racist the same way that I am the queen of England! Look at the times in which Lincoln lived, and you will find that by the definitions of that time he was VERY liberal regarding race, and as such to call him a racist by TODAY'S definition shows that you don't understand!
It is idiotic to measure a man by standards that did not exist during his lifetime. It is the same as judging a caveman evil if he had been a cannibal.
You are right. Honest Abe was a product of his times. Only fools and scoundrels buy into the trap of hindsight being 20-20.
Frederick Douglas's comments about the Black man being a slave to society versus his master and his freedom being seen as a privilege given versus a right, supersede for me any comments of Lincoln. Having studied Lincoln, and read many books related, I agree with the general tone of ALL other comments below, that with Lincoln, the important thing is he didn't stay in his thinking where he began but allowed himself to grow and change based on new information, making him a 'transformative' President, that not only transformed him but our country. Douglas's comments are new to me and very perceptive, because he was absolutely right on. The Black man's freedom didn't become a right for another 100 years in our society. It seems he was prophetic in recognizing that without the right to vote where discriminatory practices were outlawed, it would take another 100 years. MLK was correct in rebuking the Christian pastors from the Birmingham jail for telling him he should wait and be patient for change and NOT be so radical! He said the worst evil in the world is not in what known bad people do, but how good people sit on the sidelines and wait for change to happen. He said he was most disappointed by those called to be pastors, as he was, who were NOT ready to do all they could to create positive change.
To claim that Lincoln was a racist based on the views that he held regarding black people being inferior to white people....
While by CURRENT definitions Lincoln would not only be a racist, by the standards of his day he was VERY liberal!! The closest thing to call him a racist on was the fact that he used the emancipation proclamation as a way to MAKE the war about slavery so that the British and French would not come in on the side of the Confederacy!
When you think one race is superior to another, you are a racist. His time had nothing to do with his beliefs. He had his own mind and did not have to belief in the superiority of White people. Aside from their being White abolitionists who wanted to end slavery, George Mason did not sign the Constitution because the rights of Black people were not included.
It is funny how people excuse the prejudices of those in power. People of color have rarely subjected White people to the same inhumane treatment as they have towards people of color. Right is right.
Either way, Lincoln had more integrity than Sarah Palin.
It's all cherry picking on both sides. The overall essence of the mans life and times should be a positive one. I believe the important part of Lincoln is that he changed over time. As he learned more, expanded his world, read and heard different views his policies changed. Not unlike a modern day President.
...you are EXACTLY correct...
Lincoln's views on slavery were moderate for his time. He appeased voters on all sides of the slave issue to gain the most votes possible.
The last time he spoke publicly before he was killed, Lincoln said he would give the vote to the black soldiers who fought for the Union.
Lincoln was a smart man. He knew that what he did was the first step in equality for the blacks. Hopefully his great mind finally overrode his instinctive emotions about race.
By our standards today, Lincoln was a racist. I doubt the plantation owners of the South, or the Confederate Army would describe him that way.
President Lincoln never owned slaves, as most of the founding fathers did. Those in 1776 who were anti-slavery compromised that belief to create the Union.
We are constantly learning, growing, trying to live up to our great words. Lincoln was another one of those great men who helped bring us that much closer to a more inclusive society and government.
Investigate him to help us understand our mistakes, not tear down what we have worked so hard to build. The reality of what he did is not lessened by his personal faults.
Assuming Lincoln believed what he said in 1858 (and wasn't saying what he needed to to get elected), we have to remember that the Civil War was transformative for Lincoln as it was for America. He ran in 1860 saying he would do nothing to slavery in Southern states, but wanted only to stop its spread into the territories. He ended up, of course, ending slavery in the states.
Did Lincoln state publicly many times that he considered blacks inferior to whites? Yes. Did he hold those views the to the end? That's the interesting question. Certainly, he held Frederick Douglass in high regard. And blacks fighting for the Union in the final years of the war proved their abilities as soldiers to a doubting Army leadership and a perhaps doubting president.
He said in 1858 he was not in favor of giving blacks full citizenship, however he later strongly backed the constitutional amendments, ratified soon after his death, that did just that.
What you say is true.
A person is an ongoing process. Who we were isn't always who we are. Or will be.
Abraham Lincoln was an empathic man it seems who absorbed the experiences he went through. They made him smarter than the people around him who though just because something was one way that was the way it had to be. But he never stopped looking and listening. (Remind of you anyone?)
Racist? Probably. It was a different time. He was raised differently than we are, and many of the black people he was exposed to had had no chance to show who they were. I believe that had he lived another decade that the words from the 1850s would have sounded like they came from a different man. Even to his ears.
Part 1
It's hard from the distance of time to look into the heart of any public figure. All you site is factual. Yet for the pedestal of statesman, which history has placed Lincoln on, he was also a man, and a politician.
We have his public statements and his actions to try and reconcile as one. I always like the exchanges in personal letters with close friends and family as a best insight into the thinking of any public figure, it's there a person feels they can confide one's thoughts.
But we're viewing a society we're long removed from, where the views Lincoln proclaimed in public debate were held by many, many who's vote he was also trying to win.
We do know this with certainty, Lincoln followed national events for most of his adult life. He shared his opinions in letter, with friends on the events of the day. He surely was aware of the rising tensions during the 1850's, yet freely chose to run for president in 1860. Why? What did he think he'd bring to the office, what were his plans?
Continued.
Part 2
He did state once holding the union together was his only concern, and all the rest, one way or the other didn't matter to him. Was it his oath of office alone he was upholding? He also portrayed differing views depending on the audience, made political calculations and compromises. Differing with friends when, he thought politically, it was the best that could be accomplished at the time, without losing his coalition.
Was it more the economic exploitation he found offensive than the racism?
He was a God fearing man, although not strictly religious, he did reference on matters, that the judgment of God would be rendered on the nation for it's actions. Maybe this immorality in the eyes of God weighed more on his conscious as president, then his personal views of equality with blacks? Maybe intellectually he understood blacks were human just as he was, but not able to bring himself to see them as an equal?
It could be validly argued LBJ held racist views, yet he did rise to a higher calling. Maybe it was the public pressure alone, forcing him to act? Maybe these figures do feel the eyes of history upon them? Even human and flawed, we still can celebrate the courage and greatness of their acts. That's our shared history, the peoples history. It belongs to us, not any one public figure alone.
Even the South played a role in liberty's advance, if only one as catalyst for events.
Actually, on Lincoln, I would consult Senator Gary Hart..Gary is a descendant of ole Abe Lincoln:)
I thought Lincoln had no living descendants, as all his sons died without having had children.
Nope. All but one of his sons died in childhood. Robert, the one who lived, was around when they checked his coffin for the last time, early in the 1900s.
As an addendum to my post above; a little googling will reveal that the book cited by Ms. Hartman as a groundbreaking piece of new scholarship was, in fact, published almost ten years ago and was based on an article written over forty years ago.
Eric Foner had a good review/takedown of "Forced into Glory" when it was published:
http://www
This is a very reductive and shallow view of Lincoln and his views on race.
For example to state that "the [1858] debate demonstrates Lincoln was never convinced that blacks were equal and worthy" assumes that Lincoln's views were the same from that point forward until his death seven years later. There is in fact much evidence to the contrary.
The Lincoln of 1858 was not a New Englander nor an abolitionist; he was a mainstream western Republican - which meant he was against slavery in the territories but not in favor of dismantling it in the south. Before he became president, he was personally acquainted with very few black people.
Lincoln was man of his time, and, yes, a mainstream politician, but to reduce him with the label "racist" is an insult. I think the following is a useful counterpoint to Ms. Hartman's post:
http://www
I never personally gave all the credit to Lincoln for the shift in racial paradigms in this country over the centuries. He was simply an initiator of the shift towards racial equality. There were people who came after him who still had to deal with the provisions that he left out--namely the notion of integration and equality. That wouldn't be accomplished until over 100 years later in the form of the Civil Rights Movement. I study these notable people in history and I feel fortunate to have been born much later because obviously, even the thinking of well read scholars was extremely warped and misguided in those days.
I am not a Lincoln scholar by the greatest stretch of the imagination but I knew all of this. Lincoln was, the standards of our times, a racist in spite of what appears to have been a cordial relatinship with Frederick Douglass. But, was he, by the standard of his own times? Reconciling these two standards will never be satisfactory to everyone, insufficent purity of motive is always a possible objection. But the effort to understand the differences , to give credit where credit is due, and to avoid letting the perfect be the enemy of the good are instructive practices for us all.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
