Lincoln wishes he was as cool as John Brown. The unfortunate truth is that Lincoln was a pro-establishment moderate who was afraid to rock the boat. He initially fought the confederacy simply to restore the status quo rather than for emancipation. It’s only thanks to the stupidity and hubris of the confederates that his hand was forced. The civil war was primarily a conflict between competing factions of the ruling class, and the northern industrial establishment opposing slavery was motivated more by economic factors than any moral principles.
The unfortunate truth is that Lincoln was a pro-establishment moderate who was afraid to rock the boat.
Considering that even Lincoln’s incredibly moderate position on slavery in the 1860 election ended up erupting into the bloodiest war of US history, I don’t think it’s unfair to suggest that the fears moderates had of Southern reaction were very real. They just underestimated just how much more radical the South had become since the 1840s.
He initially fought the confederacy simply to restore the status quo rather than for emancipation. It’s only thanks to the stupidity and hubris of the confederates that his hand was forced.
I would argue that this is partly inaccurate - Lincoln’s hand was not forced, the Republican Party was openly anti-slavery. Hell, that was the only real uniting cause of the Republican Party, which included support from both wealthy industrialists and labor radicals. Lincoln striking against slavery was far from universally popular in the North, and any history of the politics of the US Civil War will trace out the planning done by the Lincoln administration, far in advance of the measures taken, repeatedly keeping such things ‘in their pocket’, so to speak, until military successes allowed them to present them from a position of strength.
The civil war was primarily a conflict between competing factions of the ruling class, and the northern industrial establishment opposing slavery was motivated more by economic factors than any moral principles.
… most conflicts are motivated more by material factors than abstract factors (though certainly not all, and I would also point strongly to the symbiotic relationship between Southern aristocracy and Northern industrialists to oppose a purely material basis for the war). If you’re Marxist to any degree, that’s even what a socialist revolution is.
Nah, John Brown would end up growing a giant beard the older and more radicalized he got. Plus, Lincoln wasn’t as radical as he’s currently made out to be by disgruntled southerners. He was kinda pushed into emancipation by the south, he originally just wanted to halt the expansion of slavery not force the end of the practice.
Lincoln was still kinda racist and thought blacks were inferior to whites. He was even willing to delay emancipation, if the South hadn’t been so nuts about it. They forced his hand.
John Brown is the answer to the question; What would Abraham Lincoln have done if he never became President and shaved his beard?
Lincoln wishes he was as cool as John Brown. The unfortunate truth is that Lincoln was a pro-establishment moderate who was afraid to rock the boat. He initially fought the confederacy simply to restore the status quo rather than for emancipation. It’s only thanks to the stupidity and hubris of the confederates that his hand was forced. The civil war was primarily a conflict between competing factions of the ruling class, and the northern industrial establishment opposing slavery was motivated more by economic factors than any moral principles.
Considering that even Lincoln’s incredibly moderate position on slavery in the 1860 election ended up erupting into the bloodiest war of US history, I don’t think it’s unfair to suggest that the fears moderates had of Southern reaction were very real. They just underestimated just how much more radical the South had become since the 1840s.
I would argue that this is partly inaccurate - Lincoln’s hand was not forced, the Republican Party was openly anti-slavery. Hell, that was the only real uniting cause of the Republican Party, which included support from both wealthy industrialists and labor radicals. Lincoln striking against slavery was far from universally popular in the North, and any history of the politics of the US Civil War will trace out the planning done by the Lincoln administration, far in advance of the measures taken, repeatedly keeping such things ‘in their pocket’, so to speak, until military successes allowed them to present them from a position of strength.
… most conflicts are motivated more by material factors than abstract factors (though certainly not all, and I would also point strongly to the symbiotic relationship between Southern aristocracy and Northern industrialists to oppose a purely material basis for the war). If you’re Marxist to any degree, that’s even what a socialist revolution is.
Nah, John Brown would end up growing a giant beard the older and more radicalized he got. Plus, Lincoln wasn’t as radical as he’s currently made out to be by disgruntled southerners. He was kinda pushed into emancipation by the south, he originally just wanted to halt the expansion of slavery not force the end of the practice.
Lincoln was still kinda racist and thought blacks were inferior to whites. He was even willing to delay emancipation, if the South hadn’t been so nuts about it. They forced his hand.
Or, alternatively, what would Robin Williams do if he was born a lot earlier.
Nah, abraham lincoln was just as much of a dick as the majority of the us when it came to indians.