Mr. Lee

[Linda Anderson]

(04-18-2014 10:30 PM)J. Beckert Wrote:  You've made some good points, Rick. The Church of Lincoln conveniently forgets the crude, racially themed jokes that appalled his contemporaries when he was President and the fact that when he spoke of black folks, the word he sometimes used to describe them started with an "n".

The broad brush has been used in this story for too long.

Joe, the "n" word is a horrible word but how was it regarded during the Civil War? Are you holding Mr. Lincoln to 21st century standards?

Rick, the best illustration of how Lincoln felt about African Americans is the Emancipation Proclamation. It says something about Lincoln's character that the African American abolitionist Frederick Douglass came to admire him.

[J. Beckert]

(04-18-2014 11:02 PM)Linda Anderson Wrote:  Joe, the "n" word is a horrible word but how was it regarded during the Civil War? Are you holding Mr. Lincoln to 21st century standards?
Rick, the best illustration of how Lincoln felt about African Americans is the Emancipation Proclamation. It says something about Lincoln's character that the African American abolitionist Frederick Douglass came to admire him.

Not at all, Linda. How were blacks regarded during the Civil War? Should we use 21st. Century mores, as most here do, to make excuses for why the slavery question wasn't solved sooner? And let's give Lincoln a pass for his documented use of the "n" word. He probably "evolved" by April 14th., 1865 and referred to them as "African Americans".

As far as calling blacks "African Americans" goes, it's pandering and it makes me sick. I like (black comedian) Bill Cosby's spin on that : We are not Africans. Those people are not Africans; they don't know a thing about Africa .....
I say this all of the time. It would be like white people saying they are European-American. That is totally stupid.
I was born here, and so were my parents and grand parents and, very likely my great grandparents. I don't have any connection to Africa, no more than white Americans have to Germany , Scotland , England , Ireland , or the Netherlands . The same applies to 99 percent of all the black Americans as regards to Africa . So stop, already! ! !

I've made a point of asking some black friends about this and they laughed. They said it's just a way for white people to feel better about their self inflicted guilt. They actually feel it's patronizing. Their words - not mine.

I think Rick already explained Lincoln's motives behind the EP. What's interesting about Lincoln's thoughts was that he was investigating colonization right up until the day he signed the EP. There's now way around that. Let's put everyone on the same playing field and call it what it was - a different time.

Women's Suffrage took 70 years to come to a conclusion in this country. Why is it so hard to see why slavery and racial equality weren't cleared up in 4 years?

I hope you take none of this personal, Linda. You know we are friends and I think highly of you, but I've really had enough of this 21st. century spin on 19th. century events.

[Wild Bill]

A couple of things: Lee freed his father-in-laws slaves per the old man's will. The fact that he did it by 1862 in spite of the war is rather amazing--Arlington was behind Union lines most of the time. I am uncertain if Lee owned any slaves of his own beyond perhaps a body servant or two. But I am willing to be corrected on this.

Root hog or die was a reference to blacks alone. Read Alex Stephens memoirs or Lerone Bennent, Jr., Forced into Glory. All things considered, however, root hog or die was the way Lincoln himself was brought up as were most frontier families. What he indicates here is that Freedom is the end of national largess, especially economically, although he was tending to favor the black vote as his April 11, 1865 speech showed. In this Lincoln is typical of 19th century America and this attitude is one reason why Reconstruction would fail by 1876. It was instrumental in negating any property awards to ex-slaves from their ex-master's plantations or even abandoned lands. It certainly helped kill the Freedman's Bureau and it economic and political assistance to the freed slaves.

The standard treatment of Lee is still Douglass Southall Freeman's R E Lee. The revisionist view is Alan Nolan, Lee Considered. Any other bios fall somewhere in between these two. I leave out military analyses of Lee in which he ranges between brilliance and being too costly to Confederate manpower. But one cannot make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, huh?

An aside of nonsense, especially for Laurie, Lee was born on Jany 19, Stonewall Jackson on Jany 21, and yours truly on Jany 20. So I admit to quite a bit of prejudice here. Indeed Civil War Times Illustrated used to do "Personality Profiles" on CW people. They did one on Jackson. I cannot admit to his military genius but I sure was a reincarnation of his iron self-discipline and inability or unwillingness to put up with others--A P Hill being the best example. Still makes me shudder. But self-discipline helped me get a PhD that fellow students a lot smarter people could not. Maybe is it because I come from a long line of Prussians, who knows? That's for you, Eva.

Yeah, I will admit to a willingness to tell a lot of people to go to hell, no matter their status in life. It's my most lovable quality. . . .

[Rick Smith]

It is true that the slaves freed by General Lee were not his own property, but his father-in-law's.

I do not pretend to know the laws of Virginia property rights in 1859, but certainly, Lee felt the moral responsibility to do what was right in the circumstances, not only under the terms of his father-in-law's will, but to do the best he could for the slaves under his authority until manumission could be achieved.

The point is that Lee set about educating, at least to some extent, the slaves in his care, regardless of the laws of the State of Virginia, which forbade the education of slaves. He somehow skirted the law and did give some learning to his slaves so that they would at least have some small advantage in their new estate.

General Lee's attitude regarding slaves was much more charitable than Mr. Lincoln's.

Lincoln was a consummate politician, so this may have some bearing on his attitudes and actions.

[L Verge]

Thanks for printing the Francis Carpenter piece re: the "root, hog, or die" comment in its entirety because it raises some questions - in my mind, at least - about Lincoln's feelings on Reconstruction (i.e. what would happen to the Southern people in general).

In February of 1865, when Lincoln made the comment, he is at an "informal" peace conference with representatives of the Confederate States, who realize that defeat is likely. They are concerned about their people's future - which any decent politician or person should be. Secretary of State Seward stays silent - indicating that he has no plans (at least ones that he cares to share!). I imagine that there was that pregnant moment of silence in the room, and Lincoln feels uneasy enough that he has to draw on one of his folksy analogies to break the silence. So, he decides to "let the hogs out..."

Now, go back and read his story carefully. Lincoln is not referring strictly to what will happen to the blacks, he is saying that the defeated South -- black and white -- can figure out how to survive on their own. He later claims to Carpenter that he's saying it in "levity." When the story appeared in the New York Herald, however, I doubt seriously that the majority of people, North and South, took it with a dose of levity. The serious Northern people would applaud the implication that the Southerners (in general) were ignorant souls who would have to learn to help themselves. The Southerners would be filled with rage over such an insensitive statement.

I wonder if John Wilkes Booth happened to read the article in the New York Herald?

Now, since I'm beginning to feel like I am the oldest member of this forum, I just want to mention the "n" word. The last time I checked (and maybe it has changed), the world is still classified according to races of people. I am not WHITE; I am CAUCASIAN (remember that old term?). What we now term the black race is properly named NEGROID (unless our politically correct brethren have managed to get it changed). Then, we can throw in the MONGOLOID race -- and so on.

Until the 1960s, there seemed to be no problem with referring to my acquaintances as "colored" or "Negro." If it made them seethe inside, they certainly never showed it or said it. Since my mother's family ran a country store, I was around many fine black people the whole time I was growing up, and I never noticed any uneasiness on either side.

I began teaching in 1965, right at the time of school desegregation, and I believe I have mentioned before that the Negro students were unhappy having to come into all-white schools -- just as much as some of the whites disliked the idea of being bused into Negro neighborhoods. Then came the riots on one side and the police dogs and hoses on the other side of the coin. There were no more coloreds and Negroes. Instead we had Afro-Americans, African Americans, and blacks. Whites became whitey, honky, cracker, etc. When do we get to be Americans?

P.S. Yes, I know that the truly offensive "n" word is "*****," but it was and is used in derogatory terms by people North, South, Mid-Atlantic, Mid-West, and West; so don't try and place the blame on just Southerners. And, I might add, that I have some black friends who use it in describing some of their own race (just like some of the Caucasians refer to PTW).

[JMadonna]

Lincoln's first priority was to rebuild the Southern economy by having the North reimburse the South for her slaves. His death made that a non-starter.

Lincoln knew it was impossible to integrate former slaves into a society that had completely collapsed but the me-first Yankees decided to try doing it at the point of a gun. It failed miserably. The rest is history.

[Eva Elisabeth]

(04-19-2014 01:49 PM)JMadonna Wrote:  Lincoln knew it was impossible to integrate former slaves into a society that had completely collapsed.

He knew the (human) limits he had to deal with.

When Abraham Lincoln left home, he “was a friendless, uneducated, penniless boy… a piece of floating driftwood” who was responsible himself to make use of his right of "die pursuit of happiness". "Root hog or die" IMO as well applied to his own situation. I think he didn't feel the freed blacks' situation was a much different one, and his believe was that the DOI guarantees this right, but the state is not responsible for the people to make use of it - this responsibility is upon the people themselves.

As for the "n"-word discussion, the issue with finding a "political correct term" IMO is that such is simply impossible. Whatever new word you choose, it is a word to determine and make a difference, and every new term will soon take over and imply all the former associations, too, at least in the minds of certain people.

[L Verge]

Again, I would say that you are overlooking my point - Lincoln's analogy of root, hog included the entire Southern population, not just the freedmen. It was callous and could have been handled in a much more professional manner at the time. I would suggest that the President of the United States could have invited the Southern representatives to work with him from that point on to develop an economic plan that would be a joint effort on both sides.

I know that Lincoln is appreciated for his down-home humor and analogies and that they have become part of his persona. In many respects, they are like parables to us. I'm sure that they broke tension in many circumstances and that some presented "teachable moments." However, I also think that the time for parables was over with in 1864-65, and a nation that needed to be re-united needed more than this for guidance. I used analogies a lot in teaching, but the next part of my strategy was to ask the students for proposals or at least their thoughts on how to accomplish an effective answer to the problem or situation.

As for Lincoln's plan to compensate owners for their released slaves, that is one of the first things he proposed to Marylanders and members of the border states FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF KEEPING THEM IN THE UNION. As we can see, that compensation never got accomplished in those states -- even in the early years of the war, when it more likely could have been. I believe I'm correct that only Delaware received even a small portion of what had been promised. We won't mention other promises made to those states that were never kept.

Truth be told, I am not anti-Lincoln. I am fascinated by his personality, but mainly by his dichotomy. If he was not the epitome of a pure politician, I don't know who was/is.

[JMadonna]

(04-19-2014 06:49 PM)L Verge Wrote:  As for Lincoln's plan to compensate owners for their released slaves, that is one of the first things he proposed to Marylanders and members of the border states FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF KEEPING THEM IN THE UNION. As we can see, that compensation never got accomplished in those states -- even in the early years of the war, when it more likely could have been. I believe I'm correct that only Delaware received even a small portion of what had been promised. We won't mention other promises made to those states that were never kept.

The president proposes, the congress disposes.

He planned to push it again before he was killed. Would he have gotten it? Well, he didn't get the 13th amendment the first time either so who knows. Different congress, different circumstances. He certainly would have had the support of the southern states this time.

[L Verge]

The president proposes, the congress disposes. A principle of our checks and balances system of representative government that seems to be overlooked occasionally...

[Gene C]

They're pretty free when it comes to writing the checks, not to good on the balances.

[Thomas Thorne]

Michael Korda is one of my favorite authors and I am in the happy condition of looking forward to reading some of his books for the first time. I would commend "Charmed Lives", his memoir of his family of Hungarian expatiates who dominated the British film industry and his biographies of Eisenhower and Lawrence of Arabia. I have not yet read the Grant bio.

Joe Beckert repeats the comforting belief that even without the Civil War, slavery was doomed in North America. I wish that were so. I don't subscribe to the Charles William Ramsdell climate thesis that argued slavery could only flourish in areas suitable to cotton cultivation. Railroads were the largest antebellum slave owners. Southerners,being ingenious Americans,might well have created interesting new ways to retain slavery and still make a profit.

One of the most fascinating beliefs in the mindset of the South was its belief that the only alternative to slavery was to grant full freedom and equality to African Americans. They did not have the Yankee hypocrisy that damned slavery but accepted racial subordination as the natural order of things.
Tom

[L Verge]

This from my Southern tongue: Perhaps the Southern code of chivalry dictated full freedom and equality to them should the institution of slavery be abolished? And bless you for your last sentence.

As for the railroads: Weren't they one of the largest recipients of Lincoln's industrial and economic largesse? Would he or the wheeler-dealers have let the South get a foot in the door?

[My Name Is Kate]

(04-18-2014 09:58 PM)Rick Smith Wrote:  The best illustration as to how Mr. Lincoln felt about African Americans are the negro jokes he delighted in telling his pals.

Can anyone cite some actual Negro jokes that Lincoln told, along with the references where that info comes from? I am not interested in the actual jokes so much as proof that he really did that, since I'm not aware of any such jokes.

(04-18-2014 11:02 PM)Linda Anderson Wrote:  Joe, the "n" word is a horrible word...

The "n" word is just a word. It sounds very much like the word "niggardly", which I think I recall that some people were trying to get banned from the English language because it is apparently offensive to some people. I wonder if more of those offended people are white than black. I wouldn't mind having my own surname banned from usage because of the mess of unpleasant emotions and memories that it elicits (it having been used like a four-letter word, etc., etc.), but I'm not going to make a push for that to happen. I threw in the personal bit just in case anyone accuses me of being insensitive, to show that I know whereof I speak when I say it's pretty childish when we have to start banning words instead of realizing that we need to do something to change the way we react to them.

[JMadonna]

(04-20-2014 11:13 AM)L Verge Wrote:  As for the railroads: Weren't they one of the largest recipients of Lincoln's industrial and economic largesse? Would he or the wheeler-dealers have let the South get a foot in the door?

There were a number of opportunities for the South to expand their railroad system before the war but the plantation owners didn't want to invest in them.