Fred Borch's Opinion of Lincoln

[David Lockmiller]

Fred Borch is a lawyer and historian. He was Professor of Legal History and Leadership at The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School for 18 years. He served 25 years in the Army as a uniformed attorney. After retiring from active duty, Fred took a job in the U.S. Government as the only career historian whose focus was exclusively on military legal history. He has seven degrees, including an M.A. in history from the University of Virginia.


February 19, 2024

When Lincoln was born in 1809, the United States was only 22 years old—the Constitution having been ratified in 1788. There were still Americans living who had fought in the Revolution—and Lincoln knew them or knew of them. These revolutionaries had witnessed the creation of a new system of government based not on kings, queens, and aristocrats but on the idea that men could rule themselves with a system of laws. To Lincoln and his contemporaries, America was a unique experiment—a republic based on a constitution with a president, congress, and judiciary. Had the southern states been allowed to leave the Union to create a slave-based Confederacy, the Union would have been shattered. Lincoln’s great achievement was preserving the Union—as he lived among the Americans who had been a part of the Revolution, understood what it had achieved, and did not want to see it destroyed.

[David Lockmiller]

(09-09-2024 01:26 PM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  Fred Borch is a lawyer and historian. He was Professor of Legal History and Leadership at The Judge Advocate General's Legal Center and School for 18 years.
February 19, 2024

When Lincoln was born in 1809, the United States was only 22 years old—the Constitution having been ratified in 1788. There were still Americans living who had fought in the Revolution—and Lincoln knew them or knew of them. These revolutionaries had witnessed the creation of a new system of government based not on kings, queens, and aristocrats but on the idea that men could rule themselves with a system of laws. To Lincoln and his contemporaries, America was a unique experiment—a republic based on a constitution with a president, congress, and judiciary. Had the southern states been allowed to leave the Union to create a slave-based Confederacy, the Union would have been shattered. Lincoln’s great achievement was preserving the Union—as he lived among the Americans who had been a part of the Revolution, understood what it had achieved, and did not want to see it destroyed.

President Lincoln's Address to the 166th Ohio Regiment on August 22, 1864:

(In terms of context, please note that this speech was made on the day before President Lincoln wrote the "blind memorandum" for signature by the members of his Cabinet on August 23, 1864.)

SOLDIERS--I suppose you are going home to see your families and friends. For the services you have done in this great struggle in which we are engaged, I present you sincere thanks for myself and the country.

I almost always feel inclined, when I say anything to soldiers, to impress upon them, in a few brief remarks, the importance of success in this contest. It is not merely for the day, but for all time to come, that we should perpetuate for our children's children that great and free government which we have enjoyed all our lives. I beg you to remember this, not merely for my sake, but for yours. I happen, temporarily, to occupy this big White House. I am a living witness that any one of your children may look to come here as my father's child has. It is in order that each one of you may have, through this free government which we have enjoyed, an open field, and a fair chance for your industry, enterprise, and intelligence; that you may all have equal privileges in the race of life with all its desirable human aspirations--it is for this that the struggle should be maintained, that we may not lose our birthrights--not only for one, but for two or three years, if necessary. The nation is worth fighting for, to secure such an inestimable jewel.

[Gene C]

What a difference in attitude and core values he had compared to the leadership, or lack of, we see in many of our political leaders today.

Thanks for sharing his speech with us

[LincolnMan]

What a great address to the soldiers! I always enjoys reading it. Too bad it isn’t read to the public, especially in schools. Thank you for posting!

[David Lockmiller]

(09-29-2024 04:42 AM)LincolnMan Wrote:  What a great address to the soldiers! I always enjoys reading it. Too bad it isn’t read to the public, especially in schools. Thank you for posting!

I think that President Lincoln and the American Civil War should be a mandatory one-year history course for all high school senior students throughout the nation. It is fundamental to an understanding of the basis for democracy. This is especially true now and henceforward. Research online and books such as Doris Kearns Goodwin's Team of Rivals and Professor Michael Burlingame's Abraham Lincoln: A Life (Vol. Two) [especially for detailed research on a specific topic, such as the "Dakota 38"] are so useful.

[Rob Wick]

(09-29-2024 06:02 AM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  I think that President Lincoln and the American Civil War should be a mandatory one-year history course for all high school senior students throughout the nation. It is fundamental to an understanding of the basis for democracy. This is especially true now and henceforward. Research online and books such as Doris Kearns Goodwin's Team of Rivals and Professor Michael Burlingame's Abraham Lincoln: A Life (Vol. Two) [especially for detailed research on a specific topic, such as the "Dakota 38"] are so useful.

So, what exactly are schools going to give up to fulfill this indoctrination? Let's be honest about it, David, that's what you're asking for. Public schools are already pushed to the limit without having to include nonsense like this in the curriculum. All you want is for students to see things like you do. So what if someone wants to introduce a viewpoint that the Dakota 38 was a massacre and not an example of Lincoln's beneficence? "Students must learn to love Lincoln like I do. No other viewpoints are welcome."

Your hero-worship is getting tiresome, David.

Best
Rob

[David Lockmiller]

(09-29-2024 02:49 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  So what if someone wants to introduce a viewpoint that the Dakota 38 was a massacre and not an example of Lincoln's beneficence? "Students must learn to love Lincoln like I do. No other viewpoints are welcome."

Your hero-worship is getting tiresome, David.

Best
Rob

Who are you quoting here, Rob? Is it anybody that I know?

[Gene C]

Getting a little overwhelmed by the direction of this conversation.
Don't worry. Here are my Cliff Notes so you don't have to read everything.

The study of history (specifically Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War) and the understanding of democracy does not get the attention it deserves in most of our public schools.
On the other hand, some people consider this "indoctrination" and "nonsense"

Disclaimer - That may not quite be what was said, but that's what I heard.

[Rob Wick]

"Who are you quoting here, Rob? Is it anybody that I know?"


Given how little self-awareness you have David, I can't say whether or not you know the person being quoted or not.

Gene, I will respond to your post later today.

Best
Rob

[David Lockmiller]

(09-30-2024 12:14 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  Given how little self-awareness you have David, I can't say whether or not you know the person being quoted or not.

Best
Rob

"So what if someone wants to introduce a viewpoint that the Dakota 38 was a massacre and not an example of Lincoln's beneficence?" (Rob Wick)

Rob, you have a low appreciation for truth . . . at least, as it regards President Abraham Lincoln.

On December 26, [1862] the convicted rapists and killers died on the gallows while a peaceful crowd of more than 5,000 looked on. In 1864, [Minnesota Governor] Alexander Ramsey told Lincoln that if had executed all 303 Indians, he would have won more backing for his reelection bid. "I could not afford to hang men for votes," came the reply. [Ramsey diary, 23 Nov. 1864.]

(Professor Michael Burlingame, Abraham Lincoln : A Life, Vol. Two, page 483.)

David

[Rob Wick]

In actuality David I have a great respect for the truth, especially where Lincoln is concerned. That's why I have a hearty dislike for your child-like viewpoint about him. You prefer to make him a cardboard cutout of perfection while I prefer to see Lincoln as he really was, i.e., as a flawed human being capable of not only mistakes in judgement but omission as well. Feel free to continue to hold that view, but expect to be called on it as long as I am here.

Best
Rob

[Rob Wick]

(09-30-2024 11:42 AM)Gene C Wrote:  Getting a little overwhelmed by the direction of this conversation.
Don't worry. Here are my Cliff Notes so you don't have to read everything.

The study of history (specifically Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War) and the understanding of democracy does not get the attention it deserves in most of our public schools.
On the other hand, some people consider this "indoctrination" and "nonsense"

Disclaimer - That may not quite be what was said, but that's what I heard.

Gene,

I don't question whether students should get a proper education on American democracy. Of course they should. Where I draw the line is making a mandatory course on Lincoln and the Civil War. As David would design the course, it IS indoctrination because David would never allow all sides of the Lincoln question to be studied. He would rather make it a "rah rah" course on all of Father Abraham's superiority leaving out the areas that Lincoln was not quite as noble. And there are several places where he wasn't.

I'm in the middle of reading Jon Meacham's book on Lincoln, and I can just see David having a fit when Meacham doesn't raise Lincoln to the high heavens, which he often does not. Yet, Meacham's picture is a more nuanced portrait of Lincoln's evolution on the issue of slavery and basic human rights. I've often stated before that David's position is given out of fear. He's afraid that Lincoln cannot stand up to criticism, fair or unfair, so Lincoln needs protection. I, on the other hand, believe that Lincoln's reputation has survived all these decades in spite of those whose criticism IS highly unfair and yet we continue to celebrate his life and his work.

Much of my current viewpoint is informed by my study of Tarbell. Tarbell was often accused of hero-worship, but that was usually by academic historians who approached the topic promoting their own hobby horses. Yet reading through her letters, articles, and speeches has convinced me that she is about as far from a hero-worshipper than anyone could be. She definitely admired and respected Lincoln, but she was well-aware that deification of Lincoln took him out of the sphere of the common man, making it impossible for that common man (and woman) to utilize the lessons that Lincoln could reasonably teach us.

I'm not really sure why you're overwhelmed by the direction of this conversation, but this is where I am coming from.

Best
Rob

[David Lockmiller]

(09-30-2024 03:26 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  In actuality David I have a great respect for the truth, especially where Lincoln is concerned. That's why I have a hearty dislike for your child-like viewpoint about him. You prefer to make him a cardboard cutout of perfection while I prefer to see Lincoln as he really was, i.e., as a flawed human being capable of not only mistakes in judgement but omission as well. Feel free to continue to hold that view, but expect to be called on it as long as I am here.

Best
Rob

Some of us like to live in a world of reality.

---

(09-30-2024 07:21 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  Much of my current viewpoint is informed by my study of Tarbell. . . . She definitely admired and respected Lincoln . . . .

So, Rob, what exactly did Ida Tarbell write about the execution of the "Dakota 38"? Please use her words only and absolutely none of your own words "interpreting" what she wrote.

Are you able to accomplish that task honestly?

[Rob Wick]

David,

If you want to know what Tarbell wrote, look it up yourself. Going on my memory, I don't ever remember reading anything about it in any of her work, but I wouldn't swear to it. As to whether or not she ever did, what would it prove? She wasn't infallible. She admitted that she made numerous mistakes in her writing and actually welcomed when people showed her to be wrong, because she wasn't afraid of correction.

I have never once accused you of approaching something dishonestly, and I resent your ad hominem attack on my honesty. I think you are wrong in most of what you write, but I accept that you sincerely believe it. Disagreeing with someone doesn't make your opponent dishonest. Maybe someday in your perfected reality, you might consider that.

Also, you don't seem to grasp that I'm not saying those who disagree with Lincoln's actions regarding the Dakota 38 are right. I'm saying that they have as much right to present an alternative viewpoint of Lincoln based on new evidence or a reconsideration of current evidence. That their position might make Lincoln look bad is completely irrelevant to any discussion. To you, it's the only thing that matters.

Best
Rob

[David Lockmiller]

(10-01-2024 09:05 AM)Rob Wick Wrote:  David,

I have never once accused you of approaching something dishonestly, and I resent your ad hominem attack on my honesty.

Best
Rob

Just to be clear, I requested the following:

So, Rob, what exactly did Ida Tarbell write about the execution of the "Dakota 38"? Please use her words only and absolutely none of your own words "interpreting" what she wrote.

Are you able to accomplish that task honestly?

I agree that was bad phrasing of my request. I should have written: "Are you able to accomplish that task "exactly as stated"? I apologize for my choice of words in this instance.