Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Real Lincoln’

Obama, Lincoln and the U.S. Will history repeat itself?

October 7, 2013 1 comment
bigbrowatch

bigbrowatch (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

**********************

By Doug Hagmann Monday, October 7, 2013

 

Since arriving on the national stage, many educated people have compared Barack Hussein Obama to Abraham Lincoln in glowing terms. Obama himself has an interesting, if not peculiar, love affair with the nation’s 16th president. From quoting Lincoln to emulating his historic activities, such as his 2007 speech on the steps of the Springfield Capitol and his 2009 train ride to history, Obama seems to have embraced and even assumed the persona of Lincoln.

 

 

 

Read more…

Abraham Lincoln, Stepfather of Our Country by John J. Dwyer

December 12, 2012 16 comments

Anyone who embarks on a study of Abraham Lincoln … must first come to terms with the Lincoln myth. The effort to penetrate the crust of legend that surrounds Lincoln … is both a formidable and intimidating task. Lincoln, it seems, requires special considerations that are denied to other figures.”

 

US Postage Issue: Abraham_Lincoln_Airmail_1960...

US Postage Issue: Abraham_Lincoln_Airmail_1960_Issue-25c.jpg (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

– Robert W. Johannsen, Lincoln, the South, and Slavery

 

Indeed, it would not seem a safe time to critique the wisdom, motivations, and character of Abraham Lincoln. Steven Spielberg’s reverential motion picture epic Lincoln fills screens across America. The public increasingly accepts him as America’s greatest leader. Academics from the Left – and Right – compete to bestow the grandest laurels on the 16th president.

 

Read more…

The Real DiLorenzo: A ‘Southern Partisan’ Interview (“Our Republic Cannot Be Restored Until GOP Destroyed!”)

September 7, 2012 6 comments

 

When Random House released Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo‘s critique of Abraham Lincoln, The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, in 2002, it caused quite a stir. Dr. DiLorenzo eloquently and effectively disputed the accepted Lincoln myth, and the liberal academics who’ve made a living off of Lincoln’s unassailability didn’t like it one bit.

Born in Pennsylvania — southern Pennsylvania, as he is quick to point out — Dr. DiLorenzo earned a Ph.D. in economics from Virginia Tech and is now professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland.

In addition to The Real Lincoln, Dr. DiLorenzo is the author of ten books, including Official Lies: How Washington Misleads Us; The Food and Drink Police: America’s Nannies, Busybodies, and Petty Tyrants; and Underground Government: The Off-Budget Public Sector (co-authored with James T. Bennett).

English: Photograph of Thomas DiLorenzo. This ...

English: Photograph of Thomas DiLorenzo. This is a stock image taken from: http://www.mises.org/fellows.asp?control=16 I am a librarian with the Mises Institute, and am authorized to provide the Wikipedia community with this image. Please direct any inquiries about this image to clark@mises.org. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Professor DiLorenzo is widely published in the popular press as well, including the Wall Street Journal, Barron’s, Washington Post, Washington Times, New York Times, Readers Digest, and many other newspapers and magazines. He has appeared on the Fox News Channel, CNN, CSPAN, and the Rush Limbaugh Radio Show, and writes regularly for such websites as LewRockwell.com. Recently, he was interviewed by the History Channel for an upcoming documentary about Lincoln.

Read more…

Private Property and the American Heritage by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

July 12, 2012 2 comments

The Confederate battle flag has become a worldwide symbol of opposition to state tyranny. It has been flown in the former Soviet republics and in many other places where there are opposition movements to centralized stateoppression.

Thomas DiLorenzo

Thomas DiLorenzo (Photo credit: Gage Skidmore)

That is why self-described communists like Vanderbilt University Professor Jonathan Farley are so opposed to it to the point of hysteria.

Read more…

The Real DiLorenzo: A ‘Southern Partisan’ Interview

June 15, 2012 18 comments
English: Abraham Lincoln, the sixteenth Presid...

English: Abraham Lincoln, the sixteenth President of the United States. Latviešu: Abrahams Linkolns, sešpadsmitais ASV prezidents. Српски / Srpski: Абрахам Линколн, шеснаести председник Сједињених Америчких Држава. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Real DiLorenzo

A ‘Southern Partisan’ Interview

When Random House released Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo’s critique of Abraham Lincoln, The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, in 2002, it caused quite a stir. Dr. DiLorenzo eloquently and effectively disputed the accepted Lincoln myth, and the liberal academics who’ve made a living off of Lincoln’s unassailability didn’t like it one bit.

Born in Pennsylvania — southern Pennsylvania, as he is quick to point out — Dr. DiLorenzo earned a Ph.D. in economics from Virginia Tech and is now professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland.

In addition to The Real Lincoln, Dr. DiLorenzo is the author of ten books, including Official Lies: How Washington Misleads Us; The Food and Drink Police: America’s Nannies, Busybodies, and Petty Tyrants; and Underground Government: The Off-Budget Public Sector (co-authored with James T. Bennett).

Read more…

Was Fort Sumter the 1860s Gulf of Tonkin Incident? | revisedhistory

April 1, 2012 Leave a comment
CHARLESTON, SC - APRIL 12:  Confederate re-ena...

CHARLESTON, SC - APRIL 12: Confederate re-enactors stand on the ramparts of Fort Moultrie are silhouetted in the rising sun to mark the 150th anniversary of the Civil War on April 12, 2011 in Charleston, South Carolina. The first shot that began the Civil War was fired at Fort Sumter April 12, 1861 in Charleston harbor. (Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)

Lincoln, shrewd pragmatist that he was, realized he had opposition to a war both in the North and the West Mid-West and so he used the firing on Fort Sumter to rouse the war spirit in his own back yard where it had been notably lacking up to that point.

Supposedly the nation now had to go to war because the United States flag had been fired upon. But, from Charles E. Minor’s book The Real Lincoln not to be confused with Thomas DiLorenzo’s book of the same name we learn that the United States flag had been fired upon in the same place two months earlier, a fact which has been strangely ignored.

The steamer Star of the West had been sent two months earlier, on January 9, 1861, with food and two hundred recruits to relieve the garrison at Fort Sumter. At that time the flag was fired upon, struck twice, and the steamer retired.

The main problem there was probably the two hundred recruits.William Howard Russell, a war correspondent for the London Times wrote to that paper from America stating: “It is absurd to assert…that the sudden outburst when Fort Sumter was fired upon was caused by the insult to the flag.

Read more…

(“Some On The Right Hate Ron Paul”) The Stupid and the Dishonest Join the Attacks on Ron Paul by Thomas DiLorenzo

January 17, 2012 5 comments

Yet another neocon Republican establishment political hack has demonstrated ignorance, deceit, and bad manners in yet another attack on Ron Paul.

English: Author at CPAC in .

Image via Wikipedia

This time it is one Jeffrey Lord, a “contributing editor” to The American Spectator magazine. Writing in a January 15 article on the Philly.com Web site, Lord feigns outrage over the fact that five years ago Ron Paul told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the Civil War was unnecessary to end slavery.

Lord is being deceitful here by taking what Ron Paul said out of context. I remember Ron Paul’s appearance on that show, and the point he was making was that all the rest of the world – the British, Spaniards, French, Dutch, Danes, Swedes, the Northern states in the U.S. – ended slavery peacefully in the nineteenth century. His point was that we should have done what the British did, and used tax dollars to purchase the freedom of the slaves and then ended it forever. That, Said Ron Paul, would have been preferable to a war that ended up killing over 650,000 Americans (850,000 according the the very latest historical research) while destroying a large part of the U.S. economy. Lord is obviously ignorant of all of this history.

Lord cites my book, The Real Lincoln, to feign additional outrage over the fact that I supposedly called Lincoln a “Dictator-President.” He apparently suffered a case of the vapors when he discovered that Ron Paul listed The Real Lincoln as “recommended reading” at the end of his own book, Revolution: A Manifesto.

Read more…

Barack Hussein Obama An American Caesar

December 7, 2011 2 comments

Barack Obama Says He Wants To be Like Lincoln

Thomas DiLorenzo, Illinois - crop

Image via Wikipedia

Barack Obama says he wants to govern like Abraham Lincoln, and that should terrify every American citizen, because even Lincoln’s most worshipful biographers have called him a dictator. And the reason was as soon as he got into office, he launched a military invasion of the South without the consent of Congress, which is unconstitutional; he declared martial law and blockaded Southern ports, which is unconstitutional without declaring war; and he illegally suspended the writ of habeas corpus. There were over 13,000 Northern citizens put in political prison without a warrant, and without being charged. It is time to wake up America!

The Real Abraham Lincoln – An American Caesar

America’s 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, is hailed as the abolisher of slavery in the United States. But Lincoln’s reputation as an advocate of racial equality is pure myth and fabrication. So why did Lincoln invade the South? Thomas J. DiLorenzo, a professor at Loyola College in Maryland, recently discussed his book, The Real Lincoln, which includes a foreword by prominent African-American, Walter Williams, with World Net Daily‘s talk-radio host Geoff Metcalf. This is a transcript of that interview:….

EXCERPT ~ CONTINUES @ LINK…

*****

via Barack Hussein Obama An American Caesar.

Dishonest Abe – Interview With Tom DiLorenzo – Bill Steigerwald – Townhall Conservative

November 26, 2011 Leave a comment

Don’t hold your breath waiting for economic historian Thomas DiLorenzo to show up as a guest lecturer at your local Republican Party’s next Abraham Lincoln birthday gala. The professor at Loyola College in Baltimore has made too many enemies among Lincoln lovers and mainstream historians whom he says belong to the “Church of Lincoln.”

Read more…

Why the Old Media Ignore Ron Paul by Thomas DiLorenzo

November 16, 2011 2 comments

…..This, too, is why the media ignore Ron Paul. There are a few exceptions, but for the most part they have invested many years of schooling and work as propaganda mouthpieces for the state. They are as much a part of the state apparatus as is any government bureaucrat or any politician.

Read more…

CFP: Warning: The threat of suspended elections is real (Reader Comments…)

October 3, 2011 Leave a comment

Categories

Comments

Page 1 of 11 pages 1 2 3 > Last »

Read Thomas Delorenzo’s “The Real Lincoln“. “

**********************

Great Post!!!!!

Gunny G

Semper Watching!

*****

Posted by Gunny G on 10/03 at 07:53 AM | #

Judi, Congratulations on another great article. The fact that RLimbaugh read it on air tells us you remain at the top of your game!

Posted by Jim Lampe on 10/03 at 12:18 AM | #

Judi, people like you gives me hope. Because when I read this pathetic article, it tells me that if this kind of trash will be publish by the media, then serious writers with some degree of ethics (such as myself) can hope our work will be publish, too!

Posted by Jerry on 10/02 at 10:06 PM | #

Obama is losing the Black Vote.

“Five months ago, 83% of African Americans held strongly favorable views of Obama, but in a new Washington Post-ABC news poll that number has dropped to 58%. That drop is similar to slipping support for Obama among all groups,” says Ms LeBon. http://www.sflcn.com/story.php?id=10827 Oct. 2, 2011

We Are Winning Our Great Country Back!!!!

Posted by Andrew Luck on 10/02 at 07:41 PM | #

Another CFP writer, A. J. Cameron.recently wrote –

If a Presidential candidate isn’t willing to expose all of the fraud and malfeasance that is being done at the expense of the American citizen/taxpayer during the campaign and debates, he/she won’t be able to do so after being elected to the office.

Someone must come clean with us during the campaign and make a huge break from the pack of candidates.

It seems to me that this must be the Number One priority for our 2012 presidential candidate.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/40888

.

Posted by LizMN on 10/02 at 07:11 PM | #

How many minorities will vote for the Obama when they can no longer vote? (Probably a lot!)

Posted by Rick L on 10/02 at 06:59 PM | #

What you all have witnessed here is foundational physiological operation. This is why they are called elites, they appear to interact from a balanced mind when in practice that is not their aim. As we all see from the recoiling responses they have succeeded again. They have guided the discourse way off subject. Then they sit back and laugh.

They desperatly work to confuse everything so as not to allow a consensus to congeal into a movement that will stop their NWO.

Fillade

Posted by Fillade on 10/02 at 03:25 PM | #

When people resort to profanity to get their point across it only emphasizes how dumb they are because they cannot come up with a suitable and appropriate word to use in its place.

Posted by Nina in MA on 10/02 at 02:56 PM | #

Page 1 of 11 pages 1 2 3 > Last »

Click Link below…

via CFP: Warning: The threat of suspended elections is real.

GUNNY G: THE REAL LINCOLN…

September 23, 2011 Leave a comment

The Real Lincoln

"The Real Lincoln"
(CLICK PIC!)
Dr Thomas J. DiLorenzo Archive !!!!!


**********
Hey, See the Reader Responses on each article,
they are gems in themselves!

**********

http://i46.tinypic.com/2rptut4.jpg
**********
Gunny G: BLOGGER 1984 +
http://gunnyg.blogspot.com

and…
https://gunnyg.wordpress.com/

**********

**********

Lincoln and DiLorenzo by Walter E. Williams (via ~ BLOGGER.GUNNY.G.1984+ ~ (BLOG & EMAIL))

August 25, 2011 Leave a comment

Lincoln and DiLorenzo by Walter E. Williams Lincoln and DiLorenzo by Walter E. Williams: "In 1831, long before the War between the States, South Carolina Senator John C. Calhoun said, 'Stripped of all its covering, the naked question is, whether ours is a federal or consolidated government; a constitutional or absolute one; a government resting solidly on the basis of the sovereignty of the States, or on the unrestrained will of a majority; a for … Read More

via ~ BLOGGER.GUNNY.G.1984+ ~ (BLOG & EMAIL)

Will the Real Lincoln Please Stand Up?

July 25, 2011 2 comments

Professor Owens reviewed The Real Lincoln, by Tom DiLorenzo, in The Washington Times on May 4, 2002.

The book review does not withstand reasonable scrutiny.

First, Owens begins by describing the book as “a rehash of Confederate propaganda spiced up with touches of Marxist economic analysis.”

I think that someone has been watching Emeril.

Clearly, however, this is not a neutral or friendly review by Professor Owens. Ignoring the fact that one might accuse Owens of rehashing Northern propaganda (and spicing it up with touches of mercantilism and John Maynard Keynes), it is both highly amusing and distressing to see Owens accuse Tom DiLorenzo of applying “Marxist economic analysis” to the life of Lincoln.

Giving Owens the benefit of the doubt (and making his argument for him; generally, this is a no-no, but I am striving to be fair), it would appear that Owens refers to DiLorenzo as a “Marxist” because: (1) DiLorenzo (God forbid) considers the economic causes of the War Between the States; and (2) Marxists have considered the economic causes of the War Between the States. So DiLorenzo must be applying Marxist economic analysis.

No. Wrong. Such a charge of guilt by association fails to convince.

Worse, in making such a charge, Owens ignores the fact that DiLorenzo is a prominent expositor of free market economics, by which I mean genuine capitalist, laissez faire, free market economics, as opposed to the “free and regulated” baloney so common in the mainstream today, which is not free market economics at all.

Owens calling DiLorenzo a Marxist is like Owens calling Babe Ruth a figure skater. It is simply a silly characterization.

(By the way, in the last paragraph of the review, Owens mentions that DiLorenzo “writes from a libertarian perspective.” How this is supposed to fit with the earlier charge that DiLorenzo is a Marxist, Owens does not elucidate. And how convenient that the Marxist charge comes in the first paragraph, and the libertarian comment comes at the end).

via Will the Real Lincoln Please Stand Up?.

Did the Civil War mark the end of the US as a republic and the beginning of the US as an empire? ~ Thomas James DiLorenzo on Abraham Lincoln, U.S. Authoritarianism and Manipulated History (via ~ BLOGGER.GUNNY.G.1984+ ~ (BLOG & EMAIL))

July 16, 2011 Leave a comment

Daily Bell: Did the Civil War mark the end of the US as a republic and the beginning of the US as an empire? DiLorenzo: In The Real Lincoln I quote the historian Leonard P. Curry as saying that after the war there were no longer any "constitutional scruples" about squandering taxpayers' money on corporate boondoggles. The railroads were only the beginning of what is on display today with multi-trillion dollar bailouts of Wall Street, General Moto … Read More

via ~ BLOGGER.GUNNY.G.1984+ ~ (BLOG & EMAIL)

Lincoln and DiLorenzo by Walter E. Williams

June 8, 2011 Leave a comment

Lincoln and DiLorenzo by Walter E. Williams

Lincoln and DiLorenzo by Walter E. Williams:

“In 1831, long before the War between the States, South Carolina Senator John C. Calhoun said, ‘Stripped of all its covering, the naked question is, whether ours is a federal or consolidated government; a constitutional or absolute one; a government resting solidly on the basis of the sovereignty of the States, or on the unrestrained will of a majority; a form of government, as in all other unlimited ones, in which injustice, violence, and force must ultimately prevail.’

The War between the States answered that question and produced the foundation for the kind of government we have today: consolidated and absolute, based on the unrestrained will of the majority, with force, threats, and intimidation being the order of the day.

Today’s federal government is considerably at odds with that envisioned by the framers of the Constitution. Thomas J. DiLorenzo gives an account of how this came about in The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War.”

Posted by Gunny G at Wednesday, June 08, 2011

via BLOGGER.GUNNY.G.1984(+): Lincoln and DiLorenzo by Walter E. Williams.

Did the Civil War mark the end of the US as a republic and the beginning of the US as an empire? ~ Thomas James DiLorenzo on Abraham Lincoln, U.S. Authoritarianism and Manipulated History

February 5, 2011 4 comments

Daily Bell:

Did the Civil War mark the end of the US as a republic and the beginning of the US as an empire?

DiLorenzo:

In The Real Lincoln I quote the historian Leonard P. Curry as saying that after the war there were no longer any “constitutional scruples” about squandering taxpayers’ money on corporate boondoggles.

The railroads were only the beginning of what is on display today with multi-trillion dollar bailouts of Wall Street, General Motors and Chrysler, and even now the Greek banks which Wall Street must be heavily invested in.

Read more…

Thomas DiLorenzo Vs. Lincoln…

January 16, 2011 1 comment

Thomas DiLorenzo Vs. Lincoln…

Video

Read more…

Glenn Beck’s Lincoln Contradictions by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

July 18, 2010 3 comments

 

Glenn Beck’s Lincoln Contradictions

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
Recently by Thomas DiLorenzo: Inflating War

I’ve been occasionally watching Glenn Beck on the Fox News Channel and think he has done an admirable job of smoking out and identifying the shockingly hardcore, radical socialists who dominate the Obama administration. He has also done a generally good job talking about the libertarian founding principles of America, how they have been lost, and our duty to regain them. But he has been absolutely abysmal when discussing the subject of Lincoln, the War to Prevent Southern Independence, and its legacy. I suspect that the reason for this disconnect with historical reality is that: 1) The Fox News Channel is essentially a propaganda arm of the neoconservative political cabal that has captured the Republican Party; 2) One of the cornerstones of neocon ideology is Lincoln idolatry and hatred of the South and Southerners. (Professor Paul Gottfried, for one, has written extensively about this.) 3) Therefore, if Glenn wants to keep his gig at Fox, he must toe the party line on Lincoln. Being otherwise libertarian – while the Democrats are in power – serves the purposes of the neocon cabal nicely.

To the neocons, Lincoln idolatry serves the purpose of helping to prop up the centralized, bureaucratic, liberty-destroying, military-industrial complex that defines their existence. As William F. Buckley, Jr., the original neocon, declared in 1952, fighting the Cold War meant that “we have got to accept Big Government for the duration,” including “a totalitarian bureaucracy within our own shores” with its “large armies, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards, and the attendant centralization of power in Washington.” In case you haven’t noticed, for quite some time now the Republican Party has stood for war, war, and more war, and little else. How on earth genuine conservatives who favor limited constitutional government came to embrace Buckley as one of their leading spokesmen is a bizarre mystery.

When I debated one of the gurus of neocon Lincoln idolatry – Harry Jaffa – shortly after The Real Lincoln was published in 2002, he bellowed at one point that “9/11 proves more than ever that we need a strong central government.” (In reality, it proved the failure and incapability of “the central government” to protect even its own D.C. headquarters from a few nuts armed with box cutters.) “We need big, totalitarian government to fight all the new Hitlers and potential Hitlers in the world” is the neocon mantra, in a nutshell.

To neocons, Lincoln is the poster boy of militaristic big government that runs roughshod over civil liberties while bankrupting the country with taxes and debt and murdering thousands of innocent foreigners (not that Southerners during the 1861–1865 war were foreigners; they were fellow American citizens). Doesn’t this sound like the Republican Party of today, as embodied in the recently dethroned Bush administration?

Despite his admirable performances discussing the founding fathers, socialism, progressivism, and other topics, Glenn Beck has been absolutely awful and sometimes untruthful when discussing Lincoln and his legacy. During one show he claimed to have read the actual original copy of The Confederate Constitution. I assume he made this assertion to show that he must really be quite the expert on the document. I didn’t believe him when he said this, and his next sentence proved to me that he did not read the document. The next sentence was the statement that the formal title of the document was “The Slaveholders’ Constitution . . .” Anyone can look the document up at Yale University’s online Avalon Project, which warehouses all the American founding documents, commentaries, and more, to see for yourself that Beck was wrong about this.

Beck’s next false statement was that “I read it” (the Confederate Constitution) and “it wasn’t about states’ rights, it was all about slavery.” Read it yourself online. It is a virtual carbon copy of the U.S. Constitution, with a few exceptions: The Confederate president had a line-item veto; served for one six-year term; protectionist tariffs are outlawed; government subsidies for corporations are outlawed; and the “General Welfare Clause” of the U.S. Constitution was deleted.

The act of secession was the very essence of states’ rights, contrary to Beck’s proclamation, for the basic assumption was that the states were sovereign. They delegated certain defined powers to the central government for their own mutual benefit, but all other powers remained in the hands of the people and the states, as stated in the Tenth Amendment. As sovereigns, they had a right to secede for whatever reason. If a state needed the permission of others to secede, as Lincoln argued, then it was not really sovereign.

The U.S. Constitution adopted a federal, not a national system of government. That is another way of saying a states’ rights system of government. The Confederate Constitution was nearly identical.

As for slavery, the Confederate Constitution was not essentially different from the U.S. Constitution as it existed at the time. Beck was grossly deceiving when he told his audience that the Confederate Constitution protected slavery while saying not one word about how the U.S. Constitution did the exact same thing. Slavery had been protected by the U.S. Constitution since 1789. That’s seventy-two years of slavery protection under the U.S. Constitution. A Fugitive Slave Clause was written into the original U.S. Constitution, and the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act passed by Congress was never challenged constitutionally. That in fact is why the great libertarian abolitionist Lysander Spooner launched so many vitriolic attacks on the Lincoln administration. As a trained lawyer, he had laid out the constitutional case against slavery, but the Lincoln administration and the Republican Party wanted nothing to do with him or his peaceful route to emancipation – the same route all other countries of the world (and the Northern states) took during the nineteenth century to end slavery.

Moreover, Beck’s hero, Lincoln, orchestrated passage through the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives of the Corwin Amendment to the Constitution, which would have formally and explicitly enshrined slavery in the U.S. Constitution by prohibiting the government from ever interfering with Southern slavery. This amendment passed the Senate and the House just days before Lincoln was inaugurated. In his first inaugural address he said he believed slavery was already constitutional and then, alluding to the Corwin Amendment, said: “I have no objection to it [slavery protection] being made express and irrevocable” in the Constitution. This was by far the strongest defense of slavery ever made by an American politician, coming from the president himself. Beck and the wacky preacher posing as an intellectual made no mention of this.

More recently, Beck has admirably attacked the idea of “collective salvation” that Obama himself espouses, and which is apparently as much a part of the ideology of the American Left today as militarism fueled by Lincoln idolatry is of the Right. According to the doctrine of “collective salvation,” a Christian cannot be saved and go to Heaven unless one first embarks on a crusade to have government “save” the “oppressed” of society by expanding the welfare state, raising taxes, making taxation more “progressive,” adopting more racial hiring quotas, and regulating and nationalizing as much of private industry as possible. It is a variant of “liberation theology” which, according to Pope John Paul, II, is essentially Marxism masquerading as Christianity.

What Beck and his wacky preacher/faux Lincoln expert do not know is that the main supporters of the Lincoln regime believed in the exact same quasi-religious ideas. Indeed, it defined their very existence. As explained by Murray Rothbard in “America’s Two Just Wars: 1775 and 1861″ (in John Denson, ed., The Costs of War, Transaction Publishers, 1997, p. 128):

The North, in particular the North’s driving force, the “Yankees” – that ethnocultural group who either lived in New England or migrated from there to upstate New York, northern and eastern Ohio, northern Indiana, and northern Illinois – had been swept by a new form of Protestantism. This was a fanatical and emotional neo-Puritanism driven by a fervent “postmillennialism” which held that, as a precondition for the Second Advent of Jesus Christ, man must set up a thousand-year Kingdom of God on Earth.

To the Yankees, their “kingdom” was to be a “perfect society” cleansed of sin, the principal causes of which were slavery, alcohol, and Catholicism. Furthermore, “government is God’s major instrument of salvation,” Rothbard wrote. This is why the Yankees never seriously considered ending Southern slavery how THEY had ended it in their own states – peacefully through some kind of compensated emancipation. They were not so concerned about the welfare of the poor slaves. Indeed, even Tocqueville noticed that “the problem of race,” as he phrased it, was worse in the North than it was in the South. Instead, as Rothbard continues:

The Northern war against slavery partook of fanatical millennialist fervor, of a cheerful willingness to uproot institutions, to commit mayhem and mass murder, to plunder and loot and destroy, all in the name of high moral principle and the birth of a perfect world. The Yankee fanatics were veritable Pattersonian humanitarians with the guillotine: the Anabaptists, the Jacobins, the Bolsheviks, of their era.

“Collective salvation,” as opposed to the individualistic salvation that the Bible teaches, was what motivated the Yankees and their war on the South. This of course is exactly what Glenn Beck has been ranting and raving about recently when it is practiced by opponents of the neocon establishment – the exact same establishment that embraces the Lincolnite, Yankee millennialist fervor as one of its defining characteristics. That’s why the neocons constantly invoke Lincoln’s “all men are created equal” words from the Gettysburg Address (via Jefferson’s Declaration of Secession) to “justify” their endless military meddling in over 100 countries of the world. ALL men deserve “equal” liberty, they tell us, and it is OUR job to invade, conquer, and occupy any nation on earth where there is a lack of such liberty.

America was founded with the George Washington/Thomas Jefferson foreign policy of commercial relationships with all nations, entangling alliances with none. The neocon establishment, which is influential in both major political parties, believes in just the opposite: “entangling alliances” and endless military interventionism with as many nations as possible, all in the name of some undefinable Great Moral Cause, in the tradition of Dishonest Abe.

Of course, all of this high-handed talk about the Republican Party supposedly being “the party of great moral ideas” is also a convenient smokescreen for the economic greed that is its real motivation, and has been ever since the party first gained power. As Rothbard further explained: “On the economic level, the Republicans [in 1860] adopted the Whig program of statism and big government: protective tariffs, subsidies to big business, strong central government, large-scale public works, and cheap credit spurred by government.” It hasn’t changed much since.

July 17, 2010

Thomas J. DiLorenzo [send him mail] is professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland and the author of The Real Lincoln; Lincoln Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed To Know about Dishonest Abe and How Capitalism Saved America. His latest book is Hamilton’s Curse: How Jefferson’s Archenemy Betrayed the American Revolution – And What It Means for America Today.

Copyright © 2010 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

The Best of Thomas DiLorenzo at LRC

Thomas DiLorenzo Archives at Mises.org

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,073 other followers