Rediscovering Lincoln
Posted by Matt on February 19, 2009

This month marks the bicentennial of the birth of our 16th President, Abraham Lincoln. It is generally taught and understood that Lincoln was one of our greatest Presidents. Certainly, this garners some merit, considering that the continental United States consists of one country, instead of two, and considering that we currently have an African American in the Oval Office. We can thank Lincoln for both of these things.
However, on the 200th anniversary of his birth, many Americans on the left side of the political spectrum are trying to claim him as one of their own. Liberals will claim that Lincoln’s presidency was a forerunner to the administrative presidencies of Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt. They will claim that Lincoln subsided over an administration of social progress, therefore, how could Honest Abe be anything but a liberal?
I don’t think that President Lincoln can be tied to any modern political ideology. Lincoln presided over the Union in an imperfect time. There is no way that Lincoln could have been either perfectly conservative or perfectly progressive. For example, no modern day conservative would have insisted upon the centralization of power in the federal government. However, I believe that Lincoln only violated states rights because he truly believed that the Union of the United States was worth preserving. He consciously chose to preserve the Union, and in doing so furthered the Founding Fathers vision of a more perfect union.
In studying Lincoln’s writings, one can see that Lincoln considered himself to be a conservative, while both his political adversaries and allies considered him to be a liberal. In a speech at New Haven, Connecticut in 1860, Lincoln said;
“But you say you are conservative-eminently conservative-while we are revolutionary, destructive, or something of the sort. What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried against the new and untried? We stick to, contend for, the identical old policy on the point in controversy which was adopted by our fathers who framed the government under which we live; while you with that one accord reject, and scout, and spit upon that old policy, and insist upon substituting for something new.”
One can clearly see that while Lincoln considered himself a conservative, he also considered his beliefs to be deeply misunderstood. Lincoln was indeed a conservative in the sense that he governed with the intent to preserve the ideals of freedom and democracy on which this country was founded on. In an age of serious problems, Lincoln governed with serious convictions. He intended on preserving the union and respecting human life above all else. For that, he should not be judged.
Above all else, I think that Lincoln’s memory and tradition should belong to all Americans. Great leaders transcend politics. Our greatest leaders were those who cared about America above all else. Lincoln was one of those leaders.
dpcpastor said
Great Post!
John Lofton, Recovering Republican said
http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=1253
196: Beware! We Are Awash In A Tidal Wave Of Lies About The Murderous Tyrant Abraham Lincoln
On this program, John Lofton and “Institute On The Constitution” Senior Instructor Pastor David Whitney refute many of those lies. You’ll also hear: Pat Robertson’s preposterous praising of Lincoln (where is that “word of knowledge” when Robertson needs it most?); part of a pro-suicide poem by Lincoln when he was 29; and you’ll hear several sound-bites from the History Channel’s 3-hour program about Dishonest Abe.
Comments encouraged.
John Lofton, Editor
TheAmericanView.com
Recovering Republican
JLof@aol.com
Matt said
Alright. That sounds alot like what John Wilkes Booth was saying.
Paul G. Vangelis said
Interesting post, with which I essentially agree. Lincoln– whom I consider, after long deliberation, to have been our greatest president– probably underwent the most profound spiritual and moral growth of all our chief executives. He began as a canny and consummate politican– I would have said “wily” or “foxy” except that Lincoln was certainly no sneakier or venal than any other politician of the time– and grew into a statesman of the first caliber, who put right and wrong, considered from the vantagepoint of no preconception or “ism” — first. Of course, though this is what he grew into, he traversed a lot of ground before reaching that lofty plateau on which he finished. So many people condemn him based on words or actions of his early on… one thinks of the oft-quoted opinions on racial (in)equality, or his statement that if he could save the union without freeing the slaves, he would. Yet he grew beyond the parochial or partisan. Most of all, his compassion grew and grew until it was almost Christlike at the end — pure agape.
I must note that I consider myself to be on the liberal side of the fence, by and large. But I agree with Matt in this. Those things which Mr Lofton appears to take umbrage at– such as Lincoln’s suspension of Habeus Corpus, I’ll wager– were necessities in the extremity to which the nation was forced: civil liberties would not survive in a state of anarchy.
Such reviling of Lincoln seems to be a periodic indulgence among revisionists. (Equally so, the pooh-poohing of George Washington, whom I consider a very close #2 among the greatest presidents.) Lincoln, Washington and the rest were fallible mortals like the rest of us. What is surprising is not that they had faults and failings, but that in spite of them, they achieved, and indeed embodied, so much that is great.
John Lofton said
Ah, yes, “necessity,” the rationale of all tyrants for law-breaking — and Lincoln was a law-breaker, a breaker of God’s Law and the Constitution. Christ-like? No, more like Satan, the Father of all lies. Lincoln was also a racist who rejected the idea of black-white social equality while saying that if he had to choose between preserving the union or letting slavery continue, he would choose the latter. “Preserving the union” by launching an illegal war that murdered hundreds of thousands of his fellow-citizens. A most peculiar way of bringing us together….And he had no authority at all to prevent secession which, at one time, certain New England states wanted to do.
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
Recovering Republican
JLof@aol.com