(no subject)

[technoir]

"The world has never had a good definition of the word 'liberty.' The American people just now, are much in want of one. We all declare for liberty. But in using the same word, we do not all mean the same thing."

"What constitutes the bulwark of our liberty and independence? It is not our frowning battlements, our bristling seacoasts -- these are not our reliance against tyranny. Our reliance is in the love of liberty, which God has planted in our bosom. Our defence is in the preservation of the spirit which prizes liberty as the heritage of all men in all lands, everywhere. Destroy this spirit and you have planted the seeds of despotism around your own door."

Abraham Lincoln

Okay i admit he is not so saintly as history taught to us in school would have us believe, but damn but when he was right he was right.

Comments

[misanthropoid.livejournal.com]

He planted too, the seeds of our current debacle. A blanket assumption that we could promote liberty for all men in all lands was downright attractive in the mid-nineteenth century. At that point we were a potent subversive force against the tyranny of colonialism. Yeah, do you think old Abe had clue one about what the aftermath of withdrawn colonialism would look like in the world a century and a half later?

[technoir.livejournal.com]

he was actually a very savy guy. By all accounts I have read he was frighteningly intelligent. I do not find it hard to imagine he might have seen an im some small part an idea of what his policy might bring in the future. I also believe he would have made the same choices. He did what he had to at the time. Let us not forget however while the notion has been abused of late by some prety shallow players, This is also the concept that led us to some real good as well. WE have done some good over the years going into places we were not wanted and dealt with problems. Us going into germany was important in the second world war and only part of that was in retaliation to the pearl harbor attack. We needed to go in to that war and the attack only gave us the impeteus to actually do what we needed to to be done.

all of that asside i still say the words he used what ever his motives were good words and people should know them and think on them more often.

[misanthropoid.livejournal.com]

I appreciate and admire Lincoln as much as anyone. I do damn prior generations for their short-sightedness however each time I set foot on an Indian reservation or when I consider the political outcomes in places like Hawaii, Vietnam, India, Pakistan, Israel, Iran, Iraq, Kosavo, Germany, South Africa, or about 250 other places where well-meaning people made compromises that made perfect sense at the time, but for which future generations would eventually have to pay.

[technoir.livejournal.com]

agreed, but sadly that is the real burden of any leader or any man(or woman). do you make the choise that has the long view in mind or do you do the expedient thing to fix the issue now. Sometimes you drop the ball. Sometimes you dont. The truth is when your dealing with more lives than your own it is a terrible burden to make those choices. I honstly cant judge them from my perspective now. I can learn from them sure, but on some level we cant really understand the coices they made and why untill we are placed with that level of responsability. I cant honestly say my choices would be better.

Good discussion by the way.

[misanthropoid.livejournal.com]

The luxury of hindsight is a wonderful thing. World leaders have no way of knowing whether a policy of assimilation, for example will make them a China or a Poland. Go back a hundred fifty years and every country saw itself as the next logical progression from Rome.

We, as Americans at that time represented the first attempt at moving away from that old Roman model and into what the EU represents today. We balked. We elected Lincoln (now keep in mind, my ancestors wore the blue, and proudly) and clung to the ideal that a central government knew better what suited its constituent nation-states than did the locals.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating slavery or any of that jazz. I do note, however, that within 25 years of Sumter, slavery would no longer have been economically feasible even in the south.

By the way, hello. I happened upon your journal and have been enjoying it. Up until tonight I have not had the opportunity to either introduce myself or to engage you in conversation.

[technoir.livejournal.com]

A strong central government really is better for a nation the size of this one. If allowed to balkinize into what would have happened inthe south if the conferacy had won, would have meant we were just another collection of warring states on another continent. much like europe. A central government cuts down out right war. it gives a stronger economy, provides greater protection from threats to the people from foriegn and domestic sources. It has its downside mind you, but in the end strong central government is usually a better idea.

As to the notion that slavery would have become unfeasable has been bandied around and may have some truth. This of course is still debatable. Ever read a comic called Captain Confederacy. it came out in the early to mid eighties and was sort of taking the classic patriot super hero and turning the notion on its ear. But the notion was the confederacy had won and the slavery did pretty much disappear on its own but blacks were in a bad place politically. far worse off. The civil rights movement did not have the same kick as it were. makes for an interesting read dispite the controversy around the book.

Yeah i have seen you o other journals, welcome.

[misanthropoid.livejournal.com]

Sorry, though I was a comic book junkie in the days when such an addiction was economically feasible I missed Captain Confederacy. Yes, I agree that the forced end to slavery might well have been preferable to any alternative. Look at the farmer protests when dairy prices dropped below the costs of operation. They lined up their cattle alongside ditches and opened fire. No sane person could imagine that the outcome would have been any different for a workforce then viewed as property, had economics been allowed to run its course.

The civil rights movement however, and the government's response to it, falls subject to the same scrutiny I apply to all other convenient decisions. What about forty and fifty years later? We're there. What are we giving up now for the sake of expediency then, and if we dig down deeper, just where is that 40 acres and a mule?

[msrlapin.livejournal.com]

Perfection is a myth, and plans go awry. This is a truth that applies to the everyday and the affirs of nations. It's naive to assume that everything will go perfectly. Battles were lost in World War II. The best we as mortals can do is to stick to our principles, grit our teeth, and keep trying to do the right thing.

[gingererer.livejournal.com]

What are we giving up now for the sake of expediency then, and if we dig down deeper, just where is that 40 acres and a mule?

Regarding that 40 acres and a mule, General Sherman really had no authority to back up that promise in 1864, which is why it was never acted upon. Coastal Georgia would be a different place if he had, though.

[gingererer.livejournal.com]

Us going into germany was important in the second world war and only part of that was in retaliation to the pearl harbor attack. We needed to go in to that war and the attack only gave us the impeteus to actually do what we needed to to be done.

Well, the Pearl Harbor attack galvanized the American people into a unified front against Japan. Roosevelt had been itching for a while to get involved in the European war. We really had no choice except to get involved in Europe though. Germany was sinking our ships about twice as fast as we could replace them, often within site of major cities on the east coast.