At the effective end of the Revolutionary War, British troops marched out of Yorktown to the tune of "The World Turned Upside Down".
I get that same feeling when reading about today's Party of Lincoln.
I get that same feeling when reading about today's Party of Lincoln.
4
Nice points. Of course, the Homestead Act and subsequent treaties and violations of treaties led to an intense land grab that had a big loser. The aboriginal occupants of such land.
3
Funny. I read one of these "Lincoln was really a progressive who wouldn't recognize today's GOP, and today's GOP is full of bunch of racists" articles in the Washington Post a day or two ago. I guess the dog whistle went out to the liberal media to take the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the greatest Republican president's death to try to detach him as much from his party as possible. Sorry, Egan, Lincoln was a constitutional conservative, and the GOP still proudly claims him. And, really, you don't see conservatives falling all over themselves trying to rebrand FDR as a conservative. You Democrats can keep your true progressive/liberal big government hero, and we conservatives will keep ours.
1
I agree with Robert from Arizona. My husband is a California Democrat, I am a Midwestern Democrat. We are considered much more liberal today than we were when we started voting 25 years ago. I can't fathom that we are re-fighting the value of inclusion of principles or the privacy of personal behavior that we are today.
2
i think obama IS the lincoln of our day. they ave many traits in common, and the ability to be humble yet think big. both are great presidents.
5
Ahem, but supposedly humans are the cause of all our environmental problems, and the Democrats want to, at least, minimize the problem - so now all of a sudden they're welcoming anyone who wants to come to the U.S.? What a hoot.
Egan turns even a tribute to Abraham Lincoln into a partisan attack.
The country and world have changed in 150 years. The right thing to do then may not be right now. Does Egan want the federal government to give its remaining Western lands away? To whom? This land wasn't homesteaded because it is too dry, steep or cold for farming. Perhaps he'd like to give mining companies homestead rights. The "land grant" colleges were financed by giving federal land to the states. Does he want more land to be given away?
Abolition of slavery was a moment of moral clarity. Today's issues are more ambiguous.
The country and world have changed in 150 years. The right thing to do then may not be right now. Does Egan want the federal government to give its remaining Western lands away? To whom? This land wasn't homesteaded because it is too dry, steep or cold for farming. Perhaps he'd like to give mining companies homestead rights. The "land grant" colleges were financed by giving federal land to the states. Does he want more land to be given away?
Abolition of slavery was a moment of moral clarity. Today's issues are more ambiguous.
1
I was just inside the Lincoln Memorial last week and an inscription on the wall stuck in my head:
Writing about Lincoln years after his death, a reporter aptly noted:
"Washington taught the world to know us, Lincoln taught us to know ourselves."
There is no question that the Party of Lincoln have contributed to nation-building. As a nation matures, and as we also venture in global building, perhaps what the GOP needs another Lincoln to teach them about "themselves." David Brooks don't see that potential candidacy anywhere on the near horizon.
If the GOP is no longer interesting in "nation-building," true to many of its core values, what is there left to "fight" for?
As Sherlock Holmes once said, "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?" Perhaps the Party of Lincoln in modernity is an impossibility for the GOP, and what's left is an identity that has betrayed itself on a wrong path. Perhaps we are no longer just a "budding nation," or simply "nation-building," but truly "one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all." We might not have portrayed ourselves as such with political hysteria and mass media, but the rest of the world still looks at the west in trying to emulate many of its virtues.
You should have seen the number of Chinese tourists taking pictures on the lawns of the Lincoln Memorial. They are so very proud in America the Idea. That makes me smile.
Writing about Lincoln years after his death, a reporter aptly noted:
"Washington taught the world to know us, Lincoln taught us to know ourselves."
There is no question that the Party of Lincoln have contributed to nation-building. As a nation matures, and as we also venture in global building, perhaps what the GOP needs another Lincoln to teach them about "themselves." David Brooks don't see that potential candidacy anywhere on the near horizon.
If the GOP is no longer interesting in "nation-building," true to many of its core values, what is there left to "fight" for?
As Sherlock Holmes once said, "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?" Perhaps the Party of Lincoln in modernity is an impossibility for the GOP, and what's left is an identity that has betrayed itself on a wrong path. Perhaps we are no longer just a "budding nation," or simply "nation-building," but truly "one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all." We might not have portrayed ourselves as such with political hysteria and mass media, but the rest of the world still looks at the west in trying to emulate many of its virtues.
You should have seen the number of Chinese tourists taking pictures on the lawns of the Lincoln Memorial. They are so very proud in America the Idea. That makes me smile.
2
My grandfather came here from Russio circa 1885. He and his brothers homesteaded in South Dakota, land our family still owns. My husband came from Sweden after World War II. My parents and I were born here. When these discussions about "illegal aliens" began, we all had a family talk and realized that the new infusions of immigrants were what made our country great. All three generations of us worked to better the country. Now the mode is to destroy by a thousand cuts. So sad.
1
Hmm. So, today's Republicans are different from President Lincoln and the Republicans of 1865. Holy Revelation, Batman, stop the presses! Mr. Egan, what was the national debt in 1865? What were the tax rates in 1865? Outside of the war effort, what did the government spend money on in 1865? What were our obligations as leaders of the free world in 1865? In 2014 the American people gave control of Congress to the Republicans. Deal with it!
1
One can't help but look back at the 100 year anniversary. The emergence of the modern Republican Party took root with Barry Goldwater. The Great Society and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 put the stamp on the modern Democratic Party. As those roles continue to evolve so we've become more separate and less equal. Our future demands aspiring to a common good regardless of Party.
1
150 years after the Civil War was ended at Appomattox courthouse, we need to fight it again, by other means.
Mitch McConnell and Ted Cruz and their ilk can construct verbal smokescreens to hide their ideology of nullification and white supremacy, but it's the same toxic brew it was in the 19th century.
They claim that they're "not racist"--and yet, in the states where the GOP rules, the crude dog whistle insults continue nonstop.
These people practically rule the country now, but it does not have to be so. When will the rest of the country organize and defeat them?
Mitch McConnell and Ted Cruz and their ilk can construct verbal smokescreens to hide their ideology of nullification and white supremacy, but it's the same toxic brew it was in the 19th century.
They claim that they're "not racist"--and yet, in the states where the GOP rules, the crude dog whistle insults continue nonstop.
These people practically rule the country now, but it does not have to be so. When will the rest of the country organize and defeat them?
1
President Abraham Lincoln was a Republican. Seeing the Republican to-day President Lincoln was most certainly not a Republican. Nor was he a Democrat - Northern or Southern. He was not a RINO nor a DINO. He cannot be defined by either of the Party ideology as in the present. His Party was that of a Humanist, a Futurist and above all a true Patriot. One cannot find 1/10,000th of Lincoln's humaneness and vision in to-day's politicians - both sides of the aisle!
The dominant view inside the GOP right-wing bubble is that a large and ever-growing proportion of americans (Ryan asserts 60%) won’t take responsibility for their own lives and are mooching off the hard-working wealthy where:
- rising unemployment claims demonstrate laziness, not lack of jobs;
- rising disability claims represent malingering, not the real health problems of an aging work force.
Accordingly, the GOP sees it as entirely appropriate to cut taxes on the rich, slash support programs for the needy and unfortunate while making everyone else pay more.
- rising unemployment claims demonstrate laziness, not lack of jobs;
- rising disability claims represent malingering, not the real health problems of an aging work force.
Accordingly, the GOP sees it as entirely appropriate to cut taxes on the rich, slash support programs for the needy and unfortunate while making everyone else pay more.
1
The 1863 Homestead Act would now be considered Socialism.
In our "Yankee" town five miles from where the Pilgrims landed, I waited today at a stoplight behind a mud-covered truck flying large examples of both the Gadsden and also Confederate flags.
I've seen a similar sight before in this Commonwealth of Adams(es), Kennedy, Coolidge, Hancock, Franklin, Webster, et al.
I don't know what will happen to our "Union", but have a visceral concern about it that I can't put to words.
And, although it is unlikely, there are times when I also wonder at times if our 18 month old daughter will live as an adult in a country known as The United States of America.
In our "Yankee" town five miles from where the Pilgrims landed, I waited today at a stoplight behind a mud-covered truck flying large examples of both the Gadsden and also Confederate flags.
I've seen a similar sight before in this Commonwealth of Adams(es), Kennedy, Coolidge, Hancock, Franklin, Webster, et al.
I don't know what will happen to our "Union", but have a visceral concern about it that I can't put to words.
And, although it is unlikely, there are times when I also wonder at times if our 18 month old daughter will live as an adult in a country known as The United States of America.
1
Maybe Abe was wrong. The GOP is doing a pretty good job of fooling all the people all the time.
The electorate put the GOP back into power in 2012, even though it meant continuing political scorched-earth shenanigans and reckless brinkmanship. And again in 2014 the electorate established an even more powerful GOP presence. Obviously it´ll take a full return to debilitating GOP ideology to finally educate voters to the absurdity of what they are doing.
The electorate put the GOP back into power in 2012, even though it meant continuing political scorched-earth shenanigans and reckless brinkmanship. And again in 2014 the electorate established an even more powerful GOP presence. Obviously it´ll take a full return to debilitating GOP ideology to finally educate voters to the absurdity of what they are doing.
1
What a vicious, malicious, piece of political propaganda trying to hide itself talking about the final day of the first Republican President. A President and a party to this day that stands for freedom and individual liberty. The author says Republicans wouldn't pass a homestead act today giving anyone in the world that wanted it 160 acres. Well who in their right mind would? In 1864 we added our 36th state and had a population of 33 million. There was no welfare or Obamastamp or free healthcare program, and lots of empty land. Those people taking that 160 acres had to work it, defend it, and if they didn't they went hungry. Obama wants to let in tens of millions, but he has no land for them, no Jobs. All he has for them is a democratic voter registration card, welfare, and Obamastamps all paid for by other hard pressed Americans in a country that is already full with a population of 330 Million. Lincoln would look at our incompetent dictator wannabe President and look at us in shame for electing such an unfit person to be President of our Great Nation.
1
The next time Texass or one of the other Southern states threatens to secede from the Union, we should let them go ASAP. If they were not subsidized by tax dollars from the northeast, they would still have dirt roads.
1
Cleverly left unmentioned ,Lincoln publicly estimated that the newly freed Africans would never be able to assimilate into American society and suggesting an exodus to return to Africa ,created the nation of Liberia to which many did go. This prophecy remains true today in many remarks in this commentary,the discontentment continues long after the destruction of the Southern states by Mr. Lincolns Union military. Yet ,most history experts will agree that the abolition of slavery was not the cause of the war between the states ,it was only a result. The cause was commerce or strictly just money. I addition ,Mr. Egan the homestead act was concerned with settlement of the unsettled regions of our land . Today the dream act is concerned with the high electoral regions in metropolitan areas being manipulated with added voters and offering welfare and government benefits to immigrants who have never been legally able to receive such benefits in return ,thank you much.
1
The one problem with the Homestead Act was that it involved the ethnic cleansing and near genocide of Native Americans, since they occupied the lands earmarked for settlement. Very generous to give land that is not yours to give.
I invite readers of this article to read David Brooks contemporaneous panegyric to Lincoln
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/07/opinion/david-brooks-what-candidates-n...
the one where he suggested the Lincoln of today would be in harmony with gradualism, implicitly on gay rights, or on the "religious" right for Hobby Lobby to deny its female employees access to contraception on the same basis as their fellow American down the block at a less politically hijacked company, that the Lincoln of today would have the character and vision to go slow on disrupting the privileges gained by the gated community crowd, typically on the back of the underclass, just as back in the day John Calhoun, that great American after whom a college at Yale is named, warned against moving precipitously on abolishing slavery, that we treat with respect the deep pockets on the right, whose objective it is, with the help of ALEC et al, to get a government which will lower their taxes and cut off the "welfare chislers" -- called today the takers, not Koch Bothers makers -- that we will have their opinions considered with equal weight by a body politic formally committed in its Social Contract to equality of opportunity for all -- except when it gets in the way of getting their grand kids into Harvard or Yale.
Do the comparison, and make your choice about who has more firmly captured the spirit of Lincoln.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/07/opinion/david-brooks-what-candidates-n...
the one where he suggested the Lincoln of today would be in harmony with gradualism, implicitly on gay rights, or on the "religious" right for Hobby Lobby to deny its female employees access to contraception on the same basis as their fellow American down the block at a less politically hijacked company, that the Lincoln of today would have the character and vision to go slow on disrupting the privileges gained by the gated community crowd, typically on the back of the underclass, just as back in the day John Calhoun, that great American after whom a college at Yale is named, warned against moving precipitously on abolishing slavery, that we treat with respect the deep pockets on the right, whose objective it is, with the help of ALEC et al, to get a government which will lower their taxes and cut off the "welfare chislers" -- called today the takers, not Koch Bothers makers -- that we will have their opinions considered with equal weight by a body politic formally committed in its Social Contract to equality of opportunity for all -- except when it gets in the way of getting their grand kids into Harvard or Yale.
Do the comparison, and make your choice about who has more firmly captured the spirit of Lincoln.
1
If Abraham Lincoln were alive today running for President in 2016 well then...
.No member of the GOP would vote for him...in fact he would be most likely demonized by Rubio and Cruz and even McCain...
.No member of the GOP would vote for him...in fact he would be most likely demonized by Rubio and Cruz and even McCain...
1
So slavery is our original sin, and the author lauds the Homestead Act. Well, I think it's a little odd. Our greatest sin was the expropriation of the land from the Indians, and our managing their near extinction. This seems to be nearly forgotten, certainly never mentioned.
What a brilliant essay! Thank you, Mr. Egan.
"Thing will change" is wishful thinking. I have never read Eleanor H. Porter's sequel "Pollyanna Grows Up" (1915) but in my own version Pollyanna discards her sunny optimism with the realization that the Republican Party is composed of people who are solidly obstructionist, solidly white, and solidly dug in for a long, hard battle against any notion that they represent a new generation of white who keep alive the active, toxic legacy of the Confederacy. The Tea Party is a collection of white supremacists that is not just about racism but religious supremacy, and ideology supremacy with an undercurrent of Aryan Supremacy. My Pollyanna would like to ask Mr. Egan how we can change the minds of those who consider themselves to be the "master race" whether they hold that notion overtly or unconsciously, unaware of the implications of their deeply held beliefs.
Lincoln was a Republican who understood that a Constitutional Republic derives its power from the people and for the people. The GOP, like the Confederacy, serves only commerce.
Really,
Let's look at progressive ideas here in California. We voted to fund a 40 billion dollar high speed rail line. Guess what the liberal progressives has ballooned that cost to 100 billion. That is why we don't love these progressive ideas. What will be really interesting will be the backflips that the Democrats like Elizabeth Warren will have to do regarding social security. She says we must make sure that we all get our full amount. My wife and I are 62. At age 70 we will begin to receive almost 80k in SSI benefits. This will be added to approximately 125k in annual retirement payments because of hard work and savings. Will her New Democrat constituents gladly pay into SSI so this Republican gets back what he has been promised or will the new "protection " of SSI be only for those who did not put money away. Barney Frank in an interview suggested that SSI be limited to people such that if the combined income is over 100k then SSI would be cut dollar for dollar. So in my case after paying in for 50 years and being promised benefits I would receive zero. This will be interesting
Let's look at progressive ideas here in California. We voted to fund a 40 billion dollar high speed rail line. Guess what the liberal progressives has ballooned that cost to 100 billion. That is why we don't love these progressive ideas. What will be really interesting will be the backflips that the Democrats like Elizabeth Warren will have to do regarding social security. She says we must make sure that we all get our full amount. My wife and I are 62. At age 70 we will begin to receive almost 80k in SSI benefits. This will be added to approximately 125k in annual retirement payments because of hard work and savings. Will her New Democrat constituents gladly pay into SSI so this Republican gets back what he has been promised or will the new "protection " of SSI be only for those who did not put money away. Barney Frank in an interview suggested that SSI be limited to people such that if the combined income is over 100k then SSI would be cut dollar for dollar. So in my case after paying in for 50 years and being promised benefits I would receive zero. This will be interesting
Perhaps one of Lincoln's most important and critical contributions was his distinction between negative and positive liberty. Negative liberty referred to the first 10 amendments which placed restrictions on governmental power to coerce. Positive liberty, on then other hand, is expressed in the Civil War amendments and in the many policy initiatives, such as the creation of the land grant colleges and the opening up of federal land to settlement. The Gettysburg address reflects positive liberty through Lincoln's reliance on the Declaration of Independence rather than on the Constitution. Even today, this distinction is one of the primary differences between the political parties. For example, Obama's immigration policy, strenuously opposed by the Republicans, demonstrates a fault line within the polity which is nearly immune to reconciliation. But then so was the Reconstruction which failed to create full citizenship for black Americans, and which was only repaired by the Civil Rights Acts of the 1930's, over the vigorous objections of Goldwater,Reagan, Thurmond
and other founders of today's Republican Party, who hardly walked in Lincoln's footsteps.
and other founders of today's Republican Party, who hardly walked in Lincoln's footsteps.
Today’s Republican Party is the party of fear. U.S. Census reports predict that more than half of the U.S. population will be non-white by 2044. Although they may not acknowledge it, even to themselves, to most Republicans this is terrifying. As I see it, the only way forward for those of us who want to restore our country’s promise of opportunity for all is to get out and register voters and encourage voting based on data and facts.
1
Fundamentalists -Christians in our case - do not change much!
The dogmatic certainty of their blind faith is an obstacle to acquiring the emotional intelligence that we desperately need and is lacking in most of our conservative political leaders.
Listening to them squawk and rant populist generalities should be enough to alert their constituencies but they are of the same limited intellect.
The dogmatic certainty of their blind faith is an obstacle to acquiring the emotional intelligence that we desperately need and is lacking in most of our conservative political leaders.
Listening to them squawk and rant populist generalities should be enough to alert their constituencies but they are of the same limited intellect.
1
Egan: "But you can say this with certainty: what unites the Republican Party, on this 150th anniversary of the murder of Lincoln, is that they are against the type of progressive legislation that gave rise to their party."
Lincoln and what was his party had a work ethic at one time in our history; they labored to get things done, to move the country forward. The contemporary GOP, namely the Republican legislators we have in Congress and state houses are essentially "deadbeats." They do not have a work ethic and do not want to do any work that could be considered constructive, work that advances the public good.
Their deficient work ethic becomes evident when looking at elected deadbeats like Boehner and his Republican colleagues in the House; and to think we taxpayers fund their good salaries for doing nothing and provide them with rich health and welfare and retirement benefits makes me irate and nauseous
Suggest we no longer refer to that political party as the GOP, the Grand Old Party, but as the COD, the Confederacy of Deadbeats.
Lincoln and what was his party had a work ethic at one time in our history; they labored to get things done, to move the country forward. The contemporary GOP, namely the Republican legislators we have in Congress and state houses are essentially "deadbeats." They do not have a work ethic and do not want to do any work that could be considered constructive, work that advances the public good.
Their deficient work ethic becomes evident when looking at elected deadbeats like Boehner and his Republican colleagues in the House; and to think we taxpayers fund their good salaries for doing nothing and provide them with rich health and welfare and retirement benefits makes me irate and nauseous
Suggest we no longer refer to that political party as the GOP, the Grand Old Party, but as the COD, the Confederacy of Deadbeats.
1
I'm getting a little tired of this 'largest slave holding nation on earth' business. Here are the facts. 10 million Africans were transported to the New World during slavery times. Of that, 6% came to what would become the United States. The other 9,400,000 were transported to the Caribbean and South America, primarily to work in the sugar cane plantations.
It was Lord Marlboro who won the exclusive rights to transport slaves during his Peninsula Campaign in the War of Spanish Succession. So not so much with the 'heap on the guilt' business because the US was a very minor player and the vast bulk of slaves were owned by Europeans and the history of slavery in the New World was written almost in its entirety by Europeans; the British, the Dutch, the French, the Spanish, and the Portuguese being the primary offenders.
It was Lord Marlboro who won the exclusive rights to transport slaves during his Peninsula Campaign in the War of Spanish Succession. So not so much with the 'heap on the guilt' business because the US was a very minor player and the vast bulk of slaves were owned by Europeans and the history of slavery in the New World was written almost in its entirety by Europeans; the British, the Dutch, the French, the Spanish, and the Portuguese being the primary offenders.
1
It's a clever enough trope, though hardly original, to flip "Lincoln" as a modern day Obama (or Hillary). Helps erase the uncomfortable fact that Democrats were the pary of slavery, and thereafter Jim Crow. But what unites Lincoln with modern Republicans is the notion of freedom, which Lincoln believed belonged to all. This, in fact, is the troubling issue for Democrats, who are convinced people are too stupid to run their own lives. Lincoln's faith in all people to live free lives lives on, but not with Democrats. Nice try.
The GOP just can´t countenance a black man in the WH, regardless how capable, competent, healthy and wise. It´s racism straight up ... and as a result since 2010, the 112th, 113th, and now 114th congress’s, have endured unceasing obstruction led by Boehner in the House and McConnell in the Senate. They are the most shameful, lowest rated and least effective in US history. The GOP comes out of this with not enough shreds of moral or intellectual respectability to hide the putrid pimples on its rearend.
1
I share Mr. Egan's lament; to me, I lament my chance not to be more of an American; to sacrifice collectively with my fellow Americans - if only in a monetary way - so that future generations can't have a stronger America - better education, better roads, the best of everything.
I wonder if more Americans wouldn't be willing to sacrifice if there were a universal draft? Maybe America would mean more to all of us had we had to serve in a (peace-time I hope) Army?
I wonder if more Americans wouldn't be willing to sacrifice if there were a universal draft? Maybe America would mean more to all of us had we had to serve in a (peace-time I hope) Army?
I find this article rude, condescending, and offensive. Full of broad generalizations, it's basically a list of reasons he hates Republicans, cloaked under the sweet guise of admiring a 150-year-old Republican who almost qualifies for secular sainthood.
All accusations of which, I may add, are false and under-explained. Republicans are not all white. (I'm not.) Republicans don't want the Dream Act because it would cause irreparable harm to national security and the economy. How about an honest, balanced look at each of these issues instead of offensive hate-mongering, using Lincoln as an excuse?
Disgusting.
All accusations of which, I may add, are false and under-explained. Republicans are not all white. (I'm not.) Republicans don't want the Dream Act because it would cause irreparable harm to national security and the economy. How about an honest, balanced look at each of these issues instead of offensive hate-mongering, using Lincoln as an excuse?
Disgusting.
1
I am not sure I understand the "largest slave owning nation." Is this referring to the United States as a whole or just to the South? If the latter, was Brazil which continued slavery after it ended in the United States larger?
Thank you, Mr. Egan. An elegant article, giving rise to a thoughtful review of our history and of the present.
I must note that the only apparent tribute to Abraham Lincoln by the current Republican party trades on his birth and early years--"Log Cabin Republicans," a gay men's organization that appears to have zero influence on the party. Its very name is oxymoronic nowadays, somewhat akin to the wisdom of the old "Drinking Man's Diet!" Curious to know if even one of its members has been supported for statewide or national office. Carl DeMaio, the erstwhile candidate for mayor of San Diego who lost to Bob Filner, the Democrat, who ultimately was forced to resign due to improprieties, has "come-out" but I do not know if he is a Log Cabin Republican. His debut was after his loss when he decided to run for another position and announced his partnership in remarkable candor. But is he Lincolnesque? Hardly.
Lincoln was not afraid to spend money for national defense. During the Civil War public debt increased by 1,543%. There was no sequester of military spending.
Was it a good investment to spend the money and win the war? Is our economy better off without slavery and with enforceable civil rights?
Was it a good investment to spend the money and win the war? Is our economy better off without slavery and with enforceable civil rights?
My favorite quote from Lincoln propels republicans into amnesia: "Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." First Annual Message to Congress [Dec. 3, 1861]
A Masterpiece! One of the most eloquent, succinct and lucid indictments of all that is wrong in Washington today. The Lilliputian ideologues in Congress should be called out for their mendacity and venality. There remains so much important work to be done for the benefit of society, and the gap between need and realization widens day by day. How fortunate that this replacement column was printed today!
This is a very slanted view of history that exalts the principle of Manifest Destiny as if it was an instrument of progressive social policy when in fact it was just a cynical justification for the takeover by whites of Indian lands. Egan also whitewashes the entrenched racism of the North and its indifference to and even acceptance of slavery in the South. Far from being a statement of principle, the Emancipation Proclamation was nothing but a belated attempt to prevent England from siding with the South when it was otherwise in England's interest to trade with the South and compete with Northern textile factories. After the end of Reconstruction Northern business interests made a deal with the devil that institutionalized Jim Crow racism for the sake of normalizing their business relations with the South. During this time the Dixiecrats may have taken over the South, but they were able to do so with the complicity of Northern Democrats and the white immigrant groups they represented. Nowadays the Democratic party has attempted to cast itself as socially progressive but it has done so only by alienating its traditional working class base and aligning itself more closely with Wall Street and corporate interests. If there is any theme or connecting thread to all this sad history it is not the liberal strain of either party but the apparent willingness of both parties to sell out to the moneyed elite. The rest of us ordinary folk have just been fooled by them.
1
Lincoln was also a conservative republican when it came to individual liberty and responsibility. He once said true freedom required being free to eat the bread your hands have toiled to make and free to feel the pangs of hunger if you do not toil
I do think we can call this hatred of the poor a permanent phenomenon among contenders for public office. What we are seeing here is the same prejudices inherent within the deepest darkest slave mongers of the past.
As we all know, during Lincolns' lifetime, plantation owners were actually demanding to run their slavery businesses despite all the laws of the National government.
The same philosophies are firmly planted in the greedy hearts of their parties in their separate states, even unto this day.
We are hearing the proof in the statements coming from their wannabe representatives and also from those who already hold state offices.
Those actions are rightly called Evil.
As we all know, during Lincolns' lifetime, plantation owners were actually demanding to run their slavery businesses despite all the laws of the National government.
The same philosophies are firmly planted in the greedy hearts of their parties in their separate states, even unto this day.
We are hearing the proof in the statements coming from their wannabe representatives and also from those who already hold state offices.
Those actions are rightly called Evil.
4
The Civil War is not over, and right now the Confederacy threatens not just to preserve its way of life but also to take over the rest of the country, having already taken over the party that led to its military defeat. We did not have the moral vision or courage to make emancipation actually workable by making sure the playing field was level. The losing side waited us out and wore us down, and the Reconstruction vision of a multiracial society of equals was defeated by white racial solidarity and the image of the gone-with-the-wind cavalier slaveholding man of honor and principle.
7
What you are saying was certainly true in 1932, and parts of what you are saying was true even up until 1968, but slavery is gone, gone, gone, and with it the Confederacy. Like this op-ed piece, trying to tar all conservatives with an antebellum brush is doomed to be an exercise in wishful thinking.
Might as well accuse Ronald Reagan of having been a member of the Ku Klux Klan back in 1938.
Might as well accuse Ronald Reagan of having been a member of the Ku Klux Klan back in 1938.
I'm completely baffled, have been since the War On Clinton began when he took office January 20, 1993. The Republicans, of which at the time I was one, took after Clinton...the Clintons with razor sharp tongues & knives.
It got so bad with Mr. Star that this man.....me who had never cast a vote for Bill Clinton or perhaps any other Democrat since I became eligible to vote in the 1976 elections, quit the Republican Party forever! I'm not sure I'm a Democrat but I'm super sure I'm not a Republican & really never was one. Found out about the same time that I was no Baptist either.
I hate politics! If you love politics, you're a sick puppy. But once my eyes were opened in the mid 90s I've not been able to shut them again..thus dang near ruining my life. I used to be happy back when I was ignorant. It takes no time & effort to be ignorant but this staying informed is hard, depressing work.
I don't worry about Lincoln, too far back, but the party of Tom Dewey, Everett Dirksen, Ike Eisenhower, Earl Warren, Nelson Rockefeller, Jacob Javits & Win Rockefeller is unrecognizable. is toxic today, IS Fox News, has become the American ISIS!
They are anti-education, anti-separation of church & state, pro-gun, anti-science, adverse to the truth. They are pro-war, anti-union, anti-black, anti-hispanic, anti-women, anti-LGBT. Many are disloyal!
Look around at the 10 Commandments rocks springing up on capital grounds in the Red states. I hope the GOP goes the way of the Whigs!
It got so bad with Mr. Star that this man.....me who had never cast a vote for Bill Clinton or perhaps any other Democrat since I became eligible to vote in the 1976 elections, quit the Republican Party forever! I'm not sure I'm a Democrat but I'm super sure I'm not a Republican & really never was one. Found out about the same time that I was no Baptist either.
I hate politics! If you love politics, you're a sick puppy. But once my eyes were opened in the mid 90s I've not been able to shut them again..thus dang near ruining my life. I used to be happy back when I was ignorant. It takes no time & effort to be ignorant but this staying informed is hard, depressing work.
I don't worry about Lincoln, too far back, but the party of Tom Dewey, Everett Dirksen, Ike Eisenhower, Earl Warren, Nelson Rockefeller, Jacob Javits & Win Rockefeller is unrecognizable. is toxic today, IS Fox News, has become the American ISIS!
They are anti-education, anti-separation of church & state, pro-gun, anti-science, adverse to the truth. They are pro-war, anti-union, anti-black, anti-hispanic, anti-women, anti-LGBT. Many are disloyal!
Look around at the 10 Commandments rocks springing up on capital grounds in the Red states. I hope the GOP goes the way of the Whigs!
27
Rupert Murdoch is the most successful fifth columnist in US history.
"what unites the Republican Party, on this 150th anniversary of the murder of Lincoln, is that they are against the type of progressive legislation that gave rise to their party."
But maybe the progressives have gone too far? Would Lincoln himself agree with the deaths of more than 54 million fetuses? Would he agree with affirmative action which many say legalizes discrimination against whites?
I don't know what Lincoln, were he alive, would think. But what you are doing is the usual NYTimes trick. to turn the legacy of a Republican president into an attack on the Republican party.
I cannot myself back the current Republican agenda which can rightly be described as fattening the rich and waging war on the rest of the planet. But the agenda of "the other party" is not all that inspiring either.
We centrists who like to see both sides of an issue have been pushed into the background by your partisan wars, but who knows, perhaps our day will come when the whole truth, not the half truth of the Democrats, and the half truth of the Republicans will reign.
But maybe the progressives have gone too far? Would Lincoln himself agree with the deaths of more than 54 million fetuses? Would he agree with affirmative action which many say legalizes discrimination against whites?
I don't know what Lincoln, were he alive, would think. But what you are doing is the usual NYTimes trick. to turn the legacy of a Republican president into an attack on the Republican party.
I cannot myself back the current Republican agenda which can rightly be described as fattening the rich and waging war on the rest of the planet. But the agenda of "the other party" is not all that inspiring either.
We centrists who like to see both sides of an issue have been pushed into the background by your partisan wars, but who knows, perhaps our day will come when the whole truth, not the half truth of the Democrats, and the half truth of the Republicans will reign.
3
Please don't argue for the intellectual sophistication of holding simultaneous mutually contradictory beliefs.
FYI it's 2015, not 1864, so tell us how on earth was a new party allow to become instead of rehashing history over and over again. BTW: History may rime at times but it does repeat itself someone else, I don't remober, said more appropriately. And as far as not 'escaping' history, it sounds good but what does it mean?
As usual a very good piece by a very good writer. BUT the Homestead Act of 1863 is not a good example of "government for the people." The Homestead Act legitimated what had been set in motion by Jefferson's setting up of the U.S. Geological Service. The surveying, "shooting meridians," drawing baselines and mapping out townships had one major purpose and that was to put an occupying army onto the land, the settler. Here in Michigan that took place from 1815 to about 1848 and the Homestead Act finished off the Native American once and for all. The surveyed land was used to pay off debts to soldiers and of course to settle the land. Post Civil War just sped up the process by giving someone else's land to a wider group of settlers. No one "asked" the Native American for their opinion about the Homestead Act.
8
Since the Natives had no concept of property ownership, they were presumed to own nothing.
Thanks Mr. Leighton, I was going to post comments much as you give here, but
you did it before and much more eloquently than I would have done.
you did it before and much more eloquently than I would have done.
Mr. Egan has given us another splendid treatise on the failures of the Republican party to be a valid political entity. Opposed to self-reflection although an analysis of the 2012 election debacle for them by a Republican study group enumerated the party's failings, including obstinance on immigration reform, wage and inequality issues, and voting rights, ultimately ignored those findings and continue on their atavistic methods of control, discrimination, undo religious influence, and hatred of the federal government. (They do recognize that Reagan's push for states' rights, mirroring the Strom Thurmond/George Wallace racism, is their most valued path with Tea Party influence far beyond its numbers.) Sadly, as these trolls oppose anything printed in The New York Times, as they oppose anything our president proposes, believes, supports, it is unlikely those who need to read this column from the podia of all state conventions and the floors of the chambers of the Senate and the House, will not do so. Must maintain their purity as guaranteed by FOX NEWS, Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal. "I would rather have a mind open to wonder than one closed by belief." --Spirit Science
6
Don't forget their talking points that are distributed religiously (pun intended) so that the party and its so-called strategists are all on the same page to repeat over and over on the propagandist media outlets that have no semblance of professional journalism.
Thank you for your thoughtful article! Annemarie Bestor
5
The Southern tail has been wagging the American dog since our country's inception. The price of union has been too steep. We should have let the confederate states secede.
10
The US is still in the grip of a deadly compromise with slavery.
If Lincoln were president today the Republicans in Congress would impeach him.
11
Andrew Johnson, Lincoln's Vice President and Successor was impeached.
Had Lincoln lived he probably would not have met the same fate as Johnson.
But who's to say? Lincoln believed in forgiveness for the South. Many in the North wanted retribution.
Had Lincoln lived he probably would not have met the same fate as Johnson.
But who's to say? Lincoln believed in forgiveness for the South. Many in the North wanted retribution.
What an incredibly rhetorical question, could today's Republicans pass the Homestead Act?
OK, here's another one, in the same spirit: would today's northern Democrats have fought a war to preserve the Union? Or would they have let the South, and slavery, secede from the get go?
Probably today's northern democrats would have let the South go without much more than a whimper. And perhaps it would have been the Confederacy which passed a Homestead Act first.
OK, here's another one, in the same spirit: would today's northern Democrats have fought a war to preserve the Union? Or would they have let the South, and slavery, secede from the get go?
Probably today's northern democrats would have let the South go without much more than a whimper. And perhaps it would have been the Confederacy which passed a Homestead Act first.
2
The best writing and insights going!
2
If one were to step back and objective consider the positive benefits of today’s republican party, you will be hard press to identify many, unless of course you favor obstruction with no alternative, disrespect of others, social disorder, racial hatred, as well as being joyous over the murder of a black man by uniformed gangster.
5
This is an excellent article, demonstrating that the Paty of Lincoln has ceased to be.
9
The Civil War was barely over before Big Business took over the Republican party--and let's say, changed its mandate. The big war industries had come of age by then--military-industrial you know.
1
To remain relevant, Mr. Egan needs to check his statements of fact.
Brazil had the largest slave population at the time of the American Civil War, not the CSA or USA however you want to measure our country at that time.
Brazil had the largest slave population at the time of the American Civil War, not the CSA or USA however you want to measure our country at that time.
2
Oh, well, that makes it all OK. thanks.
15
Is it a coincidence that a Republicans Party that Lincoln wouldn't agree with is populated by members who identify with forms of Christianity that Christ Himself wouldn't recognize?
9
This Op-Ed is solidly true, unfortunately. I have lived in the South for almost 10 years. I have two sayings:
"The natives are friendly but they don't speak English."
And more poignantly:
"The United States lost the Civil War -- the South is still with us."
I see this in the local and state education system, the local slanted mis-information system, the culture, the prejudices, the corruption (yes, I saw corruption up North, but it was much different -- not imbued like a Third World disaster country).
The South is NOT the country I served to defend in my 30 years in our military.
end of comment
"The natives are friendly but they don't speak English."
And more poignantly:
"The United States lost the Civil War -- the South is still with us."
I see this in the local and state education system, the local slanted mis-information system, the culture, the prejudices, the corruption (yes, I saw corruption up North, but it was much different -- not imbued like a Third World disaster country).
The South is NOT the country I served to defend in my 30 years in our military.
end of comment
35
""The United States lost the Civil War"
There are also those who say that Germany and Japan won WW II, certainly as things stand today the USSR did not win it.
There are also those who say that Germany and Japan won WW II, certainly as things stand today the USSR did not win it.
2
That's quite okay. This isn't the country I served to defend, either.
Brilliant piece today, Mr. Egan. For those who think they can defend the Republican party as anything more than an un-American group of self-interested, small-minded cynics with no meaningful sense of virtue or value, they need only read this sobering historical comparison.
17
This distortion of history is nauseating. The welfare state has made unlimited immigration unworkable. The erosion of the middle class can be dated to the "reforms" of the 1960s that opened the US birder to millions of legal and illegal immigrants with no skills and illiterate even in their native language. This has been a policy of the Democratic Party to create a new underclass that is dependent on government and therefore reliable voters for the government class.
5
Every country that is serious about immigration control has a national ID card.
3
the "welfare" is for the employers. They get modern-day slaves either as illegal immigrants (who they can report to the USCIS if they complain) or H1B's who they can send back to India, etc when THEY complain about low wages and long hours. So Mike, wise up.
last time I checked, you had to be a citizen to vote...and the open borders are a reflection of the needs of republican businessman and farmers, not democrats...
Given the divisive nature of politics in the country, I am not so sure that either major party could agree on Lincoln's agenda. We live in sad times.
2
The Democrats probably would agree if freed from the control of multimillionaire plutocrats and their corrupting campaign funds.
4
Republicans are so quick to say "let's take back our country" but from whom? They also hate government but want to bomb to smithereens all other nations who have a common denominator, no centralized government. They make zero sense.
Lets drown government in a bath tub and have anarchy prevail! We need government to live a civilized life which is sometimes imperfect. I love these leaders of the red states. Go right ahead and secede and you'll find your economy treated like south east Asia by your big business buddies.
Lets drown government in a bath tub and have anarchy prevail! We need government to live a civilized life which is sometimes imperfect. I love these leaders of the red states. Go right ahead and secede and you'll find your economy treated like south east Asia by your big business buddies.
8
OK, I admit it, I read Egan to learn how to be a better writer. None better, damn few as good.
14
The Homestead Acts evidently followed Jefferson's belief that widespread ownership of land and relative self-sufficiency is crucial to a healthy democratic republic. As de Toqueville noted, there was a great contrast in human health between the economies of the family farms of the midwest on the north side of the Ohio River and the slave-dependent export-oriented plantations on the south side - a plantation economy designed to benefit a few at the expense of the many. How was it that this understanding lost, so that America has fallen victim to a plantation mentality?
.
.
11
Thanks again, Mr. Egan! A great column! If only Republicans would read it!!
12
One of the things that I admire most about Mr. Lincoln was his capacity to adapt his views and his leadership to changing circumstances. He did not start out in 1861 wanting to free the slaves. After it became clear that doing so would be needed to defeat the pro-slavery southern rebels, he issued the Emancipation Proclamation. That led, after Appomattox, to Amendments 13-15.
You are right that Lincoln's other achievements are both irrelevant to modern Republicans and unlikely to be matched by any lawmaking of today. While I am no fan of the Republicans, though, I hasten to say that Democrats, too, have lowered their sights too much. When Mr. Obama had huge majorities of Democrats in Congress between Jan. 2009-Jan. 2011, much more, and much that would have been ambitious, could have and should have been done. The health care law and the stimulus package were and are meaningful, but they don't tackle climate change, the cost of college, the continuing disparate treatment of women in the workplace, or the nation's continuing neglect of its physical assets.
You are right that Lincoln's other achievements are both irrelevant to modern Republicans and unlikely to be matched by any lawmaking of today. While I am no fan of the Republicans, though, I hasten to say that Democrats, too, have lowered their sights too much. When Mr. Obama had huge majorities of Democrats in Congress between Jan. 2009-Jan. 2011, much more, and much that would have been ambitious, could have and should have been done. The health care law and the stimulus package were and are meaningful, but they don't tackle climate change, the cost of college, the continuing disparate treatment of women in the workplace, or the nation's continuing neglect of its physical assets.
33
Unfortunately, Democrats had the ability to stop filibusters in the Senate only from April 29, 2009 until February 4, 2010 (Sen. Ted Kennedy died on August 25, 2009). After 2/4/10, Republicans could carry out Mitch McConnell's inaugural-day plan to block action with the goal to make President Obama a one-term executive.
Given the deliberate nature of the Senate and the fact that loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat could hardly have been anticipated, the more ambitious agenda you outline -- which would have been nice -- did not fit into that 9-month period.
Given the deliberate nature of the Senate and the fact that loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat could hardly have been anticipated, the more ambitious agenda you outline -- which would have been nice -- did not fit into that 9-month period.
2
President Obama took office believing that the opposition party loved America more than it hated him. He was wrong. That miscalculation wasted two important years when he and the Democratic Congress might have accomplished more. Isn't it telling that the most popular Republican leaders are not those who want to improve the country, but are the ones who are most skilled at demonizing Obama and the Democratic Party?
7
Perhaps that Massachusetts seat would not have been lost if the Democrats had moved while they had the filibuster-proof majority to get more done than they did. Besides, major legislative efforts in the past were not always put into law with such a majority. I do not buy the rationale that 59 U.S. Senate seats between the spring of 2010 and Jan. 4, 2011 rendered Mr. Reid's majority so weak.
One thing Mr. Lincoln would not have done is vilify another party. He would take issue with men and their ideas, but not generalize them because of a label they wear. He would have put many more days of thought into his essay than this writer did.
Are there any Lincolns out there? Do you know how many people have lived and died on earth, ever? About 14 billion. So half the people that have ever lived and died are in the past. How come most of the great men are in the past and not alive today?
Lincoln could never make it today. He'd be born with a stratospheric IQ, but his mother would most likely had survived, as well as his brother, robbing him of the damage that undoubtedly motivated him to large degree. He probably would have been given an iPad at age 5, turning his brain to mush, and then told how smart he is by his teachers for mediocre effort.
He couldn't have been honest in politics, because the media would have crucified him. When he made compromises, like the historical Lincoln did on the issue of slavery, he would have been called a waffler, or much worse.
There is a tyranny today of the media and the social media, of those who think they are right, that drown out and scare off the truth seekers. Flash mobs suffocate real thought. The populations statistics say there are more Lincolns out there, but they will never see the light of day.
Are there any Lincolns out there? Do you know how many people have lived and died on earth, ever? About 14 billion. So half the people that have ever lived and died are in the past. How come most of the great men are in the past and not alive today?
Lincoln could never make it today. He'd be born with a stratospheric IQ, but his mother would most likely had survived, as well as his brother, robbing him of the damage that undoubtedly motivated him to large degree. He probably would have been given an iPad at age 5, turning his brain to mush, and then told how smart he is by his teachers for mediocre effort.
He couldn't have been honest in politics, because the media would have crucified him. When he made compromises, like the historical Lincoln did on the issue of slavery, he would have been called a waffler, or much worse.
There is a tyranny today of the media and the social media, of those who think they are right, that drown out and scare off the truth seekers. Flash mobs suffocate real thought. The populations statistics say there are more Lincolns out there, but they will never see the light of day.
29
Who can be heard of the babble of 7 billion people?
Oh, go read Faulkner's Nobel speech. You've heard of Faulkner, right?
What is the answer when you demand "more" and there is no money left in the till? Just print more of it? Borrow more? Think it was Adams who would not engage in a war with Spain because the country did not have enough money. Remember visiting a Shriner's Hospital years ago and they could not give away more of their health care and considered Medicaid its most significant competitor. Amazing to me how absorbed and evilizing people are with the Republican party on NYTimes blogs. Math of the country does not work and the party that gets it the least is the Democratic party.
The difference between the party of Lincoln and today's Republican Party can be summed up in one word: compassion. He had, they don't and I doubt they will ever learn it.
9
Mr. Egan makes a strong case for the value of secession. and it could work again. Texas could start the ball rolling - and should take Oklahoma with it. The country had 48 states for most of my life, and we were fine with that. I love Texas -- I have been there many times, and always enjoyed it. But I have a passport! If there are constitutional barriers to ssecession, take them down. It's the path to a better America.
6
The Republican party of today is not the one of 1865. The progressive wing of the party went to Democrats between about 1912 and 1932, and the conservative racist wing of the Democratic party joined up in backlash to the Civil Rights reforms. So today's GOP is a coalition of a the big moneyed interests and economically conservative base of the old GOP leading the socially, and racist base of the old Democrats. A marriage made in heaven I say.
4
Looking at how even more obstructionist and socially backward southern states are today (and their overall drain on the federal budget which is truly ironic given their limited government beliefs), I truly wish that Lincoln's initial response to the succession news was "bye, don't let the door hit you on the way out!"
7
Mr. Egan, your article articulates my thoughts on this matter far better than I could, but it rubs me very wrong every time I hear modern day Republicans referring to themselves as the party of Lincoln. To me, when Reagan said that "government is the problem," he was spitting in the face of the man who saw the power of a "government of the people, by the people, for the people." Lincoln's idea is stirring and poetic, while Reagan's is sterile and undemocratic. But today's GOP is very much the party of Reagan: In their push for voter suppression and gerrymandering, their adulation of immensely wealthy donors, and their love of corporate welfare, they reject Lincoln's all aspects of tripartite vision. What a shame.
66
Call the GOP for what it is. They are a party of Royalists of a Confederate mindset. They follow a Plantation Mentality which is as deeply in the vein of the antebellum South now as it was then.
One population's "Dream Act" is another population's nightmare. The Homestead Act was carved out of former tribal lands promised to the Native Americans. Lincoln's humanism stopped there.
Also: the subjugation of the South following the War Between the States was the source of much of the resentment still present in America. The Southern plantation owners, those accused evil doers, were bailed out by Wall Street, and the poor sharecroppers, Black and White paid the price for their misdeeds.
Meanwhile, as Blacks migrated up North, Yankees got their own racist ideologies and practices going. But at least they weren't secessionist rebels.
On top of that, the re-united United States then took its newly created military muscle and started using it as an imperialistic power across the globe, complete with the first symbols of post Roman era fascism. Exactly what the founding fathers did not want.
Also: the subjugation of the South following the War Between the States was the source of much of the resentment still present in America. The Southern plantation owners, those accused evil doers, were bailed out by Wall Street, and the poor sharecroppers, Black and White paid the price for their misdeeds.
Meanwhile, as Blacks migrated up North, Yankees got their own racist ideologies and practices going. But at least they weren't secessionist rebels.
On top of that, the re-united United States then took its newly created military muscle and started using it as an imperialistic power across the globe, complete with the first symbols of post Roman era fascism. Exactly what the founding fathers did not want.
4
The Homestead act, along with the transcontinental railroad, doomed the native peoples of the west to near extermination by century's end. Nothing progressive about it.
7
Before we raise Lincoln too high on a pedestal, let’s recall the following:
The transcontinental railroad was built as part of the Union’s war against the Confederacy and was intended to bond the isolated Western states to the Union, not just another bit of infrastructure.
Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation freed only the slaves in the South, NOT the 428,000 slaves in the North. In fact, the Proclamation was an act of war intended to cause the Southern slaves to rise up and kill Southern whites. (It required a Constitutional Amendment to free the Northern slaves.)
Lincoln authorized General Sherman’s barbarous “scorched earth” March to the Sea from Atlanta, perhaps the first of many subsequent war crimes committed by the US Government (e.g., massacre of the Plains Indians, bombing of Dresden and other non-strategic cities in Germany, the entire Vietnam War, armed drone strikes against civilians in the Middle East).
Lincoln had the choice of not going to war against the Confederacy. His immediate predecessor (President James Buchanan, Democrat) believed correctly that there was no constitutional basis for the federal government to prevent the South from seceding and that in any case it would be immoral for Americans to go to war against other Americans. Lincoln chose a different path.
Truly, “Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history.” Just think. If we’d let the South go we wouldn’t have a Republican majority in Congress today.
The transcontinental railroad was built as part of the Union’s war against the Confederacy and was intended to bond the isolated Western states to the Union, not just another bit of infrastructure.
Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation freed only the slaves in the South, NOT the 428,000 slaves in the North. In fact, the Proclamation was an act of war intended to cause the Southern slaves to rise up and kill Southern whites. (It required a Constitutional Amendment to free the Northern slaves.)
Lincoln authorized General Sherman’s barbarous “scorched earth” March to the Sea from Atlanta, perhaps the first of many subsequent war crimes committed by the US Government (e.g., massacre of the Plains Indians, bombing of Dresden and other non-strategic cities in Germany, the entire Vietnam War, armed drone strikes against civilians in the Middle East).
Lincoln had the choice of not going to war against the Confederacy. His immediate predecessor (President James Buchanan, Democrat) believed correctly that there was no constitutional basis for the federal government to prevent the South from seceding and that in any case it would be immoral for Americans to go to war against other Americans. Lincoln chose a different path.
Truly, “Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history.” Just think. If we’d let the South go we wouldn’t have a Republican majority in Congress today.
1
The south might also still have slavery.
Because there were no belligerents in the South, I guess. Or virulent racists.
Hello Mr. Carnicelli, Not likely that slavery would still exist in the South. It was proving uneconomic in the 1860s and would have died the death of all inefficient economic systems. Much cheaper for the plantation owners to hire former slaves as day laborers. As slaves the owners had to pay for food, housing, and such. Note that these days what used to be called slavery is not called the labor market. Interesting that the current "plantation owners" North and South oppose having to pay minimum wage and pay taxes for low income housing and medical care. Some things do never change. James
The days when one could entirely disregard the carrying capacity of this planet are history.
3
Lincoln said the dead at Gettysburg fought to preserve a government of, by and for the people. Therefore, the people, the government and their respective problems are one and the same. Reagan, however, declared that “government is the problem,” meaning “they” not “we.” Indeed, the Gipper included government among the nine most terrifying words in the English language. The GOP can either be the party of Lincoln (we) or of Reagan (them). It cannot be both. Solving "our" problems is harder than blaming them on "the other." It would be worth rereading President Carter’s “Malaise Speech” for a definition of “our” problem.
51
Let us not forget that in the last couple of days Nancy Reagan came out for Hillary Clinton!!! Ronnie must be spinning in his grave....fantastic! Spin Ronnie spin!!!
Ronald Reagan, the second worst President in the history of the United States, George W Bush being the first. What irony, the scion of a New England WASP family became a Confederate at heart. Then again, the Bushes are Royalists and that is at the heart of today's GOP.
Lincoln was a Republican : a true Republican.
The so called "Republicans" today are the antithesis of republicanism.
They are iJust uncover their pretention ...They are simply the bought and sold
mouthpieces of the plutocrats who tell them how to vote and how not to
vote...they are a twisted mess of anti-republican standards which
Abraham Lincoln lived for and was murdered for..by a radical conservative.
who thought just like the many so called Republicans of today do.
Just...uncover these false bearers of the Party of Lincoln....one by one
and show them as they really are....anti-Lincolnites !!!
The so called "Republicans" today are the antithesis of republicanism.
They are iJust uncover their pretention ...They are simply the bought and sold
mouthpieces of the plutocrats who tell them how to vote and how not to
vote...they are a twisted mess of anti-republican standards which
Abraham Lincoln lived for and was murdered for..by a radical conservative.
who thought just like the many so called Republicans of today do.
Just...uncover these false bearers of the Party of Lincoln....one by one
and show them as they really are....anti-Lincolnites !!!
5
This article brought up what has been my yearning for many years. I'm basically Democrat, but have voted Republican because I was inspired by a giant and his vision in the Republican Party. My question and my yearning says, "Where are the giants that used to be in the Republican Party, people who were wise and honest?" It's sad to see where it is now and what the Republican policies have become. We need two parties who are only working for the country instead of their parties. I miss the giants.
Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt --- and that's about it. T.R. taught us that the true conservative is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insists that the creature of man’s making shall be the servant and not the master of the man who made it.
This is the triumph of conservatism.
http://lifeamongtheordinary.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-true-conservative-t...
This is the triumph of conservatism.
http://lifeamongtheordinary.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-true-conservative-t...
2
Eisenhower,
Though he only joined the Republicans a year or two before he became
President, was a good President and Republican. Gerald Ford tried to do his best.
Though he only joined the Republicans a year or two before he became
President, was a good President and Republican. Gerald Ford tried to do his best.
The Republican Party believes the wealthy make too much money to pay taxes, healthcare causes sickness, and more guns.
7
Just absolute nonsense from someone obviously educated well beyond his intelligence.
Why does the NYT allow such dribble?
Why does the NYT allow such dribble?
1
Maybe it's his ability to explain what he's talking about based on historical reality rather than simply hurl a pointless insult.
Face it. Lincoln was a great president. He was no Ronald Reagan. Or George W. Bush. He knew how to play the game of politics and win. But he wasn't winning to swell the income and assets of the wealthy or to free them from the costs and responsibilities of government. What kind of presidential candidate are Republicans going to give us? Lincoln or W?
32
Shame on those Anti-American Republicans.
4
A Democrat-controlled Congress voted to kill the Homestead Act in 1976, replacing it with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, which shifted the focus to conserving federal land. Today, the government is cracking down on ranchers who craze lives stock on public land, and Republicans are often accused of giving away the nation's heritage when they proposed selling or opening up federal land to private development.
1
If you're talking about bundy, you're talking MY land that he's using for private gain.
3
If over 150 years after the Civil War, we continue to be divided along the same lines, then the whole enterprise was a mistake, and it is our misfortune that Lincoln succeeded in tying both halves together.
2
A more perfect union wouldn't have states because they only introduce unequal protection of law.
2
Who is the "our" you refer to in relation to the misfortune? You obviously don't include the freed slaves as part of "us". I suspect they and their descendants don't consider the enterprise a mistake.
To be fair, modern day Republicans HAVE adopted one of Lincoln's central tenets: "With malice toward none; with charity for all."
Except they reverse it.
Except they reverse it.
10
"Government, in their minds, can never be a force for good."
The author has evidently never heard of neocons, social conservatives, or cronyists, all of whom consider government to be a force for what they define as good.
The author has evidently never heard of neocons, social conservatives, or cronyists, all of whom consider government to be a force for what they define as good.
2
It isn't necessary to travel all the way back to Lincoln. Ronald Reagan would be an outcast in the Republican party of today.
Agreed, but Reagan likely would have lurched much farther right in order to accomodate his plutocratic buddies and sponsors.
We lost our greatest president. I wonder what my part of the country would have looked like had he lived.
I am a lifelong Southerner, and I'll say it again that today, the South IS the problem. And the know-nothings who lay claim to Lincoln's political party are just fine with that problem. It will take demographic change, mid-century, to finally be rid of the problem and the ones who like it.
I am a lifelong Southerner, and I'll say it again that today, the South IS the problem. And the know-nothings who lay claim to Lincoln's political party are just fine with that problem. It will take demographic change, mid-century, to finally be rid of the problem and the ones who like it.
8
Most historians agree that Reconstruction failed for want of Lincoln's guidance.
Whose 'dream' was the Homestead Act? You know, Mr Egan, those 160 acres weren't empty before Lincoln invited the immigrants to fill them up. If the Arapahoe, Cheyenne, Navajo, et al. were not given the opportunity to reject the 'dreamers'.
2
Mister, Egan referred to slavery as the nation's "original sin." Is suspect the native peoples might dispute that.
Um, Calypso Art, I think if you re-read my comment, you'll find we're on the same side. You will win more arguments if you don't attack your allies.
While praising Lincoln, this op-ed points out that without the obstructionist, rabidly right-leaning states of the Confederacy, this country would once again be fixing its bridges, emancipating immigrants, and conserving it's natural wonders. This country is majority blue, vaguely humane, and mildly Progressive; the states that seceded are none of these things....and most of the Border States are no prize either. I suppose without the Civil War we'd have a long border with a banana republic filled with a restive black under-class and militaristic white minority, but the alternative ain't no day at the beach...
4
Awesome alliteration! The two greatest Republican presidents - Lincoln and TR - would not recognize their party today. Today, they are indeed as Mr. Egan writes the "party of 'no,'" and a complete lack of "vision and forward-thinking," unless of course you are part of the top 1%.
2
An all-American column. The know-nothing are still at it, and the pro-Lincoln, that beautiful man, need to keep at with Lincolns will and principles as an example. If he could, yes he can.
1
While most Democrats were out of Congress (and in rebellion), it also passed legislation helping to create both the transcontinental railroad and America's state college system.
If Lincoln were alive today, he would surely be a Democrat, just as Jefferson Davis would surely be a Republican. The GOP has changed so much as it has gradually embraced white southern conservatism that it should rename itself in honor of the architect of its "Southern Strategy." It should now call itself not the Party of Lincoln, but the Party of Nixon.
2
Ah yes, republicans......what do they give us in this day and age? A man like Ted Cruz who exhibits his bigotry at will, steeped in it and ignorant that so many people are watching him! He panders to a small minority, proudly trumpeting that he will stop the influx of the politically and socially oppressed, an influx that swept his own father to these shores. And his biggest and most eloquent offering? That he will abolish the IRS! I would laugh at him but I'm stunned that he is serious about being so ludicrous. Imagine that he could even believe that he could do such a thing (note how solemn he was whilst delivering this promise) or more unbelievable.....that anyone thinks that he could do this. A politician delivering this promise....could any savvy citizen vote someone offering this promise? Here is a man who lies baldfaced to us while begging for our vote. Would we even want to elect such a man knowing that he is THIS dishonest? Party of Lincoln, what a joke and what a stomach-churning example of how low the politics of AMERICA has sunken to! I gag at the prospect.
3
Cruz is a preacher promising better magic from God if elected.
In Canada, we have an English and French divide. It has been called, rather beautifully, in my opinion, the Two Solitudes.
This is, in a more extreme way, what the United States has become. All the 'worst case scenarios' have happened: a politicized Supreme Court, a rogue South, the electoral college's undemocratic nature, the kleptocracy, the extraordinary rise and rise of the evangelical right and the NRA - they've all come together in a perfect storm. We on the outside hold our breaths, but we aren't hopeful for a painless solution. One thing for certain is that you are quickly going into Yeats's widening gyre. It's not that you will all repeat a Civil War; you will just disintegrate, fall apart, become, if you aren't already, a failed state, Two Solitudes. And that's a danger to everyone.
This is, in a more extreme way, what the United States has become. All the 'worst case scenarios' have happened: a politicized Supreme Court, a rogue South, the electoral college's undemocratic nature, the kleptocracy, the extraordinary rise and rise of the evangelical right and the NRA - they've all come together in a perfect storm. We on the outside hold our breaths, but we aren't hopeful for a painless solution. One thing for certain is that you are quickly going into Yeats's widening gyre. It's not that you will all repeat a Civil War; you will just disintegrate, fall apart, become, if you aren't already, a failed state, Two Solitudes. And that's a danger to everyone.
3
Democrats need to keep repeating this obvious truth: 'people who think government is the problem shouldn't be in government'. Just like people who think music is the problem shouldn't be musicians, people who think food is the problem shouldn't be chefs, people who think buildings are the problem shouldn't be architects, and so on and so forth.
6
the pity is the south did not end slavery but stay separated, imagine how progressive our nation of the north would be?
2
Citizenship for all who live in this country; state-of-art infrastructure; college-education opportunities in every state; national parks and conservation?
Lincoln was for these policies. How can any patriot oppose them today?
Lincoln was for these policies. How can any patriot oppose them today?
5
This column is a bit disingenuous in that the republican party of today is most definitely not the GOP of the Civil War. On the other hand, it is hard to say they are the opposite, as well, as neither are the Democrats of today.
I do think it is more than a bit cheating for the GOP to still be holding "Lincoln Day" celebrations and claiming Lincoln's legacy as their own. As Egan makes clear, the GOP hates everything the GOP of 150 years ago stood for and did in government.
I do think it is more than a bit cheating for the GOP to still be holding "Lincoln Day" celebrations and claiming Lincoln's legacy as their own. As Egan makes clear, the GOP hates everything the GOP of 150 years ago stood for and did in government.
44
Everything is an absolute you cannot prove. I do commend you for hyperbole
1
This article spells out the magnificence of the first GOP President in this country. His courage, his ability to think beyond 1864 was incredibly beyond the pale of that day, and well beyond any of the GOP spokespeople during 2015. Infrastructure builds countries, creates jobs, creates ownership and economic growth but the GOP wants none of that. Just ask Rand Baby for he wants everything in this country to rot, especially anything related to the preservation of this union and the government which up to this point has proven rather elastic, but is now under attack by the ones who do not dream, or if they dream, they are one dream people and I pity the one dream man, What happened to our electorate? How can we fall for the rhetoric and absolute lack of legislative effort on the part of the GOP members n Congress, who by the way have not forgotten how to spew racist remarks, thoughts and behaviors to our first American of African and Indonesian descent. I am fearful and ashamed of the party that pits people against people, much like supervising a dog fight.
2
If you go to Youtube you can see a clip from "i've got a Secret"
from February 9th, 1956, where Samuel J. Seymour describes
what he saw at Ford's Theater when he was five years old.
from February 9th, 1956, where Samuel J. Seymour describes
what he saw at Ford's Theater when he was five years old.
1
It is sad that Timothy Egan uses an OpEd piece about the greatest Republican to spread the ugly bigotry of stereotyping the Republicans of the 21st century. What unites Republican today is a belief in smaller government, the rule of law, transparency in government, faith in God, and the constitution. Although these values may not be shared by the Democrats in Washington (an their editorial acolytes), they are more descriptive of the party I love than the ugly serotypes spread by Mr. Egan.
Your sentiment does not change the fact that everything Mr. Egan said is true.
If republicans are united by a belief in smaller government, could you tell your republican friends to quit making absurd and onerous regulations that interfere with women's reproductive rights.
1
I love your columns, Tim. Although these thoughts have been in bouncing around in my mind for a while your writing helps to give them focus. And I'll especially be thinking about what your wrote between now and April 15. I just don't know where this all ends. I don't think it's going to be pretty. Like the song says, It's hard rain gonna fall.
2
GOP control of Congress is why we are forging ahead in progressive states, like WA, to do what we can at the state level to live by our progressive values. We can only watch in horror while reactionary states, like Kansas, Indiana and Arkansas, lurch towards theocracy. Even if we had Lincoln as president now, not much good would get done while the GOP controls Congress. Is it time for America to call it quits and become two countries?
2
A fundamental qualification of the Homestead Act was that only immigrants who had been legally permitted to enter the country could apply. The Homestead Act last until 1976, when the Democrat-controlled 94th Congress passed the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. This ended homesteading and shifted federal government policy to retaining control of western public lands.
Not in his wildest flights of drunken delirium (actually, Lincoln was a teetotaler) would Abraham Lincoln ever have imagined that his country would be taxing income when not at war and not only spending half of it on entitlements but paying for it with debt to boot. We could afford to build a transcontinental railroad between 1863 and 1869, and to subsidize land grant colleges, because we weren't paying to feed our people and give them their healthcare.
As a matter of fact, there might have been five people in the whole country then who would have regarded such a thing as anything other than craziness.
Republicans in 2015 are trying to govern an America that is utterly alien to the one Lincoln knew. To compare the two worlds for the sole purpose of demonizing people trying to keep us from falling over the abyss is simply absurd.
As a matter of fact, there might have been five people in the whole country then who would have regarded such a thing as anything other than craziness.
Republicans in 2015 are trying to govern an America that is utterly alien to the one Lincoln knew. To compare the two worlds for the sole purpose of demonizing people trying to keep us from falling over the abyss is simply absurd.
2
So, the GOP is trying to govern in 2015 with an 1865 outlook. No wonder the country is a wreck. So what if it is unlikely Lincoln could not have imagined an income tax. The flip side is that with the tax perhaps much more public good could have been accomplished, resulting in a greater joining and knitting together of our nation.
Not in their wildest dreams, knowing well that it was a divisive issue, could the Founding Fathers have imagined their country freeing its slaves; nor could 19th cent leaders have imagined women voting and later primary education provided to all. The list could on. In Lincoln's time there was not even a single currency, let alone a Federal Reserve. Does that mean either of these was unworthy? Of course not.
It is cynical to pronounce "we weren't paying to feed our people and give them their healthcare." As a national community we provide for the poor, the infirm and the elderly. To quote Lincoln, "with malice toward none, with charity for all." That is how we do it. That principle is more alive today than he could ever have imagined, but not because of the GOP. That too is a fact.
The delirium is of those who declare the GOP is "trying to keep us from falling over the abyss." As both long and short-term the historical record makes clear, that view is the real absurdity. Egan is right. It is the GOP that is demonizing and it is of everyone who dares to challenge their backward views.
Not in their wildest dreams, knowing well that it was a divisive issue, could the Founding Fathers have imagined their country freeing its slaves; nor could 19th cent leaders have imagined women voting and later primary education provided to all. The list could on. In Lincoln's time there was not even a single currency, let alone a Federal Reserve. Does that mean either of these was unworthy? Of course not.
It is cynical to pronounce "we weren't paying to feed our people and give them their healthcare." As a national community we provide for the poor, the infirm and the elderly. To quote Lincoln, "with malice toward none, with charity for all." That is how we do it. That principle is more alive today than he could ever have imagined, but not because of the GOP. That too is a fact.
The delirium is of those who declare the GOP is "trying to keep us from falling over the abyss." As both long and short-term the historical record makes clear, that view is the real absurdity. Egan is right. It is the GOP that is demonizing and it is of everyone who dares to challenge their backward views.
If Timothy Egan wants to make historical parallels, I would say the Republican Party has hewn to its human rights and dignity basis over the 150 years since Lincoln, while the Democrats have done their usual equivocations. Republicans were founded to combat what they called the "twin evils" of slavery and polygamy. They fought to expand the pool of membership in the human race and to resist the absurdities masquerading as Constitutional doctrine in Dred Scott. They also fought to protect marriage. Democrats, on the other hand, equivocated about slavery ("popular sovereignty") and defended Dred. Republicans banned polygamy in Utah (a territory--another pertinent observation to Egan's comments, as most of the legislation he cites provided for policy in lands for which the federal government was responsible, not states).
Today, it is the Republican Party that defends expanding of the ranks of humanity by protection of the unborn. It is the Republican Party that opposes the cruelty of dismemberment abortion, just as it opposed the license to kill by slaveowners. It is the Republican Party that wants to protect marriage against ersatz versions, such as "same sex" marriage. On all these points Democrats march in lockstep against real marriage and the civil rights of the preborn. It is Democrats who, in their platform, their chairperson, and their politicians pledge unwavering fealty to the 20th century's Dred Scott decision, Roe et al. v. Wade.
Today, it is the Republican Party that defends expanding of the ranks of humanity by protection of the unborn. It is the Republican Party that opposes the cruelty of dismemberment abortion, just as it opposed the license to kill by slaveowners. It is the Republican Party that wants to protect marriage against ersatz versions, such as "same sex" marriage. On all these points Democrats march in lockstep against real marriage and the civil rights of the preborn. It is Democrats who, in their platform, their chairperson, and their politicians pledge unwavering fealty to the 20th century's Dred Scott decision, Roe et al. v. Wade.
The Homestead Act does not have anything to do in "obtaining" citizenship as Eagan tries to convey but was established for people to obtain land in the west if citizens met particular criteria, and immigrants were permitted if they filed a declaration of intention to become a citizen and meeting the other requirements.
To indicate the Homestead Act and the Dream Act are similar in a sense a similar is somewhat absurd given the circumstances of the times, when the nation was rebuilding after the civil war and further expanding west.
To indicate the Homestead Act and the Dream Act are similar in a sense a similar is somewhat absurd given the circumstances of the times, when the nation was rebuilding after the civil war and further expanding west.
1
Today's Republican leaders claim to love our great land and to have a noble, honorable vision for our country's future. However, a disturbing example of the dark side of their "vision" was reported in a Times story on April 2, 2015 - "Our Land, Up For Grabs".
This report notes that at the end of March, majority Republican votes in the Senate and House of Representatives approved resolutions for greatly reducing the "federal estate" which is "far too large".
These resolutions support selling or giving away "all federal lands other than the national parks and monuments." - "If (these measures are) ever implemented, hundreds of millions of acres of national forests, range lands, wildlife refuges, wilderness areas and historic sites will revert to state or local governments to be auctioned off" (or given away). "These lands constitute much of what's left of the nation's natural and historical heritage."
It seems like this report quickly disappeared under the tide of larger news stories, but I really hope that Hillary Clinton, and other fair-minded, reality-oriented spokespersons (this includes you, Rachel Maddow), will repeatedly include this example of misguided Republican "patriotism" in public discussions as we move into the upcoming Presidential campaigns.
It is so sad that many Main Street Republican voters have been hoodwinked into believing that "We The People" have no stake in the common ownership of Federal lands.
This report notes that at the end of March, majority Republican votes in the Senate and House of Representatives approved resolutions for greatly reducing the "federal estate" which is "far too large".
These resolutions support selling or giving away "all federal lands other than the national parks and monuments." - "If (these measures are) ever implemented, hundreds of millions of acres of national forests, range lands, wildlife refuges, wilderness areas and historic sites will revert to state or local governments to be auctioned off" (or given away). "These lands constitute much of what's left of the nation's natural and historical heritage."
It seems like this report quickly disappeared under the tide of larger news stories, but I really hope that Hillary Clinton, and other fair-minded, reality-oriented spokespersons (this includes you, Rachel Maddow), will repeatedly include this example of misguided Republican "patriotism" in public discussions as we move into the upcoming Presidential campaigns.
It is so sad that many Main Street Republican voters have been hoodwinked into believing that "We The People" have no stake in the common ownership of Federal lands.
3
That was 150 years ago. A lot has changed. The USA is overpopulated. How many quarter square feet plots are left for the citizens and non citizens? How many of those people were undocumented? Most came legally through Ellis Island.
150 years ago people used rifles to supply their food. There is no longer the same need for rifles. The country was agrarian. (There was enough land to be agrarian). No large industry then. Of course no large industry anymore either.
150 years ago we were doing atrocious things to the Native Americans. Now we do atrocious things to our citizens and foreign countries.
The country was developing. It was still new. People worked hard (did not just sit in banks and figure out how they could rob people. People died at a much younger age which left jobs and property to the younger generation.
I am not necessarily saying things were better or worse then. They were different. Different problems require different solutions.
Lincoln did amazing things and he suffered greatly (even with his life) for them. It was never certain he would be able to get enough votes from congress to pass those laws. Obstructionism?
We don't have any politicians doing amazing things anymore. They don't do anything. They are not looking for solutions to problems. They are only looking for a way to stay in office. In fact, many of them are still living in the dark ages. Yes, we need a Lincoln again, one that can deal with today's problems.
150 years ago people used rifles to supply their food. There is no longer the same need for rifles. The country was agrarian. (There was enough land to be agrarian). No large industry then. Of course no large industry anymore either.
150 years ago we were doing atrocious things to the Native Americans. Now we do atrocious things to our citizens and foreign countries.
The country was developing. It was still new. People worked hard (did not just sit in banks and figure out how they could rob people. People died at a much younger age which left jobs and property to the younger generation.
I am not necessarily saying things were better or worse then. They were different. Different problems require different solutions.
Lincoln did amazing things and he suffered greatly (even with his life) for them. It was never certain he would be able to get enough votes from congress to pass those laws. Obstructionism?
We don't have any politicians doing amazing things anymore. They don't do anything. They are not looking for solutions to problems. They are only looking for a way to stay in office. In fact, many of them are still living in the dark ages. Yes, we need a Lincoln again, one that can deal with today's problems.
1
There is a path to citizenship and it's very clear. Thousands of people are waiting in line, for that opportunity. Others have decided the rules don't apply to them.
3
And what would suit Mr. Egan more--a one-party system? Or perhaps a rubber stamp Congress that would pass everything the King proposes? I think we've already had a Revolution that would prevent such a thing from happening.
3
Why would you conclude that? Nothing in the article advocates a one party system. There's nothing to stop 2 parties with imagination for how the US can be better. A lack of imagination suggest you are a republican :)
2
Funny thing is, I don't recall that either/or construct as part of Egan's argument. No one asks for a rubber stamp, just that the GOP actually be engaged in the process of legislating. That would be a good start, and maybe all we can truly hope to ask for as it continues its ineluctable slide into irrelevancy.
Insert finger in mouth.
An excellent article. The Republican party of today is indeed the party of "No." Specifically it seems to be the party of "No imagination." I can't think of any inspiring ideas, legislation, basically anything that they have done in the last 10 years that's praiseworthy.
For example, Sen. James Inhofe, brings a large snowball to the Senate floor as evidence or proof that the globe is not warming. It's this kind of political "leadership" that makes me fear for the country.
For example, Sen. James Inhofe, brings a large snowball to the Senate floor as evidence or proof that the globe is not warming. It's this kind of political "leadership" that makes me fear for the country.
13
The Republican Party promises us more effective idolatry from drippier choirboys for better divine intervention. There isn't a grown-up in the party.
While reading this lovely article, the words of the poet came to mind. What the Republican party once was and what it has become today is most aptly put with this quote.
“Of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these, 'It might have been.”
The Republican party today might have been the party of Lincoln had they not welcomed with open arms all of the Dixiecrats who changed parties after LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act. From that act alone they began the destruction of the party of Lincoln into something that is impossible for truly honorable people to respect or to be a member of.
“Of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these, 'It might have been.”
The Republican party today might have been the party of Lincoln had they not welcomed with open arms all of the Dixiecrats who changed parties after LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act. From that act alone they began the destruction of the party of Lincoln into something that is impossible for truly honorable people to respect or to be a member of.
5
Republicans are ashamed of progressive Lincoln who damaged businesses in the South by freeing the slaves. Instead they champion Reagan, whose presidency heralded steep inequality of income and opportunity. Yay team.
5
Great writing Mr. Egan and a cleaver take on the contrast between the former and present republicans and their party.
5
What a great and super accurate commentary on the pitiful state of today's Republican party. Thanks, Mr. Egan. Now for the painful part of reading what current devoted members of the "GOP" have to say to you in this comment section.
5
Mr. Egan, you would do well to expand this piece, it us such an insightful and stirring look at our greatest president in comparison to the field of polticians currently making themselves available.
4
I think I finally get it. "When we due ourselves in it will be from within not from the outside that we are destroyed." Who was it that said that? What seems so dysfunctional to me keeps on winning elections. Sanity is rare. Much more rare then I thought. It's really frightening.
1
Together with the other progressive milestones during Lincoln's presidency, you might also note that May 1863 saw the creation of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences -- a major bulwark of our nation's power, prosperity and prestige.
4
We are witnessing, in today's Republican party, an extreme case of devolution.
2
Lincoln (and Teddy Roosevelt) would be nauseated by today's Republican party and would instead either join today's Democratic party or start a new party.
6
The Southern Strategy remains the failing glue of this dissolving Republican party. We are not watching the desth of the Party of Lincoln. This column shows persuasively it died years ago.
5
An eye opener, Mr. Egan.
The Grand Old Party of Lincoln was hijacked by reactionaries who say they want to take the country back. What they mean is they want a country that existed in the 19th Century--the Confederate States of America; a country where white Protestants rule and everyone else is held as inferior. They still endorse slavery too, but by another name: minimum wage workers without any benefits who are denied suffrage by restrictive laws.
The reactionaries who claim the banner of the Republican Party today are an embarrassment to the Grand Old Party of Lincoln. Their claims to Lincoln's heritage are like all of their claims--lies that only fool the foolish.
The Grand Old Party of Lincoln was hijacked by reactionaries who say they want to take the country back. What they mean is they want a country that existed in the 19th Century--the Confederate States of America; a country where white Protestants rule and everyone else is held as inferior. They still endorse slavery too, but by another name: minimum wage workers without any benefits who are denied suffrage by restrictive laws.
The reactionaries who claim the banner of the Republican Party today are an embarrassment to the Grand Old Party of Lincoln. Their claims to Lincoln's heritage are like all of their claims--lies that only fool the foolish.
9
My older brother once said to me (and this was several years ago), "if could see his party today, he would roll over in his grave." (BTW - Wonderful article!)
6
You are absolutely correct. The Republican Party has long since ceased to be the party of Lincoln.
5
In my lifetime, which is long, I have never seen such racism, hatred and meanness in any group of human beings than in the Republican Party today. The rest of our citizens don't seem to know it, or to care, or to know that they are being bought and sold, or to know what to do. Mass education on a simple level, not spitting and hissing between left and right, is the only answer. We need the 99% to rise again, focus their game, use every weapon including Social Media, and turn this country around.
12
I'm not sure either party really serves the needs of the "little guy." Politicians from both parties link to big money. Reminds me of the "republican doctrine" that the founding fathers preferred, long before a Republican party. For the founding fathers, the goal of the U.S. Constitution was to protect private property, promote individual liberty (to gain more private property--John Locke), and limit the power of government so that government did not get in the way of those who had the most to gain more. Why not be honest and teach our kids the basic foundation of the U.S. Constitution in the first place?
23
Ah...teach our kids.... From White House to the State Houses, the testing juggernaut with its entwined accountability movement is ensuring that few if any children will learn civics, history, that the US is a republic and just what that means.
1
We would first have to agree on the meaning and purpose of the U.S. Constitution, and many of us disagree that its principal goal was to advance economic prosperity for the few. Yes, it certainly protects property rights, and yes, that was a goal of the men who negotiated its terms and wrote it. But it does far more than that, too and it certainly does not place property above the common good.
1
Julie, you and so many Republicans, need to actually go back and take an unbiased look at what the Founding Father's stood for. Washington was a federalist, as was Hamilton, and both were instrumental in the vast expansion of federal power over the states. For his part Jefferson recognized the dangers inherent in establishing a Christian nation and insisted upon a strict separation of church and state. And by the way none of these guys were regular church goers. Look it up. Please.
Nailed it.
8
More Timothy Egan! More!
6
Leave it to Egan to tarnish Lincoln this way.
1
I find my feelings toward Lincoln's desire to preserve the nation - the Union - disturbing. Some days I think we would be better off with the Union of America and the Confederacy of America. I don't feel I have anything in common with those who represent the South and much of the midWest. They receive more money in tax dollars than they contribute; they oppose national health care and abortion rights; they seem only interested in fighting more wars in the Middle East, they deny global warming and pay poor salaries to teachers ... there is nothing I agree with those who live in the South. Nothing in common. If they want to have slaves and deny women and the poor health care and continue to burn coal and ... please do so without my support. Yes, i wonder if 500,000 should not have given their lives. I'm very uncomfortable with my feelings, but equally displeased with the ultro conservatism of the South/midwest. No, the Republicans of these states do not in anyway share the vision and hopes of A. Lincoln.
8
Tiresome retread of GOP hatred. Never an examination of Democrats failures.
5
Great essay Tim.
5
It is Obvious that President Lincoln understood the need for the use of military force, to which President Obama may have that same understanding, but he is much more passive and less willing and less likely to use such military force as and when needed.
There is no period in the history of the human race when there has never been any wars and to believe in a "utopian" world of peace loving, la dee da or c'est la vie is beyond being naïve and sometimes dangerous....
There is no period in the history of the human race when there has never been any wars and to believe in a "utopian" world of peace loving, la dee da or c'est la vie is beyond being naïve and sometimes dangerous....
Homestead on lands stolen from its owner. Lakota indians hanged in Minnesotta in the largest mass execution on american soil...
5
Beautiful; thank you.
7
Congratz Mr. Egan for an excellent column showing how govt itself is the basis of our democracy and prosperity, not it's enemy. Better than Krugman’s column on govt ---more vivid, more convincing.
The Homestead act gave free land, to start a stake in the future. Where is that equivalent now? The future is mostly blocked for the majority by today’s dominant party.
I love this sentence: The great, nation-shaping accomplishments of Lincoln’s day happened ... because the South...had left the union — ridding Congress of the naysayers. Too bad they didn’t stay separated. Now the rw radical repubs are the US dominant political party, and with no true opposition party to fight for the majority.
And with each generation, despite civil rights laws, the skin color divide keeps morphing into new forms to divide the nation in so many ways, now in segregated n.hoods, schools, economic levels, policing and incarceration.
Just the opposite of the 'Union' that Lincoln upheld as the reason to fight the Civil War. We are in disunion. Funny that the S. Court decision that blessed as free speech the selling of our elections to the highest bidder is called “ Citizens United”. It has done more to disunite the United States than anything.
The Homestead act gave free land, to start a stake in the future. Where is that equivalent now? The future is mostly blocked for the majority by today’s dominant party.
I love this sentence: The great, nation-shaping accomplishments of Lincoln’s day happened ... because the South...had left the union — ridding Congress of the naysayers. Too bad they didn’t stay separated. Now the rw radical repubs are the US dominant political party, and with no true opposition party to fight for the majority.
And with each generation, despite civil rights laws, the skin color divide keeps morphing into new forms to divide the nation in so many ways, now in segregated n.hoods, schools, economic levels, policing and incarceration.
Just the opposite of the 'Union' that Lincoln upheld as the reason to fight the Civil War. We are in disunion. Funny that the S. Court decision that blessed as free speech the selling of our elections to the highest bidder is called “ Citizens United”. It has done more to disunite the United States than anything.
6
I'm inclined to think Lincoln should have let the South go. But what makes a good policy changes with time and conditions. In Lincoln's day, there were ~30 million Americans. Today there are more than ten times that many; enough that the country is almost certainly not environmentally sustainable, and has the greatest per capita greenhouse emissions of any major industrialized state.
Thus, mass immigration to the United States is no longer tenable (It has contributed ~2/3 of the 120 million population growth of the last 45 years). While a DREAM Act might be reasonable, it would have to be accompanied by an end to so-called birthright citizenship, chain migration (where immigrants can bring their extended families), and a national, mandatory E-Verify, to put the brakes on illegal immigration.
Thus, mass immigration to the United States is no longer tenable (It has contributed ~2/3 of the 120 million population growth of the last 45 years). While a DREAM Act might be reasonable, it would have to be accompanied by an end to so-called birthright citizenship, chain migration (where immigrants can bring their extended families), and a national, mandatory E-Verify, to put the brakes on illegal immigration.
1
If only the south would leave again - they should have never never be let back in.
2
Another example: Republican Tom McCall served as governor of Oregon from 1967-1975. Under McCall's leadership Oregon introduced the country's first bottle bill, cleaned up the Willamette River, and passed laws to maintain public ownership of the state's beaches and create the country's first statewide land-use planning system, which introduced urban growth boundaries around the state's cities. Each of these impressive achievements are complete anathema to today's Republicans because they require robust government of the people, by the people, for the people.
6
Good points and Oregon as well as the Pacific NW are proud of those tone-setting accomplishments. Any party that openly works for the people is doing it's job.
Although the pernicious evil of slavery has been banished from our country the institutional legacy lives on, energized and financed by the extremist wing of the party of Lincoln.
3
A good day to remember a great American and a sad comparison with what makes up the Republican Party of today. A collection of paid-for corporatists with zero independent will, vision or courage. I cannot fathom how this party can be at ease with its performance or legacy over the past 15 years and especially its near-treasonous behavior since January 2009. The Party of Lincoln. An absolute shame.
2
With very few exceptions, the GOP of today is comprised of mean-spirited no compromising hate Obama racists whose ignorant Tea Party antics are an embarrassment. Remember the signs at their gatherings back in 2010 which contained such moronic statements as "Keep the government out of my Social Security, Medicare etc."? Enough said.
3
Never let it be said that the Civil War isn't exactly what it was:
a War undertaken by the largest slaveholding nation on earth -- The Confederacy -- in order to preserve its economic advantage:
SLAVERY!
ALL ELSE IS SHALLOW FALSEHOOD!
a War undertaken by the largest slaveholding nation on earth -- The Confederacy -- in order to preserve its economic advantage:
SLAVERY!
ALL ELSE IS SHALLOW FALSEHOOD!
3
Despite considerable change (in the main economics) in the so call average "southerner" there are still far too many that still teach their children that Robert E Lee fought to preserve the status of superiority of the white race as practiced legally 150 plus years ago (states rights). As a child in 1940 I delivered the used text books to the small school for blacks only and we observed Mr. Lee's birthday as school holiday. Yes the law has changed, but old beliefs are still with us in far too many homes.
3
Imagine that! Free land! Just given away and not taken from anyone else. Except "the Homestead Act and the Pacific Railway Act of 1862 helped precipitate the construction of the transcontinental railroad, which led to the significant loss of land and natural resources, as well as the loss of lifestyle and culture, for many tribal people". http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/january_february_2013/features...
Both parties play racial politics today. Democrat and Republican are equally guilty. They just use different tactics.
Are there any political leaders today, from either party, that actually rise above using race as a wedge to gain advantage? Are there any Lincolns out there?
Are there any political leaders today, from either party, that actually rise above using race as a wedge to gain advantage? Are there any Lincolns out there?
The transcontinental railroad was chartered as a carrot to keep California in the Union. It was built with huge dollops of federal largess and made kajillionaires of California's "Big Four," which proceeded to dominate state politics for a full generation.
The Homestead Act was passed in order to encourage free-state settlement and thereby establish what in the West Bank are called facts on the ground.
So I guess I'm not quite seeing the same inconsistency.
The Homestead Act was passed in order to encourage free-state settlement and thereby establish what in the West Bank are called facts on the ground.
So I guess I'm not quite seeing the same inconsistency.
re dusting off the portrait of Lincoln behavioral pattern: People who elevate an historical figure to a pedestal often don't follow their teachings or example, it seems to be about something different.
3
The last vestige of Lincoln's Republican Party died Jan 06, 1919.
RIP Theodore Roosevelt...
RIP Theodore Roosevelt...
15
On, please. If the GOP proposed a “Homestead Act” – giving away federal land – every eco-extremist in Congress would birth an entire litter of kittens. (Back then, you might get land, but you pulled your own weight. You did not immigrate here and instantly become a colossal burden on the citizenry.)
While the feds gave public land to the RR, the construction was funded privately, the RR run privately. Construction was not litigated to death by the aforementioned eco-extremists and it was undertaken without “prevailing wage” labor. Not one Democrat would support a proposal to allow construction without massive special interest giveaways producing hugely inflated costs. And the ecos would still sue to stop it, as it might annoy a Sage Grouse or a Spotted Owl.
The GOP is NOT hostile to “conservation”; the ecos hate that concept, preferring “preservation”. “Conservation” means making fair use of land, which the GOP favors. “Preservation” asserts that the land must be essentially free of human influence and “protected” from use. Almowt always a Bad Idea.
Alas, the POTUS IS, often, incompetent and repeatedly lawless; he lacks the excuse of an existential crisis to justify his unconstitutional exercise of executive power.
Query: toward what end do “progressives” purport to be progressing? It certainly isn’t freedom.
While the feds gave public land to the RR, the construction was funded privately, the RR run privately. Construction was not litigated to death by the aforementioned eco-extremists and it was undertaken without “prevailing wage” labor. Not one Democrat would support a proposal to allow construction without massive special interest giveaways producing hugely inflated costs. And the ecos would still sue to stop it, as it might annoy a Sage Grouse or a Spotted Owl.
The GOP is NOT hostile to “conservation”; the ecos hate that concept, preferring “preservation”. “Conservation” means making fair use of land, which the GOP favors. “Preservation” asserts that the land must be essentially free of human influence and “protected” from use. Almowt always a Bad Idea.
Alas, the POTUS IS, often, incompetent and repeatedly lawless; he lacks the excuse of an existential crisis to justify his unconstitutional exercise of executive power.
Query: toward what end do “progressives” purport to be progressing? It certainly isn’t freedom.
3
This is an interesting take on the financing of the first transcontinental railroads. The private companies built - or claimed to have built - certain mileage, got government guarantees on the bonds they issue, which they then pledged to Wall Street for more operating money. Private capital was lacking; the Big Four, for instance, were successful wholesalers in Sacramento until the federal government put up the money to build the Central Pacific - the general contractor, owned by the Big Four, turned a hundred percent profit at no risk to its owners. NIce work if you can get it, and very much in keeping with the Republican ethos of today
Every Democratic president has been called incompetent, dictatorial, lawless etc. FDR was accused of these sins, and more, over the New Deal and Social Security. During the 1936 election the Republicans warned that Social Security would lead to socialism, and is now a popular program that many Americans believe, falsely, merely pays back in benefits the recipients' contributions.Truman was faced the same criticisms over the Truman Doctrine, the Korean War, over which some wanted him impeached, and when, by executive order, he integrated the armed forces. Kennedy was excoriated over the Bay of Pigs fiasco, his meeting with Khrushchev in Vienna and fecklessness over the Cuban Missile crisis. LBJ and Clinton faced similar attacks. Obama is in very good company. On the other hand, consider the 47 Republican Senators who sent an extraordinary letter to the Iranians, as if they have a personal foreign policy. They suffered the embarrassment of the Iranian foreign minister lecturing them on international law, to say nothing of the fact that various academics noted that the 47 don't even know that the Senate, as they claimed, does not ratify a treaty, which is the president's sole prerogative. The House Republicans are hardly more sophisticated, when they invited the head of a foreign government to address them but deliberately neglected to inform the White House. Is there a single candidate for the Republican nomination who has even a schoolboy's grasp of science? Who?
Reading this, yesterday's excellent and tragic "Low Life" by Nicolas Kristof and watching a black man get 8 bullets in his back, our elected officials should be in an emergency session to problem solve on all fronts. Instead they enrich themselves, work the buddy buddy lobbyist system and behave like evil clowns.
7
While I do not agree that the Homestead Act was the Dream Act of its day I can well believe that today's Republicans would never pass anything similar in nature.
The Homestead Act was never for immigrants, slaves or even the domestic poor. The Homestead Act was for the businesses, especially those that had grown around the railroads, of the day. These businesses had noticed that there was great wealth to be had if only there were people farming the vast lands unpeopled in the west.
Today most businesses well recognize that they have untapped resources that need only customers with cash to turn into wealth. But in this environment of each against all, each business wants the government to support their small segment of the economy at the cost to every other segment. When they do think in concert that the problem is consumers they fail to recognize the the real problem is good jobs and decent pay.
As to immigrants, if they can make effective use of the cheap labor they are on one side, but if it is of no use then they fall on the other. As what business wants potential customers to be paid slave wages which often are sent home and not spent here?
The Dream Act is not the Homestead Act of today. Minimum Wage laws and a strongly progressive tax code that lifts the burdens of the poor would fill that socioeconomic niche.
The Homestead Act was never for immigrants, slaves or even the domestic poor. The Homestead Act was for the businesses, especially those that had grown around the railroads, of the day. These businesses had noticed that there was great wealth to be had if only there were people farming the vast lands unpeopled in the west.
Today most businesses well recognize that they have untapped resources that need only customers with cash to turn into wealth. But in this environment of each against all, each business wants the government to support their small segment of the economy at the cost to every other segment. When they do think in concert that the problem is consumers they fail to recognize the the real problem is good jobs and decent pay.
As to immigrants, if they can make effective use of the cheap labor they are on one side, but if it is of no use then they fall on the other. As what business wants potential customers to be paid slave wages which often are sent home and not spent here?
The Dream Act is not the Homestead Act of today. Minimum Wage laws and a strongly progressive tax code that lifts the burdens of the poor would fill that socioeconomic niche.
6
I am not sure where Mr. O'Neill derives his assertion that the Homestead act was not for freed slaves or immigrants. It was exactly that. The law, passed in the 1860s, offered up to 160 acres of public land to any head of a family who paid a registration fee, lived on the land for five years, and cultivated it or built on it. How is that not the early version of a Dream Act?
1
Michael, my grandfather came from Denmark to homestead a farm as did some of his brothers, and his wife's brothers.
Clearly the lesson is that we should encourage the south to seceed
7
Just curious how Mr. Egan knows Lincoln had a "tinny voice." As we have no recordings, we really have no way of knowing. And as people loved to hear Lincoln speak,it's hard to believe that he would have an unpleasant voice.
3
They liked what he had to say and his language.
We do know how his voice sounded because people who heard him reported that his voice was high-pitched and often shrill with a decided twang. There are many, many written references to the not-particularly-pleasant tenor of his voice. What made him a compelling speaker, or a gifted fabulist, or a funny joketeller, was the content of his speech. Those mellifluous tones you hear reciting the Gettysburg Address are in no way reminiscent of Lincoln's real voice.
There were many anecdotes about Lincoln's speech, particularly after the Cooper Union speech. Many people reported noticing the Midwestern drawl and the high voice, but became so overwhelmed by the content and wit of the speech, the unusual voice and ill-fitting suit were forgotten.
Allowing citizens to pursue broader aspirations, if that is how Lincoln is perceived by some Republicans, is a laudable goal, but today's Republican party does not support such policies. The aspirations Republicans support are those who are already successful and who refuse to support the society on which their success is built. Today's Republican insists in the name of "freedom" from government that ordinary Americans bear all the burdens of society that the rich refuse to pay. They burden college students with high tuition debt. They burden middle class families with medical debt. They burden all of us with the healthcare and environmental costs of burning coal. They burden workers with poverty level wages. They burden taxpayers with subsidizing those low-wage employers, and burden workers with the taxes that the wealthy, corporations, Wall Street traders, and large estates are dodging. As a result of carrying all these burdens Americans can barely survive, let alone thrive so that one day they help support society in turn. Democrats don't want to be "coddled" by government, as Republicans are fond of saying. What Democrats want is for all Americans to be free from all these crippling burdens that Republicans insist on hanging around their necks which make it impossible to pursue broader aspirations.
16
It's so tiring to see articles like this that just spew the rhetoric of dysfunctional political parties in Washington. As an Independent I see both parties equally non-compromising. To focus on one as the "party of no", without equally pointing the other party that shut down the Senate just proves this article to be another bias'd piece.
3
Our world would be a better place if Gore had been president instead of Bush. It's great to be an Independent, but for our children's future, please don't vote Nader in 2016.
1
Lack of space won't allow TDPSS the opportunity to defend his absurd comment that the parties are equally complicit in saying "no" to just about anything Obama might favor.
I'm sure his spiritual forefathers blamed Lincoln and the secessionists who demanded states' rights to maintain slavery as equally complicit. Good work if you are willing to ignore the archives
I'm sure his spiritual forefathers blamed Lincoln and the secessionists who demanded states' rights to maintain slavery as equally complicit. Good work if you are willing to ignore the archives
What "other party" that shut down the Senate?? I assume you mean Democrats, but I must have missed that particular "shutdown" episode. It would help your argument if you would give specifics. When did that happen, exactly? Which Senators were involved and why did they want to shut the government down?
Really, I'm not trying to be facetious. I would like to know.
Really, I'm not trying to be facetious. I would like to know.
Mr. Egan, a dollar spent on progressive legislation is a dollar not spent on undermining US democracy, a requirement for GOP political viability. Moving all wealth to the top, through tax cuts, deficits and unneeded military spending, combined with rigged voting rules, accomplishes this goal. A physics defying perpetual motion machine brought to us by the Party of "I am not a scientist".
9
The South has never particularly liked the central government. For a long time, this could be explained by their fear the government would take away their slaves. But even through the nation's first 50+ years, when the party of slavery ran the government (they called themselves Democrats for much of that time), they still disliked that government. After the War, the South witnessed the national government's efforts to accord former slaves equal rights. They opposed that effectively and imposed a system of apartheid on their region that persisted until the middle of the last century. And then the Civil Rights era proved southerners right again, as the federal government (finally, after much prodding) took up the cause. It has been decades now, and the South still dislikes and distrusts the central government, even while the dominant party (now called Republican) controls two of the three branches. Given the historical roots of that dislike and distrust, I imagine the same still applies today.
6
Today's Republicans have absolutely nothing in common with Lincoln. As one columnist recently wrote, the Republican party is not the party of Lincoln but rather the party of Andrew Johnson.
14
Andrew Johnson was a Democrat
Or the National Bank Acts of 1863 and 1864, which finally gave the country a currency that circulated (at par) nationwide.
8
Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, was also the first President to use the Antiquities Act to preserve public lands when he designated Devils Tower in Wyoming as the first National Monument. Many national parks, including most of those in Alaska, were National Monuments before they became National Parks. Today's Republicans, in contrast, align themselves with people like Cliven Bundy, the rancher who refused to pay the fees he owed for grazing his cattle on federal rangeland, denounce federal ownership of lands in the West as "tyranny," and call for turning over control of national parks and wilderness to the states or private ownership. The idea that a party of such cramped and regressive vision could control all three branches of the federal government should terrify anyone who cares about the legacy of men like Lincoln and Roosevelt.
39
What a wonderful, inspiring article. David Brooks should read this and learn from it.
36
Mr. Egan - I always read your column because it has a depth of intelligence and thoughtfulness that is unusual, even at the NYTimes, and I treasure this. Keep up the magnificent work. Thank you for your efforts.
36
There aren't many Democrats who compare to Lincoln either, certainly not in the current crop who say they will run for president. "When lilacs last in the dooryard bloomed..." is an epitaph for idealism as well as for a man.
8
A perfectly correct and sad commentary.
The GOP has lost its way. It is the party of the selfish.
Their motto should be "I've got mine and I deserve it!"
The GOP has lost its way. It is the party of the selfish.
Their motto should be "I've got mine and I deserve it!"
19
As someone who was laid off when a certain venture capital firm that shall remain nameless bought into and destroyed a thriving US company, I think the GOP motto should really be, "I've figured out a way to take all of yours, and yours and yours and pretend I earned it through hard work (giggle here) while I ship it off to the Cayman Islands so that the tax you pay on your unemployment will fund my Social Security, and I will never pay a cent of tax to fund yours, and I will take and take and take from you forever."
Just Thinking, maybe the motto should be "I've got mine, too bad about you."
While the act of giving 160 acres to anyone working to become a citizen sounds progressive, in fact, the land that was being given away, belonged to Native Americans who were displaced. None of this land was theirs to give to anyone.
20
Veterans of the Civil war filed and was granted 160 acres, whether they were USA or CSA, also some from Canada. Check with Ancestry . Com for copies of actual documents
Yes! Thank you.
It is well past time for new party names in America. The Republican Party of today bears no resemblance to the party of Lincoln, and really ought to change its name to avoid confusing people. They are mostly the Southern Democrats of yore. Similarly, today's Democratic Party ought to adopt a new name to shed the racist past of its Southern wing so as not to give Republicans the opportunity to deflect their own racism by pointing to the Southern Democrats of the distant past.
4
indeed, Mr. Egan, indeed
readers should also note that the Lincoln Administration raised taxes and increased government borrowing resulting in a far larger and growing federal debt...
tsk tsk
TeaPartiers truly seek to ignore all "inconvenient" history.
8
Wasn't it Shelby Foote, the historian, who said that the Civil War can still be lost? It seems the Old South, represented by obstructionists, naysayers, politicians and their supporters who believe government to be the problem rather than a positive force in people's lives, has risen again. Are they winning back what they lost post-Civil War or have they already won? Depression era reforms to the financial system have been systematically dismantled throughout the past thirty years, beginning in the Reagan administration, which many modern Republicans now view as good old days. The common good used to mean what it says, but now it seems to mean whatever is good for the wealthiest and most powerful.
34
A very small minority in our politically fractured nation really profit from the constraints we allow to be placed on the majority of us by the politicians in office while those who actually control them are the only beneficiaries in the game we think of as the hallmark of our democracy.
While in theory we live in a free nation, in fact we have permitted the trust we have among ourselves to blind us to the simplest of political lies, for if any one seeking office has the courage to stand up and question this status quo he or she is never given a platform from which to be heard and when some decry the pernicious effect of money in politics their voices are shouted down as un American or financially drowned by those with enough money to tout "free enterprise" through non stop and prohibitively costly advertising.
Before we are Democrats or Republicans we must acknowledge we are citizens of the United States and if we are to retain our freedoms our government must work for all of us.
While in theory we live in a free nation, in fact we have permitted the trust we have among ourselves to blind us to the simplest of political lies, for if any one seeking office has the courage to stand up and question this status quo he or she is never given a platform from which to be heard and when some decry the pernicious effect of money in politics their voices are shouted down as un American or financially drowned by those with enough money to tout "free enterprise" through non stop and prohibitively costly advertising.
Before we are Democrats or Republicans we must acknowledge we are citizens of the United States and if we are to retain our freedoms our government must work for all of us.
6
The Warren Court declared one man, one vote.
The Roberts declared one dollar, one vote.
The Roberts declared one dollar, one vote.
1
In the 4th grade, during the tumultuous times of the 1960s, my African American teacher helped us all understand Lincoln and the Civil War. She inspired me to learn more and I did. Today's Republican Party is NOT Lincoln's Party. They serve those Americans who still live back in the 1860s. I live in a very Republican state and corruption and no nothing laws are forced on us by a state legislation far removed from their citizens. Our legislators are so comical that most of my fellow Arizonans do not vote. In this pathetic response to their power plays, we fail to replace incompetent politicians. Now we face life extinction problems, like finding water, and we have no politician wanting to make the hard choices. I too fear the future, but more so for my children and grandchildren than for me. But I see no way to fixing the "no nothing" Congress nor these non-visionary politicians. Voting yields no results. I wonder what a Lincoln would do today? The tragic reality is that Lincoln would not win in Today's political races.
9
Voting yields no results if you don't vote. Maybe you're in the minority and you lose a lot. That's no reason to stay home and thereby increase the voting power of the bad guys.
4
who was it that said that the populace gets the government that it deserves, or something like that.
A great article that should make all of us regardless of party pause and reflect. What's happened to the Republican party? Let's add more Republican achievements of the past--What about the interstate highway system begun by Eisenhower. What about the NIH? What about more national parks through Teddy Roosevelt. What about (GASP) the EPA and Nixon.
That was a party that was visionary and balanced ideology with pragmatism and a respect for science and technology. What Republican party do we have in 2015? Evolution, well maybe. Hey dinosaurs might have been on Noah's arc right? Fix roads and bridges, not if they cost money! Fund the NIH and NASA adequately, hey we have problems right here on earth that only Faith will solve. Immigrants? Not in my town.
The party let all of the fringe into the tent to win at any cost. The result is they took over the tent.
That was a party that was visionary and balanced ideology with pragmatism and a respect for science and technology. What Republican party do we have in 2015? Evolution, well maybe. Hey dinosaurs might have been on Noah's arc right? Fix roads and bridges, not if they cost money! Fund the NIH and NASA adequately, hey we have problems right here on earth that only Faith will solve. Immigrants? Not in my town.
The party let all of the fringe into the tent to win at any cost. The result is they took over the tent.
158
WHERE HAVE ALL THE FLOWERS GONE? By Lincoln's last day, he had left us a flowering of social enlightenment and government commitments that shine in the darkness that blinds our political vision. Given the remarkable list of contributions Lincoln made, from which we benefit to this day, I hope fervently that Obama will establish as many desperately needed government projects. In the pursuit of false promises and hopes, we've replaces stewardship of the earth and our country with a crumbling, third world infrastructure and planet where many species are already dying from pollution of all sorts, with many on their way out. I, for one, salute Obama for his courage and steady determination to implement his vision for America that is a vision Lincoln might recognize were he with us today. We have not time to lose in transitioning as quickly as possible to sustainable industry. The choices are, Pay me now, pay me later. We've consistently chosen to pay later and cannot afford the costs. The so-called entrepreneurs are willing to invest in business that quickly pocket their profits and move jobs and earnings overseas, out of the reach of the US government. They want to run the country but not pay for any of it. To use a time worn phrase, there's no free lunch. What will it take to calm the screaming infants and let the cooler heads prevail to win effective governance. The party of Lincoln have shown time and again that they have no interest, plan nor ability to govern!
9
"The great, nation-shaping accomplishments of Lincoln's day happened only because the South, always with an eye on protecting slavery and an estate-owning aristocracy, had left the union--ridding Congress of the naysayers." And so it is today that the solidly white, republican South is responsible for our dysfunctional national Congress. We seem to be still fighting that war that Lincoln thought he had won. Superficially, the issues have changed--it's no longer slavery and landed aristocracy that the South represents but a rapacious free market, low taxes, militarism and voter suppression. But what remains the same as in Lincoln's day is the animus against the federal government.
15
Insofar as the Republican Party was sprung from what remained of the 19th century Whigs, it was interested in the active involvement of Congress against an overweaning executive of the Jacksonian model. To that extent, the modern Republicans are not as far removed from their forebears as you suggest. Lincoln's more expansive role had as much to do with the waging of a war as anything else.
And the Lincolnian sense of allowing citizens to pursue broader aspirations are not as harmonious as you suggest with the current president's notion that what Americans need most is a government big enough to coddle them throughout their lives (vide the Democrats' 'Julia' campaign them of a couple years ago).
And the Lincolnian sense of allowing citizens to pursue broader aspirations are not as harmonious as you suggest with the current president's notion that what Americans need most is a government big enough to coddle them throughout their lives (vide the Democrats' 'Julia' campaign them of a couple years ago).
3
As I read Doris Kerns-Goodwin's fine book about Lincoln, "A Team of Rivals," I have been thinking too about the stark contrast too between the Republican Party of Lincoln and our obstructionist, nasty, punishing Republican Party today.
Also in reading the book, there are similarities in Lincoln's temperament and Barack Obama's. Both men exhibit an emotional balance that helped them navigate difficult situations, and while there may have been plenty of reason to be vindictive--given the nastiness of some of their rivals and the opposition--neither man chose to be vindictive even when an opportunity presented itself.
In writing about Lincoln, Harvard professor James Russell Lowell remarked in a long article for the "North American Review" during Lincoln's presidency:
"Never did a President enter upon officer with less means at his command....All that was known of him was that he was a good stump-speaker..." Lowell also noted for many months the untried president seemed too hesitant
Then Russell wrote:
"Mr Lincoln's perilous task has been to carry a rather shackly raft through the rapids, making fast the unrulier logs as he could snatch opportunity" ...concluding "and the country is to be congratulated that he did not think it his duty to run straight at all hazards, but cautiously to assure himself with his setting-pole where the main current was, and keep steadily to that."
A constant of course in both the Lincoln and Obama presidencies: the grueling Southern opposition
Also in reading the book, there are similarities in Lincoln's temperament and Barack Obama's. Both men exhibit an emotional balance that helped them navigate difficult situations, and while there may have been plenty of reason to be vindictive--given the nastiness of some of their rivals and the opposition--neither man chose to be vindictive even when an opportunity presented itself.
In writing about Lincoln, Harvard professor James Russell Lowell remarked in a long article for the "North American Review" during Lincoln's presidency:
"Never did a President enter upon officer with less means at his command....All that was known of him was that he was a good stump-speaker..." Lowell also noted for many months the untried president seemed too hesitant
Then Russell wrote:
"Mr Lincoln's perilous task has been to carry a rather shackly raft through the rapids, making fast the unrulier logs as he could snatch opportunity" ...concluding "and the country is to be congratulated that he did not think it his duty to run straight at all hazards, but cautiously to assure himself with his setting-pole where the main current was, and keep steadily to that."
A constant of course in both the Lincoln and Obama presidencies: the grueling Southern opposition
20
Never hurts to remind the Republican Party that history is written down somewhere, so they can't just make stuff up. Again.
12
good work here Mr. Egan. I too have been addled by other awesome contradictions like those you present here...
" ...government, whose leading object is, to elevate the condition of men- to lift artificial weights from all shoulders- to clear the paths of laudable pursuit for all- to afford all, an unfettered start and a fair chance in the race of life."
A. Lincoln
" ...government, whose leading object is, to elevate the condition of men- to lift artificial weights from all shoulders- to clear the paths of laudable pursuit for all- to afford all, an unfettered start and a fair chance in the race of life."
A. Lincoln
9
In my previous post I incorrectly referred to the poet Allen Ginsburg as "William" Ginsburg.
My apologies to the late Mr. Ginsburg, and to the readers of the famed Beat Poet.
My apologies to the late Mr. Ginsburg, and to the readers of the famed Beat Poet.
2
Right on!
As in the opposite of
Right: No!
As in the opposite of
Right: No!
You sometimes hear it said, jokingly perhaps, that Reagan couldn't get the Republican nomination today as the party has moved so far to the right. Lincoln would be lucky to escape the next GOP convention without a second bullet hole.
8
Upon examining the history of Regan as actor turned politician, it might have been better that he had not received the nomination. My father about to be operated on, told me that we won't know the true damage that Reagan has done to the country for a very long time. My father did not survive his surgery and the country is still reeling from the damage that Reagan the actor turned politician brought upon this country.
7
Certainly Goldwater, who was once considered to be part of the extreme right fringe of the Republican Party, couldn't get the nomination today as he was pro gay and abortion rights. Of course, at one time Reagan was pro abortion rights too (when governor of California, he signed one of the most liberal abortion laws in the country) but when the party decided to make it into an issue, he shifted his position.
And what an incentive the land was..... my great grandfather came from Germany, put his life on the line fighting for the Union Army, found his way to Oklahoma when the war was over, claimed his land, built a farm on it, got married, and then, finally, applied for his naturalization papers. And here I am.
7
This was a good response to David Brooks column on Lincoln the other day. It offers hope to Brook's usual conservative despair.
Yes as a nation we need to re-capture our "can do" mojo and hopefully our younger generations will take up this cause. Right now we are held in the grip of white Republican curmudgeons who "have theirs" and feel threatened but have not only the support of the South but from old white guys and old white gals. But as these old white guys and gals become history themselves, maybe the next generation will and can change things.
Yes as a nation we need to re-capture our "can do" mojo and hopefully our younger generations will take up this cause. Right now we are held in the grip of white Republican curmudgeons who "have theirs" and feel threatened but have not only the support of the South but from old white guys and old white gals. But as these old white guys and gals become history themselves, maybe the next generation will and can change things.
24
Thank you, Timothy Egan, for this eloquent, thought-provoking essay on the difference between Lincoln's party and the Republicans of today. The Republicans are so hell-bent on denying President Obama any achievement on which to base his legacy that they are willing to accept America's decline from its once admired status among nations of the world. Lincoln's "government of the people, by the people, for the people" seems to have perished from the earth after all.
26
Thank you for a wonderful description of President Abrahan Lincolns's last day.
The Abraham Lincoln of 1864 and the Lyndon Baines Johnson of 1964 certainly had a lot in common when it came to passing legislation that improved the lives of Americans. Maybe that in itself shows the evolution of the respective political parties. The Democrats of today are a lot closer to the Republicans of 1864 than are the Republicans of today.
The Abraham Lincoln of 1864 and the Lyndon Baines Johnson of 1964 certainly had a lot in common when it came to passing legislation that improved the lives of Americans. Maybe that in itself shows the evolution of the respective political parties. The Democrats of today are a lot closer to the Republicans of 1864 than are the Republicans of today.
14
Only Abe fought a war that couldn't be avoided and LBJ fought one that could and should have been.
Reading Timothy Egan's Friday column is one of my weekly delights and today's is one of the best yet, which says a lot.
23
Let’s once and for all drop the idea that todays Republicans have any resemblance of their predecessors.
Rather then fighting for the common good they fight for their own interests.
It’s important to understand the difference between the party of Lincoln and the party of today because you see how much their values have been corrupted. Corruptio optimi est pessima—(Corruption of the best is the worst.) Thank you Mr. Egan.
Rather then fighting for the common good they fight for their own interests.
It’s important to understand the difference between the party of Lincoln and the party of today because you see how much their values have been corrupted. Corruptio optimi est pessima—(Corruption of the best is the worst.) Thank you Mr. Egan.
5
For the GOP, Reagan has taken the place of Lincoln. The cowboy hat, the jelly beans, the trickle-down pitch, the "tear down that wall" sound bite repeated and repeated, all of it molded into this new monstrous conservative. Reagan's Americana vision has gripped a bastion of right wing ideologues into a lock step of No. Any progressive idea Lincoln would have put forth is not even on their radar. Lincoln was a dynamic leader, a visionary with the courage to act, to risk, to legislate. These modern Republicans cover their own hides while pocketing campaign finance. They appeal to an ignorant base by preying upon xenophobia, homophobia, and so-called "Christian" values. They bend to big business at the alter of the all-mighty dollar rather than legislate for the everyday, hourly wage American. They attack the immigrant while exploiting his/her back breaking work. They take reproductive rights away from women by supporting Hobby Lobby. They undermine gay rights by playing Bible politics. They bargain for more weapons, more war, more instability abroad rather than lay foundations for peace. They are not the party of Lincoln. Using Reagan as their poster boy, America was hijacked Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Bush Junior and a gaggle of neo-cons; their destructive traditions are continued with worst Congress in the history of our Union. On this anniversary of Lincoln's death, let's hope someone in the GOP has the courage to breathe life into this Party that once gave us so much.
37
Only Divine Providence can save whats left of the Republican Party! Lincoln's rolling in his grave watching the circus act going on now. When these people come to their right minds and join the 21st century the Nation will rebound. Until then, American people will continue a slow arduous state of existence.
Whoever dreamed this country would contain dilapidated bridges,highways and state colleges that lack proper funding?
Anyone one who votes for these people needs a good psychiatrist!
Whoever dreamed this country would contain dilapidated bridges,highways and state colleges that lack proper funding?
Anyone one who votes for these people needs a good psychiatrist!
6
Mr. Egan, you wonderfully presented the very basis of my general enmity toward today's Republican politicians. Thank you.
11
The cynical policies of today's Republicans to interfere with and block Lincoln's vision are oddly made possible by the people who are most victimized by them: economically disadvantaged, often minority voters who never vote. Just look at what it took to wake up voters in Ferguson, MO. If that would happen all over the country (hopefully without the same kind of tragic impetus), the Republicans would be sent packing or, more likely, would morph into something different.
4
Excellent article. For those of us with progressive ideals, it is disheartening to look back to the Civil War and realize that while the Union forces may have won the war militarily, it was the Confederacy that triumphed politically. Today we live in a southern-based political system embodying southern values.
14
All true about the right wing today. They obviously hate poor people even when the poor people vote for them. However, we need to remember that the land for the homestead act and the railroads was stolen from Native Americans. To accomplish this theft we killed their food and the bison almost became extinct. Then those Native Americans we didn't kill we put in concentration camps called reservations. The horror continues today.
10
I don't think the Homestead Act seemed very progressive to the Native Americans, whose land was being stolen and given to others.
10
A wonderful new book by Jonathan Sarna and Benjamin Shapell called "Lincoln and the Jews" contains some surprising information about Lincoln's high regard for the Jewish people and serves as a timely reminder that several recent Presidents since World War II -- including Truman, Clinton, Bush and Obama -- have been great supporters of theirs.
Now, sadly, President Obama intends to throw all of this magnificent legacy away in exhange for "a mess of potttage" (Genesis 25: Verses 29 to 34).
Now, sadly, President Obama intends to throw all of this magnificent legacy away in exhange for "a mess of potttage" (Genesis 25: Verses 29 to 34).
3
As an American Jew, I have to disagree here. Obama has differed strongly with Netanyahu, NOT with Jews in general. Netanyahu has shown himself to be a racist and a dishonest person. Would it be "pro-Jewish" to go along with that? I would like to see Obama support, in the UN, a strict return to the pre-1967 boundaries. Obviously Netanyahu is using "terrorism" as an excuse to steal Palestinian land. How can stealing Palestinian land ever contribute to the security of Israel or the dignity of the Jewish people?
3
@Bruce S
A deal that threatens the very existence of Israel threatens the very existence of the Jewish people.
A deal that threatens the very existence of Israel threatens the very existence of the Jewish people.
1
Odd thing. I was raised as a "moderate" Republican. You know: acknowledgement of the common good, the heritage of Lincoln extending suffrage to all Americans, the recognition of the value of federal support for interstate infrastructure e.g. the interstate system, the realization that you can't spend what you don't have (though emergency can sometimes triumph this).
I actually still hold all these basic positions, but find myself now labeled as a liberal and a Democrat. I didn't change other than to broaden my understanding of the human condition. The Republican Party? I have no clue who these clowns are.
I actually still hold all these basic positions, but find myself now labeled as a liberal and a Democrat. I didn't change other than to broaden my understanding of the human condition. The Republican Party? I have no clue who these clowns are.
569
Well said, sir, and may I applaud you for knowing what you are: a Republican. You don't need the far-right, anti-intellectual, Obama-hating GOPers that summarily reject you out of hand as a fellow Republican (even though you likely know more about what it means to be a 'conservative' than they do, and are also likely more consistent at it). They don't get to define you, you get to do that. The GOP, as it is now, 'left' other Republicans behind. They didn't leave it behind. Some of this countries best times have come when there are two viable, functioning parties that compromise and solve problems in a bi-partisan fashion. Even our Founding Fathers weren't always in agreement, and had to work together to solve issues, however begrudgingly. The GOP of today, that 'chooses' not to compromise and sometimes takes positions that actually may harm/have harmed this country, doesn't reflect well when compared with our country's history.
3
Moderate wing of the Republican party died along with Nelson Rockerfeller.
1
I too was a Republican walking the same path as Robert. My fear is we are witnessing the end of our great nations progress due lack of caring by the general populace, profit driven corporations, the ultra rich, and radical "Christians" whose goal is "the end times". Please wake up America!
1
Taunt and mock The Republican Party if you will Timothy Egan, but it is they whom are the party on the rise, and it is the Democrats whom are swirling and plummeting down the political drain in the epic and grand struggle that is United States national politics. Honest Abe would be proud!
It is the Republicans, the party of President Lincoln, who are currently serving up a fine consortium of qualified, articulate, and interesting candidates, who will find a target rich environment in criticizing the outgoing president and his beleaguered Democratic Party. At this time, I am proud to say that I am leaning toward the great Gov. of Wisconsin, Scott Walker. He would make a fine president, I do declare. I bet Abe would think so too.
Meanwhile the Democrats are shackled to Hillary Clinton, whose approval rating is below 50 percent, even though she has not as of yet announced her candidacy. An amazing feat. The sadly maligned Mary Lincoln, who contrary to legend was actually a substantial and wise woman (though too much of a spendthrift), would herself make a better president than Mrs. Clinton.
So howl on Timothy Egan! And prepare thyself to channel thy William Ginsberg howling to heretofore unbeknownst and bleak corners.
It is the Republicans, the party of President Lincoln, who are currently serving up a fine consortium of qualified, articulate, and interesting candidates, who will find a target rich environment in criticizing the outgoing president and his beleaguered Democratic Party. At this time, I am proud to say that I am leaning toward the great Gov. of Wisconsin, Scott Walker. He would make a fine president, I do declare. I bet Abe would think so too.
Meanwhile the Democrats are shackled to Hillary Clinton, whose approval rating is below 50 percent, even though she has not as of yet announced her candidacy. An amazing feat. The sadly maligned Mary Lincoln, who contrary to legend was actually a substantial and wise woman (though too much of a spendthrift), would herself make a better president than Mrs. Clinton.
So howl on Timothy Egan! And prepare thyself to channel thy William Ginsberg howling to heretofore unbeknownst and bleak corners.
Ah, Mr. Dooley, sir, that's Allen Ginsberg. But facts have a liberal bias, don't they?
12
Would these 'heretofore unbeknownst and bleak corners' be also 'swirling and plummeting down the political drain' while 'hunting in a target rich environment'?
Or does this state of affairs exist only in your current political reality?
And good luck with Walker ... Jeb Bush will be the Republican candidate, wake up, he bought the position months ago.
My advice: save your money and energy and put them into writing lessons. And when/if you do, ask for help with the case of 'who/whom'.
Or does this state of affairs exist only in your current political reality?
And good luck with Walker ... Jeb Bush will be the Republican candidate, wake up, he bought the position months ago.
My advice: save your money and energy and put them into writing lessons. And when/if you do, ask for help with the case of 'who/whom'.
15
Comparing Scot Walker to Abraham Lincoln does not make any sense, Walker has neither the courage or oratorical ability, intelligence that Lincoln had.
1
The Republican Party was the engine that built whatever exceptionality America rightly boasts today. Then, a new Party of over-privileged Lilliputians commandeered the old GOP name and set about to destroy the very thing that their ancestors created.
2
Greed and hatred are part of the human heart, and they have found a home in today's Republican Party.
As Caesar Germanicus once said about the ancient German tribes, "You must hit them, knock them down, and then hit them again. Only then will they respect you". That is what is now required in our battle to save the Republic from the dark side, embodied in men like David Koch and Wall Street. Imagining a polite ideological struggle legitimizes them.
As Caesar Germanicus once said about the ancient German tribes, "You must hit them, knock them down, and then hit them again. Only then will they respect you". That is what is now required in our battle to save the Republic from the dark side, embodied in men like David Koch and Wall Street. Imagining a polite ideological struggle legitimizes them.
6
Without Lincoln where would we be as a country, as a nation?
He was a great man and a great President.
Lincoln's moral compass never wavered. Regrettably, we as a nation seem to have lost ours.
We fund endless wars.
We tolerate a level of income inequality that has ripped apart the very fabric of the democracy.
We refuse to provide healthcare to all our citizens.
We endorse political bribery in the form of "donations." Incredibly, the Citizens United decision legitimized and accelerated this state of political decay.
We accept intolerably high levels of child poverty.
We turn our backs on a crumbling infrastructure.
We pass laws which permit and even encourage gun usage, gun ownership, and gun violence at levels never seen before in the West.
Lincoln would barely recognize this America. He would wonder where it all went so very, very wrong. He is not alone in that sentiment.
He was a great man and a great President.
Lincoln's moral compass never wavered. Regrettably, we as a nation seem to have lost ours.
We fund endless wars.
We tolerate a level of income inequality that has ripped apart the very fabric of the democracy.
We refuse to provide healthcare to all our citizens.
We endorse political bribery in the form of "donations." Incredibly, the Citizens United decision legitimized and accelerated this state of political decay.
We accept intolerably high levels of child poverty.
We turn our backs on a crumbling infrastructure.
We pass laws which permit and even encourage gun usage, gun ownership, and gun violence at levels never seen before in the West.
Lincoln would barely recognize this America. He would wonder where it all went so very, very wrong. He is not alone in that sentiment.
29
The Republican Party of Lincoln has become the Confederate Party of Davis, Stephens, Lee, Jackson, Forest and Benjamin.
8
I fesr the honesty of true intellect is not within the purview of many Republican minds enough for them to recognize their hypocrisies.
1
Spinning history to suit the liberal agenda fools nobody. On second thought, I take that back.
Tje only new thing is the history you don't know
Harry S. Truman
John C. Calhoun is the guiding light for today's GOP, not Lincoln.
They are all about nullification and interposition.
Booth wouild be a contributor on Fox.
Lincoln weeps.
Harry S. Truman
John C. Calhoun is the guiding light for today's GOP, not Lincoln.
They are all about nullification and interposition.
Booth wouild be a contributor on Fox.
Lincoln weeps.
14
Today's Tea=Party inspired GOP wishes to de-legitimize government by allowing spending reserves to go down to zero; not cooperating with Democrats in order to enact legislation; and, villianizing any person who does not march in lock step with their vision. Its not fascism--its a common plan of collusion to turn over all power to the very wealthy business owners and political contributors. This is in our future and voters are both unaware or unwilling to stop them.
5
Egan is right to praise Lincoln and contrast him with the sorry lot of Republicans in Congress today. But there is another Republican president who is a more modern counterpoint to McConnell and his ilk. That is Theodore Roosevelt, whom I think of as the last and only liberal Republican president. While he was in the White House, he had his justice department launch an anti-trust suit the broke up a railroad holding company that was a monopoly. He intervened in a coal strike to protect a union that was striking for higher wages. Think income inequality. He led the fight to pass the Pure Food & Drug Act. That was the first attempt at consumer legislation and a precursor to the FDA. And there is more. Fed up with conservative domination of the Republican party in 1912, he led a third party movement to defeat them. He did not win that election but what he stood for was in many ways the precursor to his cousin’s New Deal: big government on behalf of the people and the welfare state. I am sure that the Corker types in the Senate know nothing about TR and it shows. If TR were alive today, he would denounce those people in ringing tones and they would deserve his scorn. The Koch brothers would spend hundreds of millions to silence him. And given TR’s energy and oratorical skills they would probably lose.
354
TR was also, in addition to his progressive thinking about parks and trusts, a jingoist sending the White Fleet to intimidate Russia and Japan and a happy camper in the Caribbeab. No, I'd say Lincoln was the best, maybe the only good, GOP leader in the White House.
Besides, most TParty types now venerate Saint Ronnie, not Lincoln, mistaking Hollywood smoothness for goodness of heart.
Besides, most TParty types now venerate Saint Ronnie, not Lincoln, mistaking Hollywood smoothness for goodness of heart.
2
Where is today's TR?
All true, but one must remember that TR's elevation to the Presidency was quite by accident. He was nominated as the Veep because he was causing trouble for the elites as Governor of New York. However Republican party bosses did not anticipate McKinley's assassination. Teddy's popularity got a second term, and he could have won a third, but he put his protege Chester A. Arthur in the White House. When Chester reverted to politics as usual Teddy ran under the Bull Moose party. TR out-polled Arthur (the sitting President Republican nominee) thereby giving the Presidency to the Democrat Wilson. The Republican party would have been much stronger had they embraced TR.
Mr. Egan, you've written a lovely keepsake, a locket to be worn next to the heart. That's misty-eyed, but softer than the steely-eyed stare that today's GOP/Tea Party Republicans see most of us. Think the unsmiling Mitch McConnell, and you'll catch my drift. In 1957, our junior high school history teacher devoted his entire Friday afternoon lecture to President Lincoln's final days. Mr. McCarthy spoke with a hushed reverence that I can remember after 58 years; of the weariness of the president as he staggered under the heaviest load to bring about a final end to the fractured promise for all of us. John Wilkes Booth remains alive today, in the most powerful way possible: in spirit. Shelby Foote explains him with far more eloquence and scholarship than I possibly could. The assassin represented all of the traits that we see and hear in the party today: denial; reaction; given to false equivalences; self-righteous; an embrace of ignorance; subversive; an accomplice to malicious, careless destruction; a rush to flee from the wreckage left in its place. Mr. Egan, you list President Lincoln's vision for a greater, better, stronger America, one with arms wide enough to welcome the displaced, the discarded, the despairing. Today's Republicans are not willing to engage these people. They serve in Congress to protect today's .01%: the "estate-owning aristocracy," now swollen to include the energy industry, the health industry, the casino bankers. We weep. They sneer, "so what?"
466
Very nicely written. Today's GOP is the new Confederacy. They support the concentration of wealth for those who product no real wealth. They have an extractive economic model and have had a strict policy of not investing in the future of the United States. The parallels with the ante-bellum South are stark and clear. Unfortunately such politics make strange bedfellows. The financial institutions which financed the Civil War and drove the Industrial Revolution in this country are more aligned with this Confederate mindset then in the 19th and up to the mid-2oth century. The same can be said for fossil fuels. The unifying principle here is resistance to change. A new technologically driven civilization is rising and the status quo fears it mightily. For they understand that the emergence of such a civilization deceases their wealth and power.
Lincoln's Party was the party of Dr. Henry Jekyll while today's Republican Party is the party of the evil Edward Hyde. The Jekyll party is gone forever. The Hyde party is metastasizing among the states.
3
The Republican party of today is dominated by the same people who a generation ago were "Southern Democrats"; they merely switched parties. You get a glimpse of their thinking when you realize how many of them were Democrats ONLY because Lincoln was a Republican.
1
A wonderful column, evocative of past and present. I have to say, Mr. Egan might have mentioned Heather Richardson's wonderful new book, To Make Men Free, which makes the similar argument that the Republican party has gotten away from its progress-minded roots.
2
The Homestead Act was like the Dream Act only if you forget about the Native Americans who were forcibly removed from their homelands.
5
Sorry, we shall still claim the name of Lincoln, its a grand and significant name, but we also should work to correct some of his errors. He is not God who is also a backbone of our party.
Know Nothing: how apt.
8
Our American family:
Northeast - the workaholic parent. Puts in extra hours to bring home the bacon, but also avoiding their family.
Pacific Northwest - the wayward 20-something. Working at the coffeeshop, but only until his band takes off.
Southern California - the teenager. Bedroom walls plastered with fashion magazines and Katie Perry posters.
Midwest - the aunts and uncles. Nice decent folk, just dull. Might spend 30 minutes at the family reunion talking about their cats.
The South - the bitter grandpa. Everyone puts up with his racist comments, and really wants to put him in a nursing home.
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, etc - the cousin whose other side of the family seems so much cooler and better than your own. Everyone loves them, but is a tiny bit jealous.
Northeast - the workaholic parent. Puts in extra hours to bring home the bacon, but also avoiding their family.
Pacific Northwest - the wayward 20-something. Working at the coffeeshop, but only until his band takes off.
Southern California - the teenager. Bedroom walls plastered with fashion magazines and Katie Perry posters.
Midwest - the aunts and uncles. Nice decent folk, just dull. Might spend 30 minutes at the family reunion talking about their cats.
The South - the bitter grandpa. Everyone puts up with his racist comments, and really wants to put him in a nursing home.
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, etc - the cousin whose other side of the family seems so much cooler and better than your own. Everyone loves them, but is a tiny bit jealous.
2
What always astounds me is how the same mentality that drove thousands of poor Southern whites to fight and die for an institution that kept them poor, has perpetuated itself to this day, pretty much intact. The same actors; the same perceived enemies; and the same cynical demagogues laughing all the way to the bank.
30
It's not the humidity; it's the stupidity.
The irony is that many of today's right wing Republicans try to argue that it was Democrats from the South that historically supported slavery, a racially inspired "states rights" agenda, and other reactionary policies and programs. What they fail to mention is that these very same white Southern racists left the Democratic Party in droves when it began advocating for and advancing civil rights for Black Americans after 1960. Goldwater's massive sweep of deep southern states in 1964 followed by George Wallace and Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy" in 68 and 72 advanced Republican prospects with white Southerners. It would only be a matter of time before the Dixiecrat White South became the solidly white Republican South. And the harm they are doing to America is deep and in some cases irreversible.
221
And these southern conservatives held chairmanships of important senate committees. This history of the southern strategy is likely unknown to may younger people today. The big switch---it should be taught in schools, and repeated in opinion columns to relate it to our current problems. They didn't spring from out of nowhere.
And yet here we are 150 years later with the fumes of the Old Confederacy all around the Greedy Old Party as they fan the flames of division, violence and ignorance with voter suppression laws, uterine control laws, religious bigotry 'freedom' laws, gun-and-war promotion laws, plantation-owner tax welfare laws, the greatest disinformation campaign in the Western world today and an absolute refusal to compromise on almost any issue.
Today's Republican party is the party of sedition, happy to conspire with the President of Israel rather than to work with its own President.
Republican no-new-tax-nincompoopery is another form of sedition, allowing the nation's airports, roads, bridges and public education infrastructure to wither away because of bankrupt ideology focused solely on political gain that causes measurable national decay and destruction.
To be nice, one could call today's Republicans nihilists or anarchists, but the truth is much worse than that.
They are one-dimensional selfish greedheads hellbent on personal profit, happy to cook the country and the planet for more cash.
"A house divided against itself cannot stand."
"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
The words of Abraham Lincoln, who would be thrown out of today's Republican Party as a radical leftist sympathizer and skewered on FOX News as unpatriotic.
Party, Profits and Propaganda First; Country Last: GOP 2015
Today's Republican party is the party of sedition, happy to conspire with the President of Israel rather than to work with its own President.
Republican no-new-tax-nincompoopery is another form of sedition, allowing the nation's airports, roads, bridges and public education infrastructure to wither away because of bankrupt ideology focused solely on political gain that causes measurable national decay and destruction.
To be nice, one could call today's Republicans nihilists or anarchists, but the truth is much worse than that.
They are one-dimensional selfish greedheads hellbent on personal profit, happy to cook the country and the planet for more cash.
"A house divided against itself cannot stand."
"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
The words of Abraham Lincoln, who would be thrown out of today's Republican Party as a radical leftist sympathizer and skewered on FOX News as unpatriotic.
Party, Profits and Propaganda First; Country Last: GOP 2015
263
"They are one-dimensional selfish greedheads hellbent on personal profit, happy to cook the country and the planet for more cash."
Unfortunately, too many republicans are not wealthy or greedy; they are ill informed and under the spell of some ideology they absorbed from their religions and cultures. Too many are poor or simply misguided in the extreme. Some of my neighbors could not continue to live without the government benefits they rely on yet they continue to vote Republican against their own interests. It's tragic for our country.
Unfortunately, too many republicans are not wealthy or greedy; they are ill informed and under the spell of some ideology they absorbed from their religions and cultures. Too many are poor or simply misguided in the extreme. Some of my neighbors could not continue to live without the government benefits they rely on yet they continue to vote Republican against their own interests. It's tragic for our country.
5
Socarates.....Now the US is becoming just the opposite of the 'Union' that Lincoln upheld as the reason to fight the Civil War. We are in disunion. Funny that the S. Court decision that blessed as free speech the selling of our elections to the highest bidder is called “ Citizens United”. It has done more to disunite the United States than anything.
The divide in our democracy and economy is growing wider---as we wait to see what our Democratic party candidate Hillary sees fit to propose. She already raised 12 million and the election is Nov 2016! Lincoln spoke against big concentrations of corporate wealth infecting democracy.
The divide in our democracy and economy is growing wider---as we wait to see what our Democratic party candidate Hillary sees fit to propose. She already raised 12 million and the election is Nov 2016! Lincoln spoke against big concentrations of corporate wealth infecting democracy.
2
Socrates for President!!
2
I'm not to sure about the modern Republican response in the first two examples as they would both diminish the federal public estate in favor of private ownership. Witness last week's Senate to study transfer federal lands to the states.
2
The Homestead Act was the law of the land, passed by both Houses of Congress and signed by Lincoln. The "Dream Act" is legislation that since 2001 has not made it out of the legislative process. Way before Obama. That is a fundamental difference between the two Acts.
Lincoln, while a man of many opinions, did not enforce non-laws as Mr. Obama has tried to. History has a special lofty place for Lincoln; Obama will surely wind up in the "Dust-Bin of History"; remembered only for the huge rifts he tore in our Nation.
Lincoln, while a man of many opinions, did not enforce non-laws as Mr. Obama has tried to. History has a special lofty place for Lincoln; Obama will surely wind up in the "Dust-Bin of History"; remembered only for the huge rifts he tore in our Nation.
1
All arguments have at least two sides. Rifts don't grow from nothing. Who speaks against the Dream Act? Who speaks against Obama's ideas? The party of No. John Boehner declared a few years back that the Republican Party's main effort would be directed at getting Obama out of the White House. They have failed but not for lack of trying.
I submit that those rifts you mention were in place long before Mr. Obama was elected. If we want someone to blame for mess we find our government in, I nominate Lee Atwater.
Some of the best Republican Presidents elected to office-Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Ike, would all be castigated by today's GOP leadership for their progressive and compassionate ideals. Each made their mark in bettering this nation. What has today's GOP accomplished to better this country and its citizens?
293
The GOP has been a major force in shifting resources toward the 1% and diminishing the social safety net for the non-rich. They also recklessly de-stabilized the Middle East by pushing for GWB's unnecessary war. The GOP has worked for its constituency, the rich and corporations, not for the average citizen.
2
They made 1 percent even richer!
2
I would presume that almost all the Southern boys who were killed in the Civil war were poor sustenance farmers or poor laborers. The officer ranks might have been filled with the sons of the plantation owners but the major dying was done by the poor.
That was the last time American oligarchs asked poor southern boys to die for them. Now they are doing the same thing, oligarchs have convinced poor working stiff white guys to fight their fight for them while they rake in the spoils.
That was the last time American oligarchs asked poor southern boys to die for them. Now they are doing the same thing, oligarchs have convinced poor working stiff white guys to fight their fight for them while they rake in the spoils.
15
Of course, Lincoln has been immortalized for his strong will to do the right thing, free the slaves, an abomination of a country born to be free from the shackles of European religious constraints, among other things. And for the courage and determination to see it through. Today's Lincoln would, if he could, denounce the republicans for their pettiness in just about everything worth fighting for, and for their willful ignorance of science and the need to work collaboratively for renewal, and for an appetite for things 'grand, majestic, transformational'. And worse, a party that seems to be entitled to protect the 'rich and powerful', in clear detriment of the least among us.
6
Yes, today's Republican party is a blinkered, dyspeptic, reactionary millstone around the nation's neck but I would take the Democratic party equally to task for failing utterly to offer a full-throated endorsement of all the good things the Government can and should be doing. They are too afraid to think big and to talk big, so the national conversation has shrunk to the crabbed proportions of the GOP agenda which is essentially to say "No" to everything but tax cuts for the wealthy. The Democrat party should be shaming the Republicans at letting our nation literally fall to pieces, the Democrats should be saying with every issue "we can do better" than the reactionary, smug passivity that passes for policy with the GOP. Elizabeth Warren aside, they don't, or won't, or are too scared to.
16
Nicely written, Mr. Egan. I've heard several GOP politicos harping on the fact that it was the Party of Lincoln that had a hand in freeing the slaves, yet the GOP of today resembles bupkis of the GOP of old. Lincoln would have no place in today's GOP and they all know it.
I wholeheartedly blame Ronald Reagan's anti-government propaganda for the downfall of the Republican Party. Very few of them actually believe the government can be a force for good. Reagan, who ironically worked for the government, peddled the false notion that government is the enemy, after decades of progressive achievements brought so much prosperity to the middle class.
Yet Reagan has become their hero standard-bearer.
I wholeheartedly blame Ronald Reagan's anti-government propaganda for the downfall of the Republican Party. Very few of them actually believe the government can be a force for good. Reagan, who ironically worked for the government, peddled the false notion that government is the enemy, after decades of progressive achievements brought so much prosperity to the middle class.
Yet Reagan has become their hero standard-bearer.
10
The Republican party has become the last bastion of the mythical land of Father Knows Best. They now reside in the Alamo, with their muskets ready--for the coming onslaught of the moocher class. I do predict, at some point, maybe after losing the next national election, that there will be a reformation, but at this point, see few in the party ready to play the role of Martin Luther.
3
There is no doubt that, were he alive today, Lincoln would not be a Republican. However, it should be pointed out that fulfillment of his national vision, i.e., the Homestead Act and the Transcontinental Railroad, meant the destruction of the Native Americans who populated that land, mostly by the post-Civil War Union Army.
3
A sad but largely accurate take on where we stand today. In trying to look to our common future, Tim Egan's insights serve to remind me that we must seek out leaders who believe the government can be a force for good in our collective civic life. In my view, those who maintain that government can never be a force for good disqualify themselves from leadership.
222
Such individuals (under the umbrella of Ronald Reagan) are members of a Confederate mindset. I rather consider Reagan to be the second Confederate President of the United States. Royalists sit with Confederates since they embrace the "Plantation Mentality" to obtain their wealth. Such a mindset requires 'slaves' be they in chains or debt peonage.
Thanks, as always, Timothy! Your article provides such a good reminder that when I graduated from one of those "land grant colleges" (Oklahoma State University) in 1960, I was the first of my family's generation to do so. And, at my advanced age of 76, I believe that I've made good use of that investment in my future (having served as public school teacher & adminstrator in two states) before retirement.
Charlotte H. Coffelt
Houston, Texas
Charlotte H. Coffelt
Houston, Texas
7
Lincoln saw his destiny to be a healer -- to bring the divided nation back to equilibrium and mutual respect, with the stain of slavery excised. His vision was extinguished upon his death.
Politics today is viewed by most of its participants as a blunt instrument -- a cudgel -- not intended to heal or create equilibrium in our society, but to set faction against faction, belief against belief, rich against poor. The last time we were so divided, so antagonistic, so self-righteous, we fought a bloody civil war, a war that Lincoln so wanted to avoid, and a war that made him the "tiredest" man.
As a nation, I fear that we are all tired, if not completely fed up, with the path we are now traveling.
Politics today is viewed by most of its participants as a blunt instrument -- a cudgel -- not intended to heal or create equilibrium in our society, but to set faction against faction, belief against belief, rich against poor. The last time we were so divided, so antagonistic, so self-righteous, we fought a bloody civil war, a war that Lincoln so wanted to avoid, and a war that made him the "tiredest" man.
As a nation, I fear that we are all tired, if not completely fed up, with the path we are now traveling.
191
"Lincoln saw his destiny to be a healer -- to bring the divided nation
back to equilibrium and mutual respect, with the stain of slavery
excised. His vision was extinguished upon his death."
I suggest you read Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address in which he was willing to destroy the South if it persisted in its heinous efforts. Lincoln preferred peace but was willing to fight a war for justice. There should not be respect for today's Republicans, they are destroying our government by the people and for the people. If a person does not hate what they are doing he does not really love what this country can stand for.
back to equilibrium and mutual respect, with the stain of slavery
excised. His vision was extinguished upon his death."
I suggest you read Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address in which he was willing to destroy the South if it persisted in its heinous efforts. Lincoln preferred peace but was willing to fight a war for justice. There should not be respect for today's Republicans, they are destroying our government by the people and for the people. If a person does not hate what they are doing he does not really love what this country can stand for.
I think you are right-- there is a general fatigue among our people, almost a feeling of emotional and mental depression.
I'm reading Bully Pulpit by Doris Kearns Goodwin and can add that Theodore Roosevelt and Wm. Howard Taft -- two Republican giants -- would never pass muster in today's GOP. They were self-proclaimed progressives battling trusts and an entrenched plutocracy. They wanted government regulation of corporations run amok. While strongly pro business -- they saw industry as a singular route to national prosperity -- they also stood on the side of the working man and laborer. And, at least as Goodwin has portrayed them, neither was particularly religious. There's no mention of them ever going to church. Lots of hunting and parties, but no church. They, along with perhaps Dwight Eisenhower, are far more in line with Lincoln than anyone in today's Republican Party.
10
Thank you, thank you, Mr. Egan.
Everything you say is completely on target--Lincoln's broad use of the government for infrastructure such as the Transcontinental Railroad (he was also very interested in waterways and canals) and accommodation to those without land or a real future through the Homestead Act. He remains our greatest and most articulate president and should have been embraced by the GOP with pride.
The current crop--narrow minded, inarticulate and espousing ill-formed ideas--would have stunned Lincoln. It is hard to imagine that they could ever attain the level of leadership that Lincoln had. He would have said, "put the government to work for the benefit of the people", a notion that is wholly alien to today's GOP. Sadly, that little chit Grover Norquist's clarion call to make the government "small enough to drown in a bathtub" is exactly the mindset in Congress.
Everything you say is completely on target--Lincoln's broad use of the government for infrastructure such as the Transcontinental Railroad (he was also very interested in waterways and canals) and accommodation to those without land or a real future through the Homestead Act. He remains our greatest and most articulate president and should have been embraced by the GOP with pride.
The current crop--narrow minded, inarticulate and espousing ill-formed ideas--would have stunned Lincoln. It is hard to imagine that they could ever attain the level of leadership that Lincoln had. He would have said, "put the government to work for the benefit of the people", a notion that is wholly alien to today's GOP. Sadly, that little chit Grover Norquist's clarion call to make the government "small enough to drown in a bathtub" is exactly the mindset in Congress.
11
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." Lincoln's First Annual Message to Congress, December 3, 1861.
Free labor in Lincoln's day meant paying your dues as an apprentice or farmer's son and then becoming a proprietor. He hated indenture and bondage and the lost fruits of a man's labor unfairly to the other as the son of Tom Lincoln hired out to pull tree stumps for a neighbor without the slightest recompense, and as the young man who rafted to New Orleans to see men selling men. As the founding father of the entrepreneurial state, free land, free education and free men are his legacy, but in his name and under his party's banner, the enemies of labor push for-profit colleges, suppress the minimum wage, and drive down capital gains taxes in favor of sales taxes that fall hardest on working people.
Esteeming laborers while promoting their long-term access to capital (home loans, free quality education) is not Marxism, it's Lincolnism, the real American exceptionalism.
Free labor in Lincoln's day meant paying your dues as an apprentice or farmer's son and then becoming a proprietor. He hated indenture and bondage and the lost fruits of a man's labor unfairly to the other as the son of Tom Lincoln hired out to pull tree stumps for a neighbor without the slightest recompense, and as the young man who rafted to New Orleans to see men selling men. As the founding father of the entrepreneurial state, free land, free education and free men are his legacy, but in his name and under his party's banner, the enemies of labor push for-profit colleges, suppress the minimum wage, and drive down capital gains taxes in favor of sales taxes that fall hardest on working people.
Esteeming laborers while promoting their long-term access to capital (home loans, free quality education) is not Marxism, it's Lincolnism, the real American exceptionalism.
16
The 160 acres was an excellent example of a public/private partnership to develop American infrastructure and boost economic output. Notice that there were no specific requirements of what was done with the land. It was the new owner's prerogative to develop it any way they wished.
Such a plan allowed innovation and entrepreneurship to flourish. Intent is all that mattered. That's the free market at work.
Also notice that no restrictions were placed on who could own the land. Instead supply side trickle down nonsense, people that had nothing signed on. They worked hard. They suffered. Some prospered, some failed. No billionaire has ever worked as hard as a 19th century homesteader.
I just participated in one of the last US public/private partnerships. I built my own solar power system. State money rebated me $1.50 per watt. The feds gave me a 30% tax credit. I worked very hard to build it. I took risk. I could have very easily fallen off the roof. About 85% was covered by the assistance. Result. Society benefits because my system removes as much carbon from the air as about 5 acres of forest. I have an extra $1200/year that I can spend on other stuff or invest for retirement. Everyone wins.
The rebate money is 99% gone. The tax credit goes away next year. No way the Republicans in the State House or in Congress will reinstate them.
Our entire nation could be rebuilt with these types of partnership programs which the GOP fanatically opposes.
Such a plan allowed innovation and entrepreneurship to flourish. Intent is all that mattered. That's the free market at work.
Also notice that no restrictions were placed on who could own the land. Instead supply side trickle down nonsense, people that had nothing signed on. They worked hard. They suffered. Some prospered, some failed. No billionaire has ever worked as hard as a 19th century homesteader.
I just participated in one of the last US public/private partnerships. I built my own solar power system. State money rebated me $1.50 per watt. The feds gave me a 30% tax credit. I worked very hard to build it. I took risk. I could have very easily fallen off the roof. About 85% was covered by the assistance. Result. Society benefits because my system removes as much carbon from the air as about 5 acres of forest. I have an extra $1200/year that I can spend on other stuff or invest for retirement. Everyone wins.
The rebate money is 99% gone. The tax credit goes away next year. No way the Republicans in the State House or in Congress will reinstate them.
Our entire nation could be rebuilt with these types of partnership programs which the GOP fanatically opposes.
19
"Think of free land for the landless"
Rather, think of those whose land and homes were stolen and the genocide committed to steal the land from those that lived millennia on their lands. There was no "free" land to "given away" only land whose occupants, the few that survived, had been moved to concentration camps.
"Could the Republicans who control Congress in 2015, the party of no, ever pass a Homestead Act?" The answer is a clear yes, if the land being given away belonged was appropriated from non-Christians and be given solely to white, male, "Christians."
Rather, think of those whose land and homes were stolen and the genocide committed to steal the land from those that lived millennia on their lands. There was no "free" land to "given away" only land whose occupants, the few that survived, had been moved to concentration camps.
"Could the Republicans who control Congress in 2015, the party of no, ever pass a Homestead Act?" The answer is a clear yes, if the land being given away belonged was appropriated from non-Christians and be given solely to white, male, "Christians."
6
Actually Southerners were very progressive and even populistic economically - as long as it did not involve sharing anything with blacks or sectional disadvantage*. Southern legislators were very prominent in the New Deal, and tended to be opposed to Wall Street and Northern (Republican) plutocracy. They also supported the Great Society. But in the Civil Rights era the Republican party abandoned its own principles and offered sanctuary to racists, and Southerners dropped their economic progressivity in return.
Economists often assume that self-interest is paramount, but the party realignment shows that self-interest can be trumped by racism and sectionalism.
*Southerners needed to control the alignment of new states to maintain their advantage in Congress, which in turned maintained slavery and the plantation economy. The specific issue which caused secession was the entry of new states as slave or free.
Economists often assume that self-interest is paramount, but the party realignment shows that self-interest can be trumped by racism and sectionalism.
*Southerners needed to control the alignment of new states to maintain their advantage in Congress, which in turned maintained slavery and the plantation economy. The specific issue which caused secession was the entry of new states as slave or free.
8
When the Civil Rights legislation was passed in the 60's, led by the minority leader Everitt Dirksin, a greater percentage of Republican Senators voted for the Civil Rights legislation than did Democrats. Since that time the Dixiecrat members of the Democrat party have switched allegiance and for the last several years have taken over the leadership of the Republican Party (Trent Lott, Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey, Tom DeLay, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner). To me it is a wonder why so many of the Republicans choose to stay with the Party as it looks and behaves nothing like the Republican Party of 50 years ago. We can only hope that eventually many of the educated, suburban, white collar Republicans will desert those elements that thrive on pandering to bigots, become independent, and start voting the way they really believe.
30
Everett Dirksen was not really a leader in the fight for the civil rights legislation. Rather he was willing to go along with it.
And many Republicans have switched to the Democratic Party. When the civil rights legislation was passed, every northeastern state had at least one Republican senator; now there was only Collins from Maine.
And many Republicans have switched to the Democratic Party. When the civil rights legislation was passed, every northeastern state had at least one Republican senator; now there was only Collins from Maine.
1
In the 2008 POTUS election 57% of the white American majority voted McCain/Palin. And in 2012, that number increased to 59% for Romney/Ryan. While Republicans have lost the White House with this strategy they have won the Congress in 2010 and 2014. The white European American majority is aging and shrinking.
"Today, the South is solidly Republican and solidly obstructionist. The party is also solidly white. "
The South was run by a landed gentry who were attempting to expand their economic system, which was based on ownership of some human beings, and legal restrictions on land ownership. But that wasn't Big Government ... oh no! That was the magic of the free market at work.
The South was run by a landed gentry who were attempting to expand their economic system, which was based on ownership of some human beings, and legal restrictions on land ownership. But that wasn't Big Government ... oh no! That was the magic of the free market at work.
36
Sequel.......Yeah, The slave south was the biggest govt program you ever saw. And a dictatorship since any slave who ran away could be legally arrested, and the owners had life or death power over their human possessions. And, they said, this was an example of 'democracy', since all the whites favored it.
And it was god's will. Same today--ruthless capitalism allied with religion, driving our politics.
And it was god's will. Same today--ruthless capitalism allied with religion, driving our politics.
6
The Progressive President Lincoln formed much of the foundation upon which this country, until recently, rested. May those days soon return.
14
This article is thought provoking, regardless of what side of the political aisle you find yourself on. Like so many millions of other Americans, I pray for the time when our politicians focus once again on forming "a more perfect union" by promoting "the general welfare" as they were called to do by our forefathers.
314
Not as long as Mitchell, Boehner, Cruz, Graham and Rubio are around. And not as long as Citizens United allows Adelson and the Koch Brothers (money) to rule our political and governmental proceedings. There has been a secular shift toward oligarchy that may not be reservable.
4
This country cannot lose the narcissistic habit of praying too soon
1
There is no way to form a more perfect union with people who inhabit a different universe, since for them the perfect union is but a tactic to gain them time to gather their forces for another push. Coexistence is unstable; one of these universes will eventually be pushed underground by the other, but only one of them is pursuing this goal as such, while the other one just wants the struggle replaced by harmonious competition.
2
No, but doomed to repeat it.
1
No. Today's Republicans would never pass a Homestead Act. The party has turned into an angry seething mass fighting hard to destroy fundamental rights and the unfortunate thing is there is no way back for them because the best and brightest have left the fold in disgust.
27
"the best and brightest have left the fold in disgust"
It looks as if they gave up on politics altogether. They went away, and they are nowhere to be found in our public life today.
It looks as if they gave up on politics altogether. They went away, and they are nowhere to be found in our public life today.
4
If Timothy Egan is in the paper , his is the first column I read that day. I will never, ever forget the picture he painted for me in his heartbreaking book on the Dust Bowl of how The world looked with its grasses perfect for the winds and soil for the area, with the buffalo, a perfect animal for the conditions in the area and the Indian living and surviving there. And then, greed and ignorance hit. I am an informed citizen thanks to the NYT but an increasingly frantic and helpless citizen
38
Another difference between Lincoln and today's Republicans is his willingness to take a critical look at his own country's history. As in the Second Inaugural address, delivered a little over a month before his death, where he considers the possibility that God sent the Civil War as punishment for the Nation's racial sins. That's "American Exceptionalism" of a different sort than that which has become a litmus test for patriotic correctness among current Republicans.
241
I hope he considered it and rejected it. Even God Himself, if you believe the Book of Job, said he doesn't work that way.
1
A beautiful and heartbreaking column, your words on "Remains from LIncoln's Last Day", Tim Egan. His was one of the few greatest legacies of our elected Presidents.
Having had the privilege of working at Ford's Theatre in the late 1970s, it was an eerie honor to spend time close to the site of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln while he watched "Our American Cousin" from his box above the audience. The museum and the sad house across the street where he died are memorable and worth visiting. The first American President to be murdered by a demented white supremacist with a Derringer, shot Lincoln, leaped to the stage below and shouted "Sic semper tyrannis!". And though today's Republican ethos doesn't in the least resemble Abraham Lincoln's Republican ethos during his lifetime, the present-day GOP has the hubris to consider the ownership of guns as the one uniting agent of their party. cf NRA meeting, where all battling republican obstructionists today can only agree on gun ownership re the deeply flawed Second Amendment to the Constitution.. Lincoln said "Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history." Bless the memories of Lincoln, the greatest Republican, on this the 150th anniversary - 15 April) of his murder by gun. The party of Lincoln has transmogrified into a frightening nightmare of its former self. History will eloquently see to the party of the Southern naysayers. The party of the rich oligarchs is no longer the party of "Honest Abe".
Having had the privilege of working at Ford's Theatre in the late 1970s, it was an eerie honor to spend time close to the site of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln while he watched "Our American Cousin" from his box above the audience. The museum and the sad house across the street where he died are memorable and worth visiting. The first American President to be murdered by a demented white supremacist with a Derringer, shot Lincoln, leaped to the stage below and shouted "Sic semper tyrannis!". And though today's Republican ethos doesn't in the least resemble Abraham Lincoln's Republican ethos during his lifetime, the present-day GOP has the hubris to consider the ownership of guns as the one uniting agent of their party. cf NRA meeting, where all battling republican obstructionists today can only agree on gun ownership re the deeply flawed Second Amendment to the Constitution.. Lincoln said "Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history." Bless the memories of Lincoln, the greatest Republican, on this the 150th anniversary - 15 April) of his murder by gun. The party of Lincoln has transmogrified into a frightening nightmare of its former self. History will eloquently see to the party of the Southern naysayers. The party of the rich oligarchs is no longer the party of "Honest Abe".
33
Thank you Timothy!
13
Bravo!
17
Today's Republicans are the party of John Wilkes Booth, right down to the reliance on guns over thinking.
185
Lincoln saw America as a place with room for everyone to benefit.
Current republicans see America as a place ONLY for the benefit of their paymasters, the 1%.
Current republicans see America as a place ONLY for the benefit of their paymasters, the 1%.
40
I must admit, I have a hard time figuring out what drives the average Republican. Their party now has no compassion, no common sense, insomuch as the only ones benefiting from GOP policiy are the very rich. I'm familiar with the theory about low information voters going against their own best interests, but come on, how dumb can these folks be?
94
Gary, it is worse than you would have it. The most frightening reality is that these same low information voters are convinced that they are high information voters.
Intending to know the enemy, I spend some time here and there on conservative sites, watch some conservative events covered on CSPAN, etc. The rank ignorance puffed up with certainty is unnerving. During the comment section of one CSPAN covered Tea Party event, a member of the audience unleashed a spool of conspiracies and then asked how all the high information voters in the room could make sure all the low information voters who voted for liberals could get this information so that they would not keep making the same mistakes.
Intending to know the enemy, I spend some time here and there on conservative sites, watch some conservative events covered on CSPAN, etc. The rank ignorance puffed up with certainty is unnerving. During the comment section of one CSPAN covered Tea Party event, a member of the audience unleashed a spool of conspiracies and then asked how all the high information voters in the room could make sure all the low information voters who voted for liberals could get this information so that they would not keep making the same mistakes.
10
Gore Vidal once said that the challenge to Republicans is getting voters to support a party that is based solely on human greed.
And another great American writer, H.L. Mencken, said that nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.
I think those two quotes pretty much answer your questions.
And another great American writer, H.L. Mencken, said that nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.
I think those two quotes pretty much answer your questions.
18
Gary sit in any public space where people gather and eavesdrop on their conversations.
3
This article is deeply flawed in that its logic is bogus. Neither the Republican or Democratic Parties of 1865 have any relationship to today's parties that go by the same name. The premise here is about as superficial as can be.
3
So you're saying both parties have changed? Fine. Agreed. But the Republican Party has turned into a positive force for bad; The Democratic Party has turned into a weak, hesitant force for some good, anyway.
46
This is an article about the temperament and deeds of Abraham Lincoln. Timothy Egan is comparing Lincoln to modern day Republicans on the fundamentals of economic opportunity and their promotion. The terms are clear and relevant, as are the differences.
23
So, start a movement to have the GOP end references to Abe as if he were their ur-Republican.
8
Excellent piece. The still, sad music of American humanity. Is democracy a failure? Or is it the weakness of the US constitution that allows five conservative Roman Catholics to decide our politics and the primacy of money? The combination of the assault of wealth and the ignorance of voters leads the shining city on the hill into increasing darkness. Bread, circuses, and Apple watches! Who could want anything more?
65
@Des.....yes, I wonder....5 Catholics on the Court pushing 1 way and the Jews on the other side pushing the other way. That shows our polarization or 'disunion' right there. Where are the anglo saxon Protestants who were the founders and the majority in America?
2
None of this was possible when the South held the floor of the Senate before the war. They held back the progress of the nation. The South had no interest in making New England Yankees rich. Without the South, at least for a half-dozen years, America surged ahead to become an industrial power. All this would not have been possible without the foresight of a leader like Lincoln.
56
makes you kinda wish we had not been reunited with the confederacy, doesn't it?
Mine eyes have seen the glory
of the coming of the Jeb,
he pretends to stand for everything
beloved by the red,
he panders to the neocons
who share his ample bed,
his family marches on.
Sorry, sorry California,
there's little rain a-falling on ya,
I'll fix it when I'm in
just believe in all my spin,
and yes, I'll bomb Iran.
of the coming of the Jeb,
he pretends to stand for everything
beloved by the red,
he panders to the neocons
who share his ample bed,
his family marches on.
Sorry, sorry California,
there's little rain a-falling on ya,
I'll fix it when I'm in
just believe in all my spin,
and yes, I'll bomb Iran.
72
How ironic Lincoln was killed by a White Supremicist and today his party , the GOP, thrives in the South as a bastion against progressive government.Nixon seized on the Southern strategy of the GOP as a racist antidote to the Civil rights Act, school integration and Voting Rights Act.All of these were passed and approved by Congreess and the Supreme Court to finish the mission of Lincoln. Today GOP
Senators and Congressmen in Georgia get elected merely by advertising their disaproval of our first Black president and advocacy of dissension from federal programs like Medicaid and Obamacare . Staes rights and gerrymandering to deprive minorities of representation are alive and well under the GOP in the old South. Only the parties advocating increased states rightsand limited representation have changed.
Senators and Congressmen in Georgia get elected merely by advertising their disaproval of our first Black president and advocacy of dissension from federal programs like Medicaid and Obamacare . Staes rights and gerrymandering to deprive minorities of representation are alive and well under the GOP in the old South. Only the parties advocating increased states rightsand limited representation have changed.
34
Nice piece, but what about the Morrill Act that donated land for agriculture & mechanical colleges in the states, signed by Lincoln in 1862. Certainly one of the top five acts of congress ever, I think!
11
Egan: "In 1862, Lincoln signed legislation spurring construction of the transcontinental railroad. That same year, he approved a bill that led to the creation of land grant colleges."
7
The Republican Party was founded in 1854 as a radical alternative to the conservative policies that preserved aristocratic WASP privilege and kept the underclasses in their place. At its inception, the Party opposed not only the pro-slavery Democrats but also the American, or "Know-Nothing" Party, which incited hatred against immigrants.
Fast forward to 1966: a Senator named Strom Thurmond, who had run as a segregationist in the 1948 Democratic Presidential primaries and then received 39 electoral votes as an independent Dixiecrat in that fall's election and had served as a Democratic Senator from South Carolina since 1954, ran for re-election as a Republican. Why?
Fellow Dixie Democrat George Wallace once promised, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever!" President Johnson had signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and that same year, three rights activists from the North who were attempting to help African Americans register to vote were murdered and buried in Mississippi.
Southern Democrats supported an Athenian-type democracy, in which everyone allowed to vote could vote. When Kennedy and then Johnson committed to racial equality, the South flipped: Thurmond became a Republican, Nixon devised a Southern Strategy, and Reagan kicked off his presidential campaign by touting "states’ rights," the polite version of "segregation forever!" in Philadelphia, Mississippi.
Lincoln was a Republican. Let's stop pretending that he would be a Republican today.
Fast forward to 1966: a Senator named Strom Thurmond, who had run as a segregationist in the 1948 Democratic Presidential primaries and then received 39 electoral votes as an independent Dixiecrat in that fall's election and had served as a Democratic Senator from South Carolina since 1954, ran for re-election as a Republican. Why?
Fellow Dixie Democrat George Wallace once promised, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever!" President Johnson had signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and that same year, three rights activists from the North who were attempting to help African Americans register to vote were murdered and buried in Mississippi.
Southern Democrats supported an Athenian-type democracy, in which everyone allowed to vote could vote. When Kennedy and then Johnson committed to racial equality, the South flipped: Thurmond became a Republican, Nixon devised a Southern Strategy, and Reagan kicked off his presidential campaign by touting "states’ rights," the polite version of "segregation forever!" in Philadelphia, Mississippi.
Lincoln was a Republican. Let's stop pretending that he would be a Republican today.
564
Kennedy lowered taxes and supported free trade. He was a Democrat...let's not pretend he would be a Democrat today
1
And you can add to this blame Nixon a Republican for not vetoing the 1st abortion rights bill after Roe vs. Wade
1
Well historians have also surmised that Lincoln's motives were not as humanitarian as the passing of history has lead the public to believe. A somewhat equal motives for freeing the slaves were economic as well as military issues, to disrupt the southern economy during the war....
1
How true. The reversal began the day LBJ signed civil rights and voter rights laws into effect. The South turned away from the Democratic Party, the party that had always supported the little guy, when the little guy was redefined to include people of color.
325
In reality the killer is Brown vs Board of Ed (1954?). This is when the whites began their Southern Strategy. White people abandoned the cities and public schools in the greatest demographic changes of the 20th century. They left us with inner-city ghettos and miserable public education in most of the USA.
We should have cut the South loose in 1861.
69
Right, but we'd have had to invade later, to bring them civilization and American values.
Hey. That would mean my life would have been controlled and by southern politicians. Thanks.
Not too late, it can still be done.
Egan is one of the best editorial writers there are; I always read his column. Thanks to the Times' management for offering his comments. Right up there with Paul Krugman and Roger Cohen.
148
Today's GOP will not make their historical standard bearers proud. People like Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt have absolutely no chance of success in GOP. I doubt even Reagan will be able to secure the nomination for president.
10
Tim, the party labels have been so completely reversed in the 150 years since Lincoln's martyrdom that today's progressives would likely have identified with the Radical Republicans had they been alive back then.
Conversely, the Republicans have become the party of Jefferson Davis and George Pendleton - and they can have Andrew Jackson as well.
Tim, the Republicans are no more the party of Lincoln than the Democrats are the party of Strom Thurmond.
Conversely, the Republicans have become the party of Jefferson Davis and George Pendleton - and they can have Andrew Jackson as well.
Tim, the Republicans are no more the party of Lincoln than the Democrats are the party of Strom Thurmond.
81
Yes, the Democrats of Mr. Lincoln's time were for states rights and small government while the Whig Party, which Mr. Lincoln was a member of before it was replaced by the Republicans, and the Republicans were for greater federal government involvement.
And all those bills such as land grant colleges, the Homestead Act, and the building of the transcontinental railroad never would have been passed if the Southerners hadn't left the Congress leaving it in overwhelming Republican control. If all those southern Republicans today left Congress leaving the liberal Democrats in control, you'd see a lot of Federal action that is now blocked.
And all those bills such as land grant colleges, the Homestead Act, and the building of the transcontinental railroad never would have been passed if the Southerners hadn't left the Congress leaving it in overwhelming Republican control. If all those southern Republicans today left Congress leaving the liberal Democrats in control, you'd see a lot of Federal action that is now blocked.
12
Mr. Egan:
You have painted an excellent word picture of the contemporary Republican Party.
Not only is the present-day GOP no longer the party of Lincoln, but Republicans continued efforts to undermine the legitimate government of the United States and the U.S. Constitution (e.g., Republican letter to Iran--a possible violation of the Logan Act, not confirming Loretta Lynch as the next Attorney General of the United States for the apparent reason that she is a black woman, passing Religious Freedom Restoration Acts that are really stalking horses for codifying religiously-sanctioned discrimination, etc.) make it the party of Jefferson Davis.
Also, the hypocrisy and moral depravity of the GOP seems to be on full display at an NRA convention in Tennessee. To read more on this hypocrisy, go here: http://tinyurl.com/GOP-firing-blanks.
You have painted an excellent word picture of the contemporary Republican Party.
Not only is the present-day GOP no longer the party of Lincoln, but Republicans continued efforts to undermine the legitimate government of the United States and the U.S. Constitution (e.g., Republican letter to Iran--a possible violation of the Logan Act, not confirming Loretta Lynch as the next Attorney General of the United States for the apparent reason that she is a black woman, passing Religious Freedom Restoration Acts that are really stalking horses for codifying religiously-sanctioned discrimination, etc.) make it the party of Jefferson Davis.
Also, the hypocrisy and moral depravity of the GOP seems to be on full display at an NRA convention in Tennessee. To read more on this hypocrisy, go here: http://tinyurl.com/GOP-firing-blanks.
105
Not only is Loretta Lynch a black woman, but she was nominated by President Obama, our first black President.
5
Today's naysayers are utterly controlled by the pledge they've signed to Grover Norquist's anti-tax group; it takes even takes precedence over their oaths of office, as we saw when they refused to raise taxes to pay for war(s) against those they said attacked us.
Think of it - the war party won't even raise taxes to pay for defending ' the Homeland '.
Grover Norquist is the most important person in D.C., and we can tell from what he said at CPAC when Romney was running:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/13/grover-norquist-speech-...
that if there is another Lincoln, he won't come from the GOP.
Think of it - the war party won't even raise taxes to pay for defending ' the Homeland '.
Grover Norquist is the most important person in D.C., and we can tell from what he said at CPAC when Romney was running:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/13/grover-norquist-speech-...
that if there is another Lincoln, he won't come from the GOP.
100
and now I think they are making a pro-Israel pledge. Aren't both of these seditious acts, when they put something or someone above the constitution they are supposed to protect and defend above all?
Well done.
"Government, in their minds, can never be a force for good."
Government, in their hands, will never be a force for good.
"Government, in their minds, can never be a force for good."
Government, in their hands, will never be a force for good.
294
Now Lincoln rotates in his grave
At how today's Repubs behave,
Massive vote buyers,
Climate change deniers,
Tax cuts for the Rich which they crave!
Hostile to those Lincoln set free,
Denying the vote, virulently,
Assaulting Barack
Mainly 'cause he's Black,
Cowed by a Party named Tea!
At how today's Repubs behave,
Massive vote buyers,
Climate change deniers,
Tax cuts for the Rich which they crave!
Hostile to those Lincoln set free,
Denying the vote, virulently,
Assaulting Barack
Mainly 'cause he's Black,
Cowed by a Party named Tea!
161
Those who talk the most loudly of their patriotism also say, in virtually the same breath, how they despise our government; and those who support "Second Amendment Rights," have stopped insisting that it is hunting and "sport," but rather their perceived need to prepare for armed rebellion, which motivates them.
As we commemorate Lincoln's death, it's hard not to wonder what our country might be like today, had he just let the South go. I think we would all be happier. Except maybe for the slaves.