Abraham Lincoln is almost as controversial a figure today as he was136 years ago at the time of his assassination in 1865. His legacy is presently under attack from some on the left as well as from some on the libertarian/conservative right. Leading the charge on the left is court historian Doris Kearns Goodwin and Hollywood producer Steven Spielberg. They are, reportedly, spearheading an effort to knock Lincoln off his pedestal with charges of racism and mental problems. They are smearing his wife. This is the same school that wants Washington and Jefferson discredited, along with their utterances concerning freedom and liberty, because they were slave owners. This is nothing short of a concerted effort to denigrate the American civilization with it’s notions of individual rights, liberty, private ownership etc..by attacking our heroes of history.
The attack from the conservative side is, however, quite astonishing to me. Since my recent article, Abraham Lincoln – America’s Greatest President, I have received extremely vituperative, and in some cases, downright personal email from conservatives. One conservative publication, which usually carries my articles, refused to print this one presumably because it favored Lincoln. Reasonable people can differ, and these differences make me proud to be conservative as opposed to a left that generally demands conformity. My position, however, remains the same with regard to Lincoln and I will try to spell it out here.
Lincoln, I contend, was, besides George Washington, our greatest president because he dealt with the most dangerous conspiracy this Republic ever faced, one that intended to smash this nation to smithereens. The issue of slavery, while certainly a source of friction, was enflamed, on both sides, by interests that sought to destroy the USA. This was the same dialectical process that the Communists attempted to use to create class warfare in the 1930’s and race warfare in the 1960’s. The conspiracy Lincoln confronted made the Communist conspiracy look like a picnic in comparison and Lincoln confronted it head on to the degree that he sacrificed his own life.
This was not an issue of North verses South. The idea of secession actually started in New England during the War of 1812. This was not an issue of slavery per se because Lincoln clearly stated that, if elected, he would not attempt to abolish slavery in the slave states. This was not an issue of states rights. The southern slave states were demanding more federal control over the states to protect slavery. The three examples of this were the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, the Kansas/Nebraska Act of 1854 and the Dred Scott decision of 1858, all favoring unconstitutional federal interference over all the states to protect slave interests.
Several factors contributed to the destruction of the Union. Lincoln stated that “combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary machinery of peacetime government had assumed control of various Southern states.” This “combination” Lincoln referred to was, most likely, the Knights of the Golden Circle, a secretive organization that counted much of the Confederate elite, including Jefferson Davis, as members. The KGC sought the establishment of a huge slaveholding empire including the Southern states, Mexico, the West Indies, Central America and parts of South America. Much was known about this group at the time, but they are rarely mentioned today.
The secession, and the KGC influence was not limited to the South. According to Jim Marrs, author of Rule by Secrecy, the KGC agitated, through a network of pro Confederate Copperheads, to create a “Northwest Confederacy” made up of mid western states. This would be accomplished by the seizure of federal arsenals and the freeing of Confederate prisoners. These plans were thwarted by Lincoln who responded by declaring a state of semi martial law. Lincoln was dealing with a subversive emergency far graver than the Communist subversion of the 20th century. Under the circumstances, Lincoln acted appropriately by protecting the Nation. There is every evidence, based on his writings, that he intended to return to the status quo ante after the emergency had subsided.
The British and the French were clamoring to enter the war on the side of the Confederacy. With regimental bands playing “Dixie,” according to Marrs, Britain sent eleven thousand additional troops to Canada which had become a haven for Confederate agents. France installed Archduke Maximilian as emperor of Mexico where supplies were transported across the Texas border, in defiance of the Union naval blockade, and French troops were poised on the Texas border. Marrs contends that both France and England were ready to step in just as soon as the North and South had bled each other dry.
International bankers were loaning money to both sides and appeared to be playing each side off against each other. Lincoln rebuffed efforts by the “money power,” as he called it, to establish a central bank, which would loan the government money at interest. Instead, Lincoln authorized, in 1862, the issuance of Greenbacks, interest free, fiat currency, which emanated directly from the US Treasury and bypassed the banks. There would not be another attempt by the bankers to establish a central bank in this country until 1913 and the establishment of the Federal Reserve System.
Lincoln also spurned the efforts of the Radical Republicans as all of his writings indicate that he intended to return to the status quo ante after the insurrection with regard to states rights and the southern states. He did not seek the revenge that would eventually be wracked on the South after his assassination. His only qualification for a re admittance into the Union for the South would have been the abolition of slavery in accordance with the emancipation proclamation. Lincoln’s writings indicate a profound respect for, and understanding of our constitution. He was dealing with an emergency that, the likes of which, God willing, this Republic will never face again.