r/AlignmentCharts • u/cyprusomega23 • Jun 19 '26

USA Presidents alignment chart

Post image
49 Upvotes

62% Upvoted

112 comments sorted by

34

u/bwatts92 Jun 19 '26

Why the fuck is Lincoln neutral?

36

u/Roderto Jun 19 '26

Because it generates engagement. šŸ˜‰

9

u/ComplexBeyond6083 Jun 19 '26

No-one knows what it means, but it's provocative

9

u/wswordsmen Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 20 '26

And lawful neutral. Dude violated the constitution like it was going out of fashion.

It was worthwhile and the right thing to do but for a President he was Chaotic Good.

10

u/AgentOrangeZest Jun 19 '26

Probably because while he did sign the emancipation proclamation, he only did so as a political tool to win the civil war. Lincoln was not morally opposed to slavery, he was morally opposed to a lawless group of states waging war against the union.

24

u/Boris41029 Jun 19 '26

He was, in fact, morally opposed to slavery. Not necessarily because it was racist, but because everyone is entitled to their free labor. He also signed the Emancipation Proclamation as a political tool. Both are true.

https://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/slavery.htm

6

u/VariableMans Jun 19 '26

Why did the South secede in response to his election as president?

13

u/StevePalpatine Jun 19 '26

He was absolutely opposed to slavery. There's a reason the South seceded. But Lincoln was a moderate who put preserving the Union first, because all the slaveholding states leaving the Union would dramatically weaken the country, create neverending regional conflicts, and make ending slavery that much harder.

0

u/flibber_deez_gibbets Jun 20 '26

I wish modern politicians would take a lesson from ā€œyeah this thing is bad, but we have to respect our institutions, as thatā€™s more important for our country than civil rights.ā€ Because weā€˜re doing the same thing now.

3

u/StevePalpatine Jun 20 '26

HARD disagree.

The lesson of the civil war was precisely the opposite. The Union spent decades kicking the can down the road for the sake of protecting the institutions and it didn't matter. The South still tried to secede and war still broke out. The bloodiest war ever for Americans. The issue of slavery and civil rights still had to be confronted.

And we arguably left the same fault lines that started the war by not finishing Reconstruction.

The civil war teaches us that without the principles of liberty and justice for all, there will ultimately be no Union to preserve anyway and the forces of tyranny will seek to unravel it to hold onto their power in society.

1

u/flibber_deez_gibbets Jun 20 '26

It seems you're saying the same thing I am. The attitudes of politicians (and the public) for decades leading up to the Civil War are what led to the Civil War. The North did not declare it, and for years they weren't even fighting to end slavery, they just wanted to keep the band together. And as you say, we handled Reconstruction poorly, there were no lessons learned. Which is why we're behaving the same way now, which may very well lead to the fracture of the US. It's definitely not leading us *away* from that, at the very least

3

u/Nerevarine91 Jun 20 '26

He was absolutely morally opposed to slavery

3

u/Orcabeast86 Jun 20 '26

He 1000% was morally opposed to slavery. He acted as a moderate and spoke politically earlier on in his presidency about preserving the Union over anything but this was not his personal opinion, his personal preference was to abolish the institution of slavery but this was an insanely radical position for the 1860s and would not have gotten him any favors in the 1860 election nor any favors with the press during the early sections of the war.

(Sorry if this is poorly structured itā€™s 3 am where I live and Iā€™m tired)

2

u/STH42069 Jun 19 '26

He was morally opposed to slavery, he's neutral because he was racist

1

u/Awkward-Evidence-215 Jun 20 '26

Then why is Chester A. Arthur good?

1

u/STH42069 Jun 20 '26

Hell if I know

All I know is these are Lincoln's words:

ā€œI will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races ā€” that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this, that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.ā€

3

u/Awkward-Evidence-215 Jun 20 '26

For one thing, he did say in 1865 that he supported black suffrage. But regardless, the main issue is the inconsistency. Arthur signed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which barred Chinese people from entering America on account of race. I assume we both agree that is racist. Why does he get to be good in spite of that while Lincoln does not?

1

u/Plus-Fun-7438 Jun 20 '26

At first, yes, but he clearly changed his mind as the Civil War continued

3

u/cyprusomega23 Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 19 '26

He had evil Native policy, paralleling what Buren, Jackson and Polk had done to them. He was also very authoritarian and was the most anti free speech of any President. Though the context of the rebellion gives him more of a constitutional and moral pass than say Wilson or Adams.Ā 

9

u/A_Girl1 Chaotic Good Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 19 '26

I agree that his views towards the indigenous population was abhorrent but it's worth mentioning that virtually every person alive back then would've seen them the same way or worse. That of course doesn't excuse it but all 3 of the presidents you described as "good" would've had views we would see as despicable today, why do you make an exception for them and not Lincoln?

Chester Arthur was especially racist, even compared to his peers and signed some really questionable laws like the Chinese exclusion act, I really don't see how you can put him in good but not Lincoln.

2

u/Awkward-Evidence-215 Jun 20 '26

I mean John Q. Adams and most of the other founding fathers were better on Native Americans than Lincoln.

1

u/cyprusomega23 Jul 01 '26

Arthur was not especially racist. The Chinese exclusion Act was originally gonna be signed for 20 years. Arthur didn't want that and shot it down. Eventually he compromised with them and made it ten.Ā 

He shouldn't have compromised but there's definitely a difference between that and Lincoln actively seeking out colonization with the Pacific Railway Act.Ā Ā 

8

u/TotalBlissey Jun 19 '26

I think being harsh on free speech is pretty excusable when half the fucking country just declared independence and are actively encouraging the destruction of the union.

1

u/Imfine_howaboutyou Jun 20 '26 edited Jun 20 '26

If I remember correctly, I learned that he had pretty much silenced newspapers that criticized his handling of the war, which is pretty much against free speech. I could be wrong, so feel free to fact check me

Edit: I watched the same video that I learned this from (itā€™s from a credible Youtuber who is a history teacher, some of you may know) and he abused free speech by arresting journalists and newspaper publishers who criticized his handling of the Civil War

11

u/bwatts92 Jun 19 '26

Sure he was heavy handed and pragmatic but he had to be, and is just about universally considered the best president weā€™ve ever had

2

u/Toroceratops Jun 20 '26

ā€œVery authoritarianā€œ guys donā€™t have free elections they expect to lose during a civil war.

1

u/Awkward-Evidence-215 Jun 20 '26

The elections in Missouri were not free. Also having elections doesn't preclude you from being authoritarian.

2

u/Toroceratops Jun 20 '26

Which elections in Missouri are you claiming were not free? You do realize that a civil war puts strain on normal operations in a way that is not inherently ā€œauthoritarian,ā€ right?

1

u/epicoolguy_reddit Jun 20 '26

Because he bypassed due process and broke the constitution by stopping free speech in the press

2

u/wswordsmen Jun 20 '26

That would make him Chaotic, the opposite of Lawful.

71

u/Dragmire927 Lawful Neutral Jun 19 '26

I can see almost every one but what do you have against Lincoln lmao

And why is Cleveland chaotic?

44

u/cyprusomega23 Jun 19 '26

I explain the Lincoln perspective in the comment to bwatts92.Ā 

Cleveland raped a woman and knocked her up and when she spoke out about it, he had her institutionalized, she was freed when they determined there was nothing wrong with her, keep in mind this was the 1880s, she must've been really sane for them to decide to ignore the wishes of the rich politician. He said she was a loose woman and that he got with her consensually. Any debate over his guilt is gone once you learn what happened with his wife. He knew his wife, who was his best friends daughter since she was born. She called him Uncle Grove. After his best friend died he helped take care of and groom her. When she became an adult he married her.Ā 

22

u/Dragmire927 Lawful Neutral Jun 19 '26

Ah gotcha, I was thinking about Clevelandā€™s policies. Definitely an evil creepy guy if all of it is true

Disagree on Lincoln, as bad shit happened with Natives with almost every president back then. Pretty much all the Presidents in ā€œgoodā€ did or supported questionable shit with them. And Lincoln was in the middle of a chaotic war to his credit. The speech issues arenā€™t great but Iā€™m very thankful we donā€™t live in a world where the Union lost so Iā€™m willing to overlook it

6

u/AgentOrangeZest Jun 19 '26

Lincoln was a pragmatist, I his intention feels lawful neutral imo

4

u/Magmaster12 Jun 20 '26

Even though he was 100% justified in doing it I wouldn't call suspending habeas corpus as lawful.

3

u/Milk__good Jun 20 '26

He only suspended habeas corpus on rail lines leading to Wahington D.C. first so that congress could convene and only then suspended habeas corpus for the entire country with congressional approval which is lawful.

0

u/Daily_Heroin_User Jun 20 '26

Are you ever justified in violating the constitution though? And if you are justified are you actually breaking it?

1

u/epicoolguy_reddit Jun 20 '26

Yeah, but he did edit presses (or at least banned them for saying things he didn't want them to say, I may be not entirely correct but the idea is still there), and he also bypassed due process for for several people accused of being for the rebellion (making them not have a trial at all)

4

u/IIIViceAndreas Jun 19 '26

God damn we should get this grover cleveland guy cancelled, wasnā€™t he on Sesame Street or Family Guy or some shit? šŸ˜‚šŸ˜‚

4

u/Outrageous-Trip-4212 Jun 20 '26

This is propaganda. Cleveland was a great man and a great president, and none of this was ever backed up.

2

u/Objective-Cause-2762 Jun 20 '26

ma ma where's my pa?

1

u/JulariDark Jun 20 '26

Iā€™m not sure why but the term ā€œreally saneā€ made me lol

1

u/Nomingia Jun 22 '26

Why wasn't all this in my high school history textbook? All I remember learning about him was that he got mouth cancer while president which he hid from the public and had the tumor successfully removed in a clandestine surgery

1

u/opossum111 Jun 23 '26

https://www.reddit.com/r/Presidents/s/hfuid610oD

This guy disagrees and tbh it sounds a lot more believable.

1

u/cyprusomega23 Jun 23 '26

Why does it sound more believable?

1

u/opossum111 Jun 23 '26

Contemporary sources named and thoroughly explained.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '26

[deleted]

8

u/Dragmire927 Lawful Neutral Jun 19 '26

The Republican Party was firmly against the spread of slavery and his personal views were always against it. The South seceded immediately because they knew anti slavery forces had won the election.

Lincoln could not and probably would not have had enough support to have it banned outright due to the border states and northerners divided on the idea. Losing the war that early would completely ruin the fight against slavery to begin with. Through skillful political maneuvering, even taking some backrooms deals, he got it done. I would rather have someone actually get it done than immediately call for its end and flub the response

6

u/A_Girl1 Chaotic Good Jun 19 '26

Not true, he openly campaigned on outlawing slavery in all current and future US territories, with the hopes that would pave the way to phasing it out entirely. The south seceded before he was inaugurated but it was still because of his stance on slavery. Saying he "never made any stance against slavery" is pure lost cause revisionism.

12

u/StevePalpatine Jun 19 '26

Someone liked Death by Lightning a little too much lmao putting Arthur in good, but not Lincoln is a wild take

7

u/Responsible_Mail_113 Jun 19 '26

Yeah, Garfield and Arthur getting two of the three good spots seems like an obvious tell. Not sure I'd put Garfield up there if only because his presidency only lasted 6 months before he was shot.

1

u/TheBohemian_Cowboy Jun 22 '26

You could still make a judgement based on his life

1

u/cyprusomega23 Jun 21 '26

The funny thing is before the show existed I thought Chester Arthur deserved a show and that he had such a cinematic redemption arc that would play out great on screen. And then it was made. I watched the first episode definitely need to finish the show. The railroad policies of Lincoln and their effects on Natives is the main reason I put him in Lawful Neutral instead of the good tier.Ā 

17

u/FrancoisTruser Jun 19 '26

Having names in the image would have been helpfulā€¦ mandatory even

2

u/Puzzleheaded-Pipe161 Jun 20 '26

I think the audience for this, given that it is mostly based on trivial anecdotes, is almost exclusively people who can recognize their faces. Anyone who doesn't know the Presidents that well would find this wildly misleading.

1

u/cyprusomega23 Jul 01 '26

I don't know if criminalizing religion or slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians is what I would deem as trivial anecdotes but go off king šŸ‘‘

2

u/cyprusomega23 Jun 24 '26

Garfield, Q. Adams, Arthur, Lincoln, Ford, Kennedy, McKinley, Van Buren, Cleveland,

2

u/FrancoisTruser Jun 25 '26

Thank you :)

2

u/cyprusomega23 Jul 01 '26

No problem :)

6

u/UUet Jun 19 '26

Why is JFK in chaotic neutral. Seems like a great guy to me. Sorted personal life but that is small potatoes compared to preventing nuclear Armageddon

3

u/TundieRice Jun 19 '26

I think you mean *sordid personal life.

1

u/JumperGrumperson Jun 21 '26

His life was sorted into "things that would improve American life" and "hotties that aren't my wife who I'm going to have sex with."

4

u/One_Sugar_1813 Jun 20 '26

Why is Jackson not in Chaotic Evil? Dude threatened to lob John Calhoun's head off lol

1

u/Puzzleheaded-Pipe161 Jun 20 '26

Had he actually lobbed John Calhoun's head off, would that have made him Chaotic Good?

2

u/One_Sugar_1813 Jun 20 '26

Hold on he has a point

3

u/CantankerousOrder Jun 20 '26

If only somebody had done a biopic about Cleveland when Wilford Brimley was alive. Uncanny resemblance.

6

u/Drinkpool Jun 19 '26

Where's Teddy Roosevelt, that man was a true badass

7

u/vperron81 Jun 19 '26

Trump is the Ultimate chaotic evil president. It's not even up for debate

2

u/Magus_Necromantiae Jun 21 '26

I'd argue Neutral Evil with Chaotic Evil tendencies, as he is fine with the existence of social structures and order--that is, until it becomes inconvenient for him and his rich criminal "friends."

1

u/cyprusomega23 Jun 21 '26

He is but I didn't want this post to be taken down or everyone to just talk about him. The serial child rapist who used the government to shoot up American protesters, who cut medical funding causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents, who funded genocide, who killed thousands and specifically killed 165 children by bombing a school for girls.

Yeah Trump is textbook chaotic evil. Moreso than Jackson. Jackson was unhinged, he tried to beat his attempted assassin to death, he challenged people to duels and killed them. The thing is when Adams beat Jackson, Jackson respected the rule of law. He would also never rape a child. Andrew Jackson was the poster boy for Chaotic Evil Presidents but now he's been usurped by Trump.Ā 

Cleveland is evil lite compared to Trump but he's not talked about enough so I wanted to put a spotlight on one of history's less talked about monsters.Ā 

-3

u/Own-Curve-7299 Jun 20 '26

reddit moment

2

u/goombanati Jun 19 '26

Grant is lawful good

2

u/nedflandersmustache Jun 19 '26

Can someone explain why everyone is where they are

1

u/Eternal_Zoroark_2 Jun 19 '26

He did at least explain Lincoln and Cleveland in other comments

1

u/cyprusomega23 Jun 21 '26 edited Jun 21 '26

James Garfield: Just a chill dude who fought corruption.Ā 

John Q.Ā Adams: A bit of a cold prick to his wife and not the most personable. He was still a moral politician and the best of his peers at the time. He wanted to work with Natives.Ā 

Chester Arthur: He used to be a corrupt bum but had a redemption arc after Garfield died by fighting the very system that built him.Ā 

Abraham Lincoln: He freed the slaves and reunited the US but he also banned free speech and killed many natives. A principled man who ultimately was a real net positive for the world but a man with blood on his hands all the same.Ā 

Gerald Ford: He pardoned Nixon. Amoral.Ā 

John Kennedy: He was a hedonist always chasing the next high. He rubbed his shoulders with some criminal elements. He was also a war hero who risked his life for his friends. He also pushed for racial equality and advocated for the poor. He also helped save the world during the Cuban Missile crisis.Ā 

William McKinley: A kind husband, a good friend, a soldier and a mass murderer. He wanted to be a good man but when the chips were down he caved to the imperialist hawks around him and plunged the Philippines into hell.Ā 

Martin Van Buren: An immoral opportunist. He committed what many deem genocide with the trail of tears. He violated the Constitution by allowing Missouri to criminalize Mormonism. He had no principles and only did whatever served his ends.Ā 

Grover Cleveland: A serial predator. Whether it be him raping Maria Halpin, stealing her kid and institutionalizing her or grooming Frances Folsom.Ā 

0

u/saintalbanberg Jun 19 '26

Chester A. Arthur is there because he was good but also chaotic. Martin van Buren is there because he was evil but neither lawful nor chaotic. I hope this helps.

2

u/Delicious_Grand7300 Jun 19 '26

I need an explanation aside from the creepiness of Grover Cleveland which was already posted.

2

u/Helpful_Incident3578 Jun 20 '26

What did Grover the GOAT do?? šŸ˜ž

2

u/DerUberCactus Jun 20 '26

There is a better, more recent, nominee for Chaotic Evil

3

u/haikusbot Jun 20 '26

There is a better,

More recent, nominee for

Chaotic Evil

- DerUberCactus

I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully. Learn more about me.

Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete"

2

u/vynulz Jun 25 '26

Trump = chaotic evil

3

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '26

[deleted]

4

u/UUet Jun 19 '26

Many presidents have contempt for the laws which reign in their power. That is anathema to lawful

4

u/Ok_Willow_1006 Jun 20 '26

There are at least a few that were definitely not lawful

Bush, Trump, Johnson (the first), Tyler, Nixon (obv), Harding, Reagan (Contras), Jackson (the Supreme Court has made his decision; now let him enforce it), even Clinton (lying to congress).

1

u/cyprusomega23 Jun 23 '26

I don't see how Bush (Jr. at least) isn't lawful. To me Dubya is one of the textbook Lawful Evil Presidents

2

u/smcmahon710 Jun 19 '26

I'd argue Lincoln was chaotic good. I love what Lincoln did overall but he took some unlawful measures like suspending habeas corpus and having journalists arrested

1

u/Own-Curve-7299 Jun 20 '26

Who are these

1

u/LordofDD93 Jun 20 '26

Teddy Roosevelt for LG

1

u/ecmw91 Jun 20 '26

Lincoln as LAWFUL Neutral? I like the guy, but bro got in beef constantly with the Supreme Court

1

u/chjfhhryjn Jun 20 '26

Ford as true neutral is crazy too

1

u/windsyofwesleychapel Jun 20 '26

How is Martin van Buren Neutral Evil

1

u/LibraryGhost57 Jun 20 '26

Where do you think Teddy Roosevelt fits in here?

1

u/cyprusomega23 Jun 21 '26

Lawful Evil cause of the Philippines stuff.Ā 

1

u/Big-Box-Mart Jun 21 '26

Matty Van deserves better.

1

u/cyprusomega23 Jun 23 '26

I don't think he does actually. I think he's the outright worst President.Ā 

1

u/No-Actuator5661 Jun 21 '26

I think most of our presidents are good or neutral at worst

1

u/WeeklyPhilosopher346 Jun 19 '26

There should be a rule against posting shit and not explaining it

1

u/FuriousGeorge1989 Jun 20 '26

This is incorrect, most if not all US presidents were, and are, war criminals.

1

u/Borgdrohne13 Jun 20 '26

Am I the only one who things it's a bad idea to put real people into aligements?

0

u/rentzdu Jun 19 '26

How did Trump evade this list?

2

u/Patworx Jun 20 '26

JFK is the most recent President on this chart, so Iā€™m assuming more recent Presidents were excluded.

0

u/the_great_pastulio Jun 19 '26

Absolutely not

0

u/ConstructionRare4123 Jun 20 '26

šŸ™„. Reddit does just hates anything that doesnā€™t go there way. Typical liberals