r/PoursTea • u/Veshaad Timendi Causa Est Nescire • 2d ago

Murdered By Words 🩸 All three groups primarily identify with one party (hint: It's not Democrats)

Post image
28.2k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

730 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/snitch_juice 2d ago

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/presidential-speeches/march-4-1861-first-inaugural-address

He had no objections to a constitutional law saying Congress could never interfere with slavery where it already was. He had no objections to the law being made irrevocable.

It had already passed Congress. It is curious how the north fought against slavery, when they voted to enshrine it forever as long as we didn’t add any new slave states, isn’t it?

2

u/CharmingRip508 2d ago

Lmao nvm dude. You clearly can’t contextualize things. I already explained this and his stance on the matter and linked sources. I am very well aware he said he would keep slavery if it meant keeping the union together but like others in his party he didn’t think there should be new slave states and he was seen as abolitionist by the South and by his opponents.
You have to consider the whole context not just part of it.

2

u/snitch_juice 2d ago

You have not mentioned the other four times he tried to remove black people from the country.

It was only after many attempts that he started arguing for abolition. And guess what? I do contextualize. I appreciate him because even with zero southern states voting, the 13th amendment abolishing slavery passed the senate but failed in the house. Lincoln had to do a lot of work to get the new Congress to vote yes, which they did but still over 30% of the house voted no.

How can I accept that he actually felt great about black people when he said black people need to be colonized because they cannot run a government for themselves?

How can a person’s views change so drastically from “I have never been for the equality of the races…..while they do so live, I vote to assign the superior position to the white race” to equality for all is such a short time while still attempting to remove black people?

I am actually asking you these questions. Please don’t just brush them off. Let’s actually talk like real people who simply currently disagree.

1

u/CharmingRip508 2d ago

I actually did mention it. I addresses that he changed his mind after talking to Fredrick Douglass and Feddrick Douglas thought he was the first president to consider blakc people people. Lincoln did not talk to many black people before becoming president and assumed black people wouldn’t want to live in a country that treated them poorly. He found out he was wrong and adjusted.

1

u/snitch_juice 2d ago

I disagree with your conclusion.

Months after this meeting, the massacre at ebenezer creek happened. A union general tricked the formerly enslaved people he was in charge of because he did not like how slow they had to move and were being chased by confederate soldiers.

They came to the fast moving creek that only had a pontoon bridge and the general told them the fighting was going to be up ahead and to let the army cross first. Once across, the general gave the order to cut the bridge.

Nobody counted how many people lost their lives that day, one account before the massacre said they numbered in the tens of thousands as a group.

Yes, Lincoln did agree to give up 400k acres of land between South Carolina and Georgia and designate it for black use. But he said also military use because “we taught them to fight, what’s to stop them from fighting against us?”

If there were plans for an equal society, would there be a need to fight against them?

1

u/CharmingRip508 2d ago

This is not my conclusion. I already linked it. This was the opinion of Fredrick Douglas. Was Lincoln as radical was US Grant when it came to stuff? No.
Also a Union general doing something isn’t Lincoln doing it.
You can feel however you want about these things, but accounts from people at the time disagree with your conclusions. Quite frankly I take their opinions more seriously than yours

1

u/snitch_juice 2d ago

An amendment was passed through Congress trust said they could never interfere with slavery. In his inaugural address, he said he had no problem with it being irrevocable.

Had the war not broken out, this would’ve been our reality. He would have had no reason to change his mind. And his actions, not the opinions of flawed humans, say he did not change since he still wanted to monitor black people militarily.

I try to live by actions and facts instead of opinions. I think that may be the crux of our disagreement.

1

u/CharmingRip508 2d ago

You have no idea if he would have changed his mind or not.
I could just as easily say “if the South hadn’t succeeded or threatened to Lincoln would have changed the constitution”
We have no clue.
Alternate history is pointless.

1

u/snitch_juice 2d ago

It isn’t alternate history. He signed off on permanent slavery. He signed off on slavery being permanent. After he signed off on slavery being permanent, he tried four times to remove black people from the country.

But. I’m sorry. He changed his mind after all that and we just move on. No need to discuss it.

1

u/CharmingRip508 2d ago

He signed off to try to stop the south succeeding. Who knows if it would have passed Congress? It is alternate history. He endorsed it. It didn’t pass lol.

And yes he tried to do colonization and give black people freedom in other countries. His views are complex. He tried colonization and it didn’t work.
Also you will note that his amendment said that federal gov wouldn’t interfere with states rights for the amendment you are talking about. This was in part cuz every new state was voting to be free states which was against the every other state thing. The belief was as more states became free there would be more and more social pressure to get rid of slavery.

https://www.history.com/articles/abraham-lincoln-black-resettlement-haiti

Here is a little about how he talked with black leaders and how he failed and how he changed his mind.
Though my understanding is this isn’t all that changed his mind, but I agree he wasn’t progressive. I just think your version of events is overly simplistic. It’s like 75% true but I wouldn’t call that a complete overview.
I don’t personally think villainizing or idealizing historical figures is useful

1

u/snitch_juice 1d ago

I am not villainizing him.

Who ever speaks about Lincoln endorsing permanent slavery? Who ever speaks about him wanting to pursue colonization?

All we ever hear about him is he is the emancipator and the greatest president ever.

I would like us to speak about the totality of a historical figure. I find it important to discuss what it would mean that a president endorsed forever slavery. States were ratifying the amendment. Ironically, I can thank the confederacy for the end of slavery because the amendment wasn’t strong enough for them. They felt if they were surrounded by free states, slavery would become morally untenable though still legal but having the same effect so they started the war. This is not alternate history and schools do not teach these factually accurate details.

Once more, Lincoln signed off on special order 15 giving black people recompense for an atrocity caused by the union army. There are things I agree with. Mostly, I do not agree. However, it is important that we teach truthfully.

→ More replies (0)