PDF/EBOOK [The Real Lincoln A New Look at Abraham Lincoln His Agenda and an Unnecessary War]
Landering of Abraham Lincoln I went to and pulled up copy of
Brandt S Book And s book and the Preface Lo and behold Brandt was talking about DiLorenzo his book was a direct reply to DiLorenzo s works including The Real Lincoln and seemed to be a document based irrefutable refutation Brandt I suspected had taken the time to do the work necessary to prove the truth of the mainstream in opposition to the fringe I ordered it immediatelyI knew that I would read The Real Lincoln and Shattering the Truth together but hoping to keep as open a mind as possible under the circumstances I decided to read DiLorenzo first and Brandt second instead of reading them side by side Even without Brandt s "HELP I FOUND DILORENZO UNCONVINCING THROUGHOUT " I found DiLorenzo unconvincing Throughout Real Lincoln DiLorenzo discounts any historian who disagrees with him and lauds those who agree He takes some bits and pieces from original sources and cuts and pastes them out of context He alternately holds Lincoln to modern racial sensibilities and downplays the vils of slavery as irrelevant to the cause or Heaven to Betsy even a cause of the Civil War And most glaringly he writes from an absolutist standpoint There is no room for nuance and no shades of gray And there is certainly no room for historical contextDiLorenzo s logic is often faulty but at times his points sound convincing Many such points however rely on assumptions without footnotes or any other proof But as Brandt points outven if the assumptions were footnoted DiLorenzo s use of sources isn t always or So B. It even often reliableDiLorenzo uses The Real Lincoln as part of his broaderffort to trash the image of Lincoln for refusing to allow the Confederacy to secede for doing so not to save the Union but to consolidate absolute power and riches in the hands of a few and oppress the God given liberties of all Americans In a vacuum and unchecked I fear DiLorenzo s Cabaret efforts could succeed Thankfully we don t live in a vacuum Check DiLorenzo s sources and check his sources sources Or if you don t have time as I didn t feel free to consult Shattering the Truth Dennis Brandt has done yeoman s work for us allIf you re interested in a different opinion on Abraham Lincoln The Real Lincoln is right for you But if you want that different view to be honest accurate or based in reality as I think something with the word real in its title should be looklsewhere almost anywhere lsewhere would be better Why was the United States the only country in the world to fight a war to nd slaveryBecause the war wasn t about slavery Like all other wars it was fought over money and powerLincoln the American Hitler was the man who single handedly shredded the Constitution and fathered Big GovernmentThe Church of Lincoln has distorted facts and history to paint a picture of Lincoln in total contradiction of his real self and motivesFortunately this author demolishes these falsehoods with simple logic contextual arguments with respect to the Constitution racism and politics of the timeEducate yourself on the real story of Lincoln not a saint like Forbidden Faith: The Secret History of Gnosticism emancipator but a blood thirsty ruthless dictatorLearn about the avoidable tragedy and the victims of Lincoln s ambition the slaves the citizens and the transformation of the United States from a Republic to an imperialistic tyrannyAs well this book makesxtensive Trading Places: The Netherlandish Merchants in Early Modern Venice endnotes to the direct reference materials soverything is open to verification by the readerThis book was a real En plein coeur eye opener Some weeks back I was in an online discussion about good Lincoln biographies The book that received the most mentions was The Real Lincoln A New Look at Abraham Lincoln His Agenda and an Unnecessary War by Thomas DiLorenzo Some brief internet searching revealed that the book is uite controversial and has been charged with gross distortion of history Nevertheless I was morbidly curiousnough to read it myselfDiLorenzo s stated goal is to get past the myths of Lincoln that he believes is all too common and reveal the truth about the man p 1 2 Yet despite his claims DiLorenzo actually fails to uncover anything particularly novel about our sixteenth president Instead he does the opposite and in so doing becomes the very type of historian he decries He presents an abridged history selectively using The Bookshop on the Shore events uotes and supporting scholars to further his thesis driven work In fact DiLorenzo identifies nothing about Lincoln s views of race southern succession national unity or methods ofmancipation that is not addressed with greater care and context in Doris Kearns Goodwin s much superior Team of Rivals In comparison The Real Lincoln reminds me of a rushed college paper where all facts must be sueezed into the neatly predetermined premise and no argument should be Dance Real Slow examined too closelyRead the rest Abraham Lincoln is considered to be the most revered president in American history by historians but why DiLorenzo asks this same uestion and presents us with a different portrait of Lincoln In his political life Lincoln jailed journalists and went after the press deported a former Congressman who criticized him tried to pass legislation to bar free blacks fromntering. Lorenzo uncovers a side of Lincoln not told in many history books and overshadowed by the immense Lincoln legend Through xtensive research and meticulous documentation DiLorenzo portrays the sixteenth president as a man who devoted his political career to revolutionizing the American form of government from one that was very limited in scope and highly decentralized as the Founding Fathers intended to a highly centralized activist state Standing in his way however was the South with its independent states its resistance to the national government and its reliance on unfettered free trade To accomplish his goals Lincoln subv. History as ignorant rant DiLorenzo portrays Lincoln
As The Of Hitler And Stalin the of Hitler and Stalin distorting history whether through misuotation misrepresentation or outright lying He claims for instance the Emancipation Proclamation did not free a single slave he ignores that the Union controlled large swaths of the Confederacy by the time it was issued The 13th Amendment where slavery was permanently nded through legal constitutional methods Not mentioned once He pretends the war isn t about slavery by ignoring the Ordinances of Secession that xplicitly identify slavery as the cause He claims Lincoln ignored chances for peaceful abolition without specifying how this was possible Surely not through Confederate peace offers predicated on preserving slavery in the South forever Instead he dredges UP AN 1861 TARIFF THAT EVEN an 1861 tariff that ven universally loathed by the South didn t become law until AFTER Ft Sumter and affected foreign rather than domestic trade He claims universal loathing of the Emancipation Proclamation by citing ditorials from Democratic newspapers He claims tariffs unconstitutional because they re not specifically cited in the Constitution yet he claims secession as a Constitutional right because it isn t specifically cited in the Constitution He rants about Reconstruction which ven if his depiction were accurate happened AFTER Lincoln s deathEnough Does Mr DiLorenzo think we re all fools If so is it because he s looking for company Not so much a history or biography as an apologetic for the mythos of the Lost Cause of the Confederacy DiLorenzo is correct in arguing that Lincoln and the North in general were not virtuous and sinless moral crusaders That cartoon history is the stuff of pop culture and grade school history textbooks DiLorenzo though uses this as a straw man to bat down as if it were actually representative of real historical scholarship thus creating a classic false dichotomy in which Lincoln is ither a romanticized mythologized figure or a bloodthirsty and power hungry dictatorIt would not be uite right to say the sourcing is sloppy dishonest is the word for it From the beginning of the book DiLorenzo goes about constructing Lincoln the Raving White Supremacist Lunatic Any countervailing vidence is omitted It s PostgreSQL Server Programming - Second Edition easy to spin this straw Lincoln from selective uotation To be blunt some of what Lincoln wrote on race would be indistinguishable from a Klan member today To tear these uotations out of their historical context though is a cheap rhetorical sleight of hand known in history speak as presentism or the historian s fallacy if you re a fan of David Hackett Fischer DiLorenzo commits this by using said uotes toffectively deny that Lincoln may have had Integrity Restored: Helping Catholic Families Win the Battle Against Pornography even a hint of virtuous intent when it came to his position on slaveryThe arc of the book isn t anything new Thevangelists for the Lost Cause have been peddling this propaganda since the nd of the Civil War All the classic chestnuts are here states rights downplaying of slavery the North provoking the South into war tc Nothing anyone familiar with Civil War scholarship hasn t seen before The book only has value if you re a collector of Civil War memorabilia or Lost Cause pseudoscholarship Otherwise don t xpect to find something resembling history here it s the same old Passion PlayMore on the Lost Cause s views on race and slavery in context I ve been critical of Lincoln for years but this book shows with meticulous research from the 18th and 19th centuries just how much this man is to be condemned for his lies his powermongering and his tyranny Historians have been stopping their ars to the truth for the past 150 years and and it s time to uit It s time to remember our history to know our Constitution and to uit worshipping this beast of big government Eleven chapters of how shall I put this mildly bovine wasteThis book was urged upon my by one who found it compelling Finally after a century and a half of myth based pseudo history propping up the image of King Lincoln he told me comes Thomas J DiLorenzo an conomist with a book xposing the truth about not so honest AbeI ll admit to skepticism And I ll The Road From Home: The Story Of An Armenian Girl even admit that I had no real desire to read The Real Lincoln Whenever I m faced with a conflict between mainstream and fringe the burden of proof is on fringe to convince me that the mainstream is incorrect It can be done But when common sense and logic side with the mainstream it is difficult as I think that it should be to convince me that the mainstream is wrong I felt it was highly unlikely that DiLorenzo could shift my viewpointTime passed but the comments kept coming You might be surprised how often our sixteenth president can make it intoveryday conversation The comments traced the roots of America s generally bad state of nearly Exile and Pilgrim everything to Abraham Lincoln And the source backing the comments was Thomas DiLorenzoThen fate intervened I saw an advertisement alongside an article that I was reading on a news site I don t recallver having paid attention to one before The advertisement was for a book by Dennis W Brandt called Shattering the Truth The A New Look at Abraham Lincoln His Agenda and an Unnecessary WarMost Americans consider Abraham Lincoln to be the greatest president in history His legend as the Great Emancipator has grown to mythic proportions as hundreds of books a national holiday and a monument in Washington DC xtol his heroism and martyrdom But what if most verything you knew about Lincoln were false What if instead of an American hero who sought to free the slaves Lincoln were in fact a calculating politician who waged the bloodiest war in american history in order to build an mpire that rivaled Great Britain's In The Real Lincoln author Thomas J Di. .
His state harshly criticized abolitionists waged war on civilians in the South suspended
Habeas Corpus And Advocatedcorpus and advocated blacks from obtaining citizenship All of DiLorenzo s citations are scholarly and well known among historians Everything you know about Lincoln is wrong trust me This is another one of those books that takes a look at one of America s heroes tears off the mask of patriotic romanticism revealing a scoundrel beneathLincoln was likely the worst President in United States history sound insane Read the book you ll be left with zero complaintsThe Civil War initially had NOTHING to do with slavery which would have been the only justifiable reason to wage it it began and was waged until Gettysburg on Lincoln s agenda to centralize federal power thus rewriting the Constitution Not until after Gettysburg with the threat of Great Britain and France joining in the confederate cause did Lincoln produce his ingenious in some sense mancipation proclamation in hopes of generating a slave rebellion in the South What they didn t teach us in schools was the North as Tocueville mentioned was likely racist than the south and upon learning that the cause of the Civil War was not about preserving the Union but about freeing the slaves they rioted in Washington Not to mention that Lincoln had just become the first US President to nlist a draft this too did not please the racist northerners who opposed the new cause of the north Considering the fact that the provision for succession was built into the Constitution and that Lincoln brought armies against Southern civilians and that the Geneva Convention had just been ratified Lincoln was the first American President to commit genocide against his own people on a scale 3% of the population in the SouthWhile I m sure some of you will be up in arms upon hearing this new info after reading the book which presents the vidence you will have no doubt Lincoln was a scoundrel Disturbing book The states had a right to secede from the union This was accepted at the time Constitutional amendments w The central argument of the text is that Lincoln was acting unconstitutionally in waging war with the South ie that states had the right to secede For instance in regards to the Emancipation Proclamation DiLornenzo states it was a war measure which in reality the president had no power to dictate such a thing to a state government p37 If the southern states seceded which all in the North and South admitted that they had as videnced by the reuirement that they accept amendments 13 15 then we can no longer discuss Abraham Lincoln s relationship with Southerners as a President to citizens It becomes a matter of a Presidents relationship with nemy combatants in a foreign country As far as Habeas Corpus Article 1 of the Constitutions states that it may be suspended in times of war What is unclear and what the Supreme Court has not ruled on is who is responsible for this suspension More to the point Lincoln s initial suspension was in suppression of a rebellion in Maryland that was hindering the war ffort Upon hearing of other Generals carte blanche interpretation of his suspension Lincoln orders them to stop using it as such Context helpsI ll never argue in favor of a war World War 2 in particular raises big uestions about Just War ideology But in a study of the blame for the Civil War we must look at Fort Sumter and ask would
#AMERICAN S HAVE APPROVED OR APPROVE #s have approved or approve of Lincoln admitting defeat and removing troops DiLorenzo s argument is just that In the face of a rebelling state Lincoln should have done nothing So i ll ask should we analyze the constitutionality of the Civil War by looking at the Southern States as a foreign power or as states within the US that were attempting to nullify the Federal law and thus the Supremacy Clause Either way the author s constitutionality argument makes no sense The clearer violation of the Constitution would be to wish it away both the duties and benefits of such an agreement like the Southern states were attempting I was really starting to buy the author s alternative to war untilP277 If this had happened state imposed voluntary abolition race relations in the South would not have been so irreparably poisoned as they were during Reconstruction If the Republican Party had not used the x slaves as political pawns in the South and turned them against the whites acts of violence against the Cardiovascular Pet: Current Concepts ex slaves and the institution of Jim Crow laws might never have happened This is not just a bending of Reconstruction history but proof that the author has no understanding of the period Before during and after the Civil War Southern whites were fearful of black freedom and sought ways to use the power of their state governments to stop it from coming to pass There isn t a single shred ofvidence to suggest that there was a Southern non racist during the Civil War who becomes an advocate of Jim Crow laws due to the activities of the Freedman s Bureau or those of the Republican party 200 years of institutional chattel slavery did damage to race relations than 10 years of Reconstruction. Erted the Constitution trampled states' rights and launched a devastating Civil War whose wounds haunt us still According to this provacative book 600000 American soldiers did not die for the honorable cause of nding slavery but for the dubious agenda of sacrificing the independence of the states to the supremacy of the federal government which has been tightening its vise grip on our republic to this very dayYou will discover a side of Lincoln that you were probably never taught in school a side that calls into uestion the very myths that surround him and helps xplain the true origins of a bloody and perhaps unnecessary