Comments on: Jefferson vs Lincoln: America Must Choose

By: mark

mark — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 16:08:21 +0000

Some serious head hunting going on here. If Lincoln had not preserved the union, we would all be part of a different nation as we disagreed throughout the years. Texas would disagree and seceed. Being unable to defend itself from an entire foreign nation it would be part of Mexico. Followed by perhaps California, Florida, etc. Each state would fall prey to foreign countries due to its inability to call on National Defense. I agree that this could have been against what Jefferson intended and I agree that it has gotten out of hand with the Federal Government empowering itself further by limiting states rights. This has gone well beyond the intentions of our 16th president. To blame it on him is rediculous. His ability to hold the nation together shows supreme leadership when it was needed the most. You cannot take that away.

By: Charles Jernigan

Charles Jernigan — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:08:56 +0000

But they did via their Congressional representative and by ratification.

By: Kae

Kae — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 16:12:02 +0000

So, Lincoln was a despicable, unconstitutional president because he didn’t want states to secede from the nation because they wanted to keep their slaves. And when that made them angry, he stated that you are still have to pay your taxes, whetheryou like it or not. What if he let them do what they wanted, how do you think things would be so much better now?

By: Kris

Kris — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:19:28 +0000

A reply to this article: http://stuffthatisgood.com/?p=310

By: Bryce Shonka

Bryce Shonka — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 06:05:59 +0000

Man, you really nailed it there Josh. The fact that a majority of Americans still thinks of Lincoln as a hero is an illustration of how out of touch we are as a people.

By: Davis

Davis — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 22:26:06 +0000

Over the course of on nations history leading up to the session the tarif was the largest source of fedeal revenue. The north developed industrially (Hamilton) and the south did not, clinging instead to agarianism (Jefferson). This made the south for more dependent on the very imports that were subject to tarifs. So it could be argued that their weaker economic position was a largely self inflicted injury. Per haps yes it could be argued that slavery was out of context LEGALLY to a republican given the accomidations to it that were in the Constitution. I would argue that it was MORALLY incompatable with repuplican government when viewed in the context of the Decleration of Independence.
As to the states that "voted" to secede it should be noted that in some, noteably North Carolina, the votes in the state legislature was not taken until those opposed wer forceable removed from the chamber. That is what I would call a coup d’état .

By: Jsmith

Jsmith — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 17:29:30 +0000

Indeed! It is an excellent article!

By: Jsmith (part 2)

Jsmith (part 2) — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 17:28:59 +0000

While slavery was (and still is, where it exists) an abomination, laying the blame squarely on one issue as you appear to have done is inaccurate. Six of the Southern states (VA, NC, TN, KY, AR, and MO) seceded over Lincoln's usurpation of power (as they saw it) in calling up troops to crush the rebellion. The book "Was Secession Constitutional" will lay out for you the multitude of indignities the South had suffered at the hands of the North, and it was getting steadily worse. For all the evil it was, I cannot see your argument about how slavery is incompatible with a republican form of government — are you arguing that the authors of the Constitution did not establish a republic and that we didn't have one until after the War Between the States?

Your point about Hamilton vs Jefferson is a great one; however, Hamilton didn't use force to get what he wanted.

By: Jsmith

Jsmith — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 17:28:37 +0000

The Constitution of the Confederacy established a republic there as well, so the requirement for the Congress to maintain a republican form of government is irrlevent with respect to the War of the Southern Secession.

Joining the Union does not imply that they agree with or, until Andy Jackson threatened them with invasion, that they would enforce them. There are other ways of raising money — we use most of them now.

By: stuff that is good Jefferson vs Lincoln: A False Choice

stuff that is good Jefferson vs Lincoln: A False Choice — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 03:20:16 +0000

[...] Eboch at the Tenth Amendment Center writes that Americans must choose between Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln.Â Yet that choice has [...]