I post this content because I think it is always a struggle to interpret a historical figure through our own moral compass and the one described by today.
So let's move to today. On gay marriage ... what is Barrack Obama? A leader? A follower? A flip-flopper? And gay service in the military? Is Obama a gutsy leader? A panderer to a morally repugnant clique? These matters are not settled.
Slavery is settled.
I think, if one takes the time to read all of the debates of Lincoln and Douglas (really really remarkable stuff, neither of those guys the dullest knife in the drawer) read what Lincolns comments and transcripts as available were throughout the War (his CONSIDERABLE trepidation in allowing black regiments e.g.) to his eventual migration towards 'o.k., mayber we should let at least a few of them into the building ... WAS. LEADERSHIP.
Certainly lame by my standards today (reprehensible by my standards today) and clearly sick by csl's standards as well (IMO).
So we vote differently on Lincoln, but seem to share standards on human dignity, and if I may quote "inalienable rights ...." (written by a slave-holder who, transcript indicate, struggled as well).
Lincoln's issue was more one of being a poor-boy (poorer at least) from Illinois, some states and economies he perieved had an unfair advantage (the wealthy had them darn n**g**s).
He, his family, did not. He resented that disadvantage. He essentially embodies a working man's ideology ... we see that today. Sweat shops in Burma (Romney owned) competing against 'good white folk' in New England. Most of us have moved beyond race in this interpretation of fairness, ... we cite trade, etc., but the same pocket-book issues in the end underpin our perceptions and feelings about "wet-backs" "illegals" "parasites" and so on.
In a competition between the takers (owners and mangers) and the makes (workers) we struggle, we at times are confused, and at times we come together (even if we don't mean it). So, Lincoln took the indecency of Slavery and leveraged it for himself ... and for people like him.
A coincidence of purpose. But he stepped up, at a tough time, and died for it. HE said in the end, maybe we should let a few of those inferiors vote. Weak by my standards. Weak it seems by csl's standards ... but in the scope of human history and given the current prominence of the US, rather grand.
| 