It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Yahoo News gives Lincoln credit for freeing the slaves

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 01:47 PM
I was looking through news articles and videos and stumbled upon this one:
Black History Month Recognizes Lincoln

I'm not exactly a history expert but I have read a few books on Lincoln. He thought that blacks were inferior, he wanted to send the free blacks back Africa, Central America, the Caribbean, pretty much anywhere but the US. He never wanted to end slavery, the Emancipation Proclamation only applied to slaves in the 'rebellious southern states" and slavery was still happening in the North under Lincoln's presidency. It was a wartime measure that he thought would cause chaos on the plantations in the South where all the men had left the women and kids in charge while they went off to fight the war. The slaves who ran away from the south were either forced back into slavery or put on the front lines for the union. Also it should be noted that slavery was ended peacefully it many places around the world, they way it ended in the United States created a racial divide that is still apparent 150 years later.

I think the most important issue that most Americans are clueless about is the American Civil War was NOT over slavery, it was about the state rights vs the federal government. Up until the civil war it was assumed that every state had the right to secession. After the war the States were literally held together by gun point.

If you don't agree, please do the research yourself and not listen what MSM and the propaganda machine tells you. Deny Ignorance!

posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 01:55 PM
I agree. But there is also a lot more to it that everyone needs to understand. The southern confederate states are put in such a bad light because of the common accepted fact about slavery. Any true history buff with an open mind has understood this. Those who understand 'common factual' history knows it is based off those who "rule".

It's black history month? Damn, i must not be watching enough tv to remember that garbage.
edit on 13-2-2012 by jvm222 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 01:57 PM

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause."


That pretty much says it all. The war was not about slavery, Lincoln could care less about slaves.

posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 02:08 PM
reply to post by jrod

While I am no expert on the subject, from what I have read of history, I will agree with you. The Civil War wasn't about the issue of slavery, it was about states vs the federal government and the federal government's push for industrialization. Many of the southern states used largely slave labor and didn't want to be industrialized like the north was beginning to be. Freeing the slaves was a move to end state rights, and force the south to move further toward industry when the plantations collapsed.

posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 02:16 PM
Good post. It is shocking to learn that most of the "history" we were taught in school is nothing but myth. It makes one question everything they know. They say history is written by the victors, and that is certainly true in this case.

posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 02:29 PM
Also Lincoln was a Whig and became a Republican after the Whig party fell apart. He wanted a central bank, more taxes and tariffs, and wanted to use subsidies to build railroads and other projects to industrialize the nation. He had an agenda and it had absolutely nothing to do with slavery.

I recently read a book called "The Real Lincoln" so a lot of Lincoln's legacy is fresh in my head. When I saw that video giving credit to Lincoln for freeing the slaves it did get under my skin. If I were to ask random people what the American Civil War was about and almost everyone will tell me slavery and call me a racist if I try to enlighten them.
edit on 13-2-2012 by jrod because: not a typists

posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 02:30 PM
The mythology of the Civil War is quite pervasive and is a major part of the corporate/centralized government/establishment's propaganda to reinforce a strong federal government as "the protector" of minorities and the poor.
In actually, the purpose of this myth is to strengthen the ruling elites, who were coming into power in the industrial north at the time, to maintain the status quo. The Southern elites preferred a more decentralized, states first economic system that benefited the agrarian economy. The north favored a more centrally organized system that favored their emerging industrial economy. Slavery was important to the mix insomuch that Westward expansion of slavery tipped the balance of power in Congress (and ability to enact legislation) in favor of the agrarians. The banning of slavery in those territories and new states tipped it in favor of the industrialists. This was an issue for decades until it reached a point where no more compromise was possible. The morality of slavery was only a concern for a tiny minority of abolitionists. That being said, rich Southern planters went out of their way to morally justify an obviously evil practice.

In either case, Lincoln, in his own words time and again, reinforced the notion that slavery was not his concern. Preserving the Union, even if by force, was. The Emancipation Proclamation didn't free a single slave. It was a calculated propaganda move. In fact, for the time being anyway, it calmed the nerves of slaveowners in the Union's border states (Missouri, Maryland, Kentucky) and in recaptured territory by maintaining the legality of slaves in all Union held territory. Obviously, there was no legal weight to his proclamations in Confederate territory. In South Louisiana, Union generals kept the stolen plantations running and funneled the profits to themselves and their elite buddies up North.

Lincoln freed no slaves. The 13th Amendment did.
edit on 13-2-2012 by pierregustavetoutant because: sp

posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 03:27 PM
Yahoo! is still around? Geez, I guess Aol is too then, right? That's so 90s. And btw slavery was never abolished. Instead of Afro-Americans being slaves TPTB decided to enslave Americans in general. Just because you own an 80" plasma hi-def supersurround sound 3D smellovision and have a closet full of guns that may or may not misfire does not mean you are free. It means the good little workerbee slave has the freedom to piss away his/her money the way he/she sees fit. You have as much freedom as a crackhead...maybe less.

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 03:43 AM
I'm torn on Lincoln.
As a President he had a hard job and he succeed in keeping the union whole which he thought was his responsibility.
He however shredded the constitution when he did so, the states were allowed to succeed and or abolish the government itself.
Lincoln said no I won't let you, so he kept America whole, but began the process of Presidents and the congress slowly ignoring our constitution.

As far as slaves, yeah most people don't realize he was at the very least neutral about the issue.
He once said if it would preserve the Union he would let them keep their slaves.
He only freed them as part of a propaganda ploy to cause chaos.

The war itself was over States rights, the north had more control over the House and was taxing the hell out of the south.
They were taxed on their corn production instead of the sale of corn.
Couldn't sell your corn and wanna make whiskey well they taxed that too.
Southerner:"but you already taxed our corn how are you going to tax us twice"
Northerner:"shut up and pay the taxes, oh and while you're at it, if you send raw goods to other countries to be refined or processed we will tax your export, and than tax the money when that comes back as well"

The war was fought over unequal taxation as well as other issues that could fill an entire text book.

As for the scars of the war on race, there actually weren't that many at first.
In fact freed slaves could vote, it wasn't until Democrats saw that they were losing elections because the slaves were voting Republican and third party that they passed Jim Crow laws and poll taxes.
The places that had already lost were lost, but what they did is enact the poll taxes in regions that they hadn't lost control and were able to maintain their control.
Once smaller areas shored up their control they were than able to spread the policies.
They even got Republicans and independents to agree because it wasn't sold under a race issue it was sold as an election protection issue.
The underlying tool used was literacy, the secondary tool was the poll tax.
They convinced people that if you stop their illiterate neighbor from voting you could have your way easier.
They convinced the rich people that if you stop the poor person from voting you can have your way easier.
Over time since many African Americans were poor and didn't have access to education they were affected worse than other groups.
Once disenfranchisement occurred than horrible racial laws were easier to pass.
That is when the racial divide began and that didn't occur until 1/2 a generation or more out of the war, in some places much further out of the war than that..

Our racial issue in this country is all because politicians were whiny jerks and didn't want to lose their offices.

I'm sure I will get flamed or hated on for pointing out things that make people uncomfortable but oh well.
I am not saying these things to be malicious, just pointing out that the Civil War, and the following racism were much deeper than most realize.

posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 05:02 AM
Everything you posted is true.

However in the end, Lincoln was President, The Union won the Civil War, and slavery was abolished in the USA... so ineffect, Lincoln did end slavery.

posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 11:07 AM

Originally posted by AlreadyGone
Everything you posted is true.
However in the end, Lincoln was President, The Union won the Civil War, and slavery was abolished in the USA... so ineffect, Lincoln did end slavery.

I'm fine with giving him credit, I just think more people should know it wasn't as straight forward as most have been led to believe.
To me most of his actions fall under the right thing for the wrong reason category.

new topics

top topics


log in