SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Wharf Rat who wrote (399263)2/10/2019 1:58:16 PM
From: Sun Tzu  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541648
 
>> Thinking evolves; voter registration rolls don't. Lincoln will always be an R. Klanguy Wilson will always be a D.

You are right. But one can reasonably claim that Dems today are closer to the spirit of Lincoln's platform now than Reps are. But you can't claim Lincoln as a Democrat - you could claim him as a "progressive", esp. in the context of his time.

>> A very progressive person (an Abolitionist) would have freed all the slaves, not just the ones owned by the other side

About that - actually, he did not want them freed in the South either. I posted a very good article on how slavery finally ended in the US. And it was more because of Buttler than Lincoln.

An *extremely* shortened version is that Buttler defied orders from Lincoln to return the slaves because he realized that most of his troops were abolitionists and he would have hell on his hands if he listened to Lincoln. So he formulated the issue as a military stratagem by essentially saying that depriving the South of its slaves will put resource pressure on them and help with the victory.



To: Wharf Rat who wrote (399263)2/10/2019 7:02:38 PM
From: Sam  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541648
 
Only if that progressive person was really dumb and wanted to lose the war. If the slaves in the border states that didn't secede had been freed, then they plausibly would have gone with the South, adding men and factories to them. As it was, MD, KY and MO were teetering on the edge anyway.

>>A very progressive person (an Abolitionist) would have freed all the slaves, not just the ones owned by the other side.