"With Malice Toward None..." Funny how a Republican best sums up our current situation

[SidneyCarton]

In 1865 Abraham Lincoln took the oath of office for his tragically short second term as President. He had presided over what remains to this day the bloodiest conflict in American history. As he swore once again to uphold and defend our Constitution he demonstrated the qualities necessary in order to heal the vicious divisions that had wracked the nation:

"With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan – to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations."

We could learn something from Lincoln here. The last five months have seen bitter cruel and vicious internecine fighting between democrats. Feelings have been hurt, friendships damaged and reputations wrecked in bitter (no pun intended) partisan fighting. Yet we are all still democrats. Those of us who have come out the victor in this mess should seek to embrace those who labored so mightily for Senator Clinton. Let us be greater than our quarrels, many who opposed us will more readily join us if we offer the outstretched hand than the extended middle finger. As to the rest, well there are always some who cannot reconcile themselves to the new state of affairs, usually they end up consigning themselves to oblivion without any help from us.

Anyhoo, first DU post for me, please feel free to commence flaming at will!

[HCE SuiGeneris]

1. It's an excellent quote... and one that should be taken to heart.

K & R

[sazemisery]

2. Very well spoken and Welcome to DU. n/t

[Tommy_Carcetti]

3. Holy hell. I was going to post the EXACT same thing.

Literally. Down to refrencing the Republican speaker.

Oh, and welcome. Hopefully you've come at the right time when we will come together and win this thing.


Hopefully.

[SidneyCarton]

4. Great minds think alike

[invictus]

5. K & R

[Bread and Circus]

6. I think back then the Republican Party literally and practically stood for the opposite

of what it stands for today. I think it used to be the progressive party but I'm not a huge historian so I might be wrong.

[Alter Ego]

7. You are correct.

The Republican Party gave us the likes of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt--so they were good once.

Once.

[SidneyCarton]

8. Lincoln, TR, even Ike to some degree...

Once upon a time the Republicans were the insurgent party fighting for the little guy. Lincoln indeed made many statements regarding the plight of the workers and the injustice of exploitative capitalism. If you want an interesting read, check out Harry Turtledove's "How Few Remain" a what if book in which the North loses the Civil War, Lincoln doesn't get assassinated, and ends up founding an American Socialist party in the 1880's

[Window]

9. You are absolutely correct.

[SparkyMac]

13. The GOP has always been the party of the War Profiteer

And Abe Lincoln was their patron saint. The Civil War was the Iraq of it's day.

[SidneyCarton]

15. Oh crap, which rock did you crawl out from under?

Do you think that allowing the South to secede would have led to a better future? The Confederacy sought European allies from the beginning. Having suffered humiliation from an expansionist South, there would have been wars between the USA and the CSA, whether in 1861, 1871, or later. These wars would have likely included European intervention. If the CSA had British and French allies, who would the USA side with, likely their main continental rival: Imperial Germany.

Have you considered the full implications of this mess? Instead of a civil war from 1861-1865, the bloodiest conflict on the North American continent would likely be a First World War with the north and south as further global proxies for the Central Powers and the Entente. Such a conflict would have cost lives in the millions. Furthermore, the permanent existence of the CSA would likely mean that there would be no US assistance to Benito Juarez, so Mexico would still be ruled by a French proxy emperor. In essence, while this war was awful, the alternative could be much worse.

All wars are evil, but not all wars are the same, attempting to compare the Civil War to Iraq is like comparing Thomas Jefferson to Vladimir Lenin, both were revolutionaries, but the similarity ends there.

[SparkyMac]

16. Come now, let us be civil ...

You know, we aren't all that far apart. The only difference I can see is that I do not think the Republicans instigated the murder of 600,000 American men for altruistic purposes.

The South was led by men who had many evil ambitions and desires. Number one was to re-open the African Trade. After that their biggest potential evil was to treat with the slave countries in the islands to form a power block of said people to help supply new man power.

But even they would not have killed 600,000 American men had they had a choice.

[SidneyCarton]

17. Fair enough...

Though considering the opinions of both political and military leaders of both parties in 1861, I don't think either group actually planned to kill over 600,000 Americans. Herein lies the dangers of war, we always plan for a short victorious war, and all to often end up with a lengthy, bloody and ruinous conflict whose cost far outweighs any of its benefits. Had Clausewitz forseen the costs of modern war, he may have thought twice before advocating it as "politics by other means."

Apologies for the rant.

[SparkyMac]

10. The problem was his GOP friends took him seriously ..

..and thought Lincoln wanted to prevent them from profiting from the upcoming Reconstruction.

Somebody had an idea ---- "Call that Booth guy" !

[SidneyCarton]

11. ya think?

There is always that possibility, after all Seward and Butler were both memebers of the cabinet and rather shady characters to boot. However I think in the end that Booth killed Lincoln essentially because he was an actual true believer, a guy who actually thought the Confederacy was attempting to preserve the liberty of states rights against federal tyranny. The fact that it did so by preserving a system that kept millions in chattel slavery didn't seem to cross his mind.

[SidneyCarton]

12. Better get off this topic though,

Otherwise the mods will boot us to the dungeon as Tin hats for sure.

[SparkyMac]

14. You may have a point there :-)