As Thomas DiLorenzo calls it, "Lincoln’s Legacy of Tyranny ... and the antidote of capitalism and the civil society."

History provides our best guide to the future, so it's imperative we keep our historical facts correct. Please watch the following video by Judge Andrew Napolitano about President Abraham Lincoln. Know your history.


The South wanted to secede because of the Northern Tariff, which was imposed to subsidize Northern industry. The effect of the tariff was to force the South to pay higher costs for manufactured goods, disproportionately tax them to support the federal government, and injure their trading relations with other parts of the world. The battle over the tariff began in 1828, long before Lincoln entered the scene.

So, after 30 years of being taxed unfairly (a long train of abuse), 13 Southern states chose in 1860-61, to peacefully secede from the Union and go their own way. Lincoln however, pledged to "collect the duties and imposts." The issue of slavery didn't enter the picture until long into the war.

In April 1861, with Congress out of session, President Lincoln ordered the blockade of Southern ports (an act of war) and suspended habeas corpus in the South. In September 1862, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus in the North as well, putting down resistance to his military draft. Lincoln imprisoned more than 14,000 civilians without due process, and ordered the shut down of more than 300 newspapers. His Secretary of State William Seward boasted*:

I can touch a bell . . . and order the imprisonment of a citizen of New York, and no power on earth, except that of the President of the United States can release [him]. Can the Queen of England do as much?

Professor Walter Williams on Lincoln and Slavery:

[T]he War between the States was not fought to end slavery; Even if it were, a natural question arises: Why was a costly war fought to end it? African slavery existed in many parts of the Western world, but it did not take warfare to end it. Dozens of countries, including the territorial possessions of the British, French, Portuguese, and Spanish, ended slavery peacefully during the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Countries such as Venezuela and Colombia experienced conflict because slave emancipation was simply a ruse for revolutionaries who were seeking state power and were not motivated by emancipation per se.

The true costs of the War between the States were not the 620,000 battlefield-related deaths, out of a national population of 30 million (were we to control for population growth, that would be equivalent to roughly 5 million battlefield deaths today). The true costs were a change in the character of our government into one feared by the likes of Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson, and Calhoun – one where states lost most of their sovereignty to the central government. Thomas Jefferson saw as the most important safeguard of the liberties of the people "the support of the state governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against anti-republican tendencies."

620,000 human deaths ... is mass slaughter, not heroic. Don't let yourself be fooled otherwise.

*Jeffrey Rogers Hummel, Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men: A History of the American Civil War (Chicago: Open Court Press, 1996), p. 256.

  • http://therepublicanmother.blogspot.com republicanmother

    My high school history teacher told us we should proudly display our Confederate flag because it stood for individual and states rights. Mr. Lincoln was a tyrant in every sense of the word. The recent repeal of posse commentates and the "patriot" act makes it seem like history is repeating itself.

  • Gail

    So much of the history we are taught in the compulsory state-sponsored educations, is a lie. State sponsored Lincoln worship is only one set of lies that serve the fed by painting a misleading picture of what America is about.

    I think that the world should know about McCulloch v. Maryland - the Supreme court decision that overturned the constitution, stripped the states of their sovereignty, and turned all that America stood for on its head. It was America's first coup d'etat. And no one knows about it? Curious.

    But your children will be taught to worship an idealized Lincoln in spite of the evidence that shows him in a less than honorable light.

  • Retired Coastie

    Sir, regarding your, "...slavery didn't enter the picture until long into the war..." - you are wrong. Though I don't have my sources at hand, the writings of the various southern state governments clearly marked slavery as a key issue, as one of Property. Hence the bastardization of the States Rights meme...

    • theCL

      The abominable institution of slavery was not in danger when the South pushed for secession. In fact, Lincoln pledged to enforce the fugitive slave laws, declared no intention of interfering with slavery, and even supported a new irrevocable constitutional amendment to protect slavery prior to his starting the war. So, if slavery was the issue, there would have been no reason to secede.

  • Pingback: Sunday Morning Quick Hits: The F-22 as Art Edition | motorcitytimes.com

  • geek49203

    So, that effort by Southern Dems to steal/capture/buy Cuba and parts of Central America to be used as southern "slave" states is just another object of mythology, with no basis in truth?

    To ask the Southerners to give up slaves is akin to asking modern Southerners to give up their stocks and bonds, plus asking them to give up the tools of their industry. Of course they opposed giving up slavery, and of course that made for a basis for war.

    Finally, the South Carolina secession came upon the inauguration of Lincoln, not at the passage of any piece of legislation. One cannot make the mistake of thinking that the abolitionist GOP was the straw that broke the camel's back. Certainly, it was a party -- unlike the impotent Whigs as well as the Dem party -- that they could not control.

    • theCL

      Nobody denies slavery in the South, nor defends it. Prior to the war however, the institution of slavery was protected by law, and did not lead to war.