C-SPAN Q&A with Thomas DiLorenzo on Abraham Lincoln [1]

[GaConfederateLady]

Thank You Thomas DiLorenzo for Your Books about The Truth. God Bless You, Always.

[procommenter]

(Fascism will save us, somehow, as it is being promoted by the powers-that-be as the cure-all for America's ills. The American Empire is crumbling as the building of the police state continues.)

[procommenter]

The electorate of 1864 DID NOT elect Lincoln for a second term. Lincoln "won" on absentee ballots cast from battlefields. Much happened to these ballots between the battlefields and the counting houses. Joseph Stalin's observation: "The people who count the votes are more important than the people who cast the votes," clarifies the mystery as to how Lincoln, the most-reviled Chief Magistrate in the Republic's history, secured a second term of office.

[procommenter]

"It is the sacred principles enshrined in the U.N. Charter to which we will henceforth pledge our allegiance."

--George Bush addressing the foreign leaders at the U.N.

[procommenter]

Lincoln on Slavery: "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery." --- March 14, 1861

"What I would most desire would be the separation of the white and black races." --- 7-17-1858, fr. a speech delivered in Springfield, Ill.

"I am not in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, or of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people." --- September 15, 1858

[ingenuitas]

I live in North Carolina. Lincoln was never president over a country that contained North Carolina. I can't say he was the worst president we ever had because he was never my country's president. I can say that he was the worst president the united States ever had though.

[Easleytee]

Does anyone on this blog actually believe that the Founders would endorse Lincoln's presidency?

The Civil War essentially took the Constitution asunder.

No Civil War...No New (Raw) Deal.

No New Deal...No Welfare State.

States' rights is a dead letter thanks to the tyrant.

[Marian12c]

@Easleytee I agree with you 100%. That is why Lincoln is, at least to me, the worst president we have ever had. The War of Northern Aggression obliterated the Constitution, made secession in the eyes of future presidents 'illegal' (even though it's protected by the Constitution) and...oh yeah, he is responsible for 622,000 deaths. 

[Easleytee]

The United States was the only nation that resolved the slavery issue with bloodshed.

Lincoln took no steps to prevent the jihad against American citizens. The Civil War was an unnecessary provocation of hostilities for the singular purpose of eradicating the South.

Less than 25% of the people who populated the south owned slaves.

Read John Tilley's "The Coming of the Glory."

Useful idiots dominate this blog.

[procommenter]

U.S. soldiers are occupying & waging war in the nations of Iraq, Afghanistan, Qatar, Pakistan & God knows where else. No declarations of war have been made as prescribed by the United States Constitution. ALL participants are guilty of treason. The "I-was-just-following-orders" defense didn't work at the Nuremberg show-trials of 1946-7 and it won't work now. U.S. commanders have routinely violated the Yamashita/Medina Standard in regards to hierarchical accountability in cases of war crimes.

[Jubilo1]

Foolish premise from the begining; the "Fire-Eaters," were not about to end slavery under any conditions. "Invade his own country?" Did Washington invade his own country during his suppression of Shay's and the Whiskey Rebellion? It sells books so it seems DiLorenzo supports Hamilton's ideas after all !

[VictorLepanto]

It is hardly Lincoln who was calling for a war over slavery. It was the CONFEDERATES who were fighting over slavery. They weren't fighting to preserve their institution as it was. They wanted to expand slavery. It was only when slavey was made universal in America that the secessionist would have been satisfied. The whole purpose of the war was to secure Western territory to allow the slavers to purpetuate their interests into the future.

[Chslosers]

@VictorLepanto It's incredibly obvious you learned that in 2nd grade and now you just repeat it blindly. This is because liberals teach based on emotion and what better emotional response than slavery. In reality liberals and pro union officials had bad economics and therefore wanted to inherit all of the souths profits. The south produced the raw goods which they sold to the north and they paid the most taxes out of the entire country. This is the real reason. The north had slaves too dummy.

[VictorLepanto]

@Chslosers: It is incredibly obvious you've never recovered from the failure of leftist dominated education system's failure to educate you about the real history of the U.S., its constitution, or of the slavery issue. The economy of the North was far larger then the South's, as was its population. The narrow interests of the privileged minority of slave holders' need to expand slavery into the territories is what drove the war. They wanted take Western territory. Forcing war was the goal.

[Chslosers]

@VictorLepanto At the time of the civil war only a few of the confederate states had slaves while much of the industry in the north was still using slavery. If you have ever actually read anything about lincoln tariff war maybe you wouldn't be speaking with such smugness. If the north was so "concerned" about slavery why didn't they just keep voting on amendments to ban slavery instead of using veto power each time?? hmm? why did the last slave that went free come from the North? Im all ears

[VictorLepanto]

@Chslosers: So. In your history, there was more slavery in the North then in the South? I really don't know where to begin.

[19Truth53]

Lincoln needs no "demonization" against him. He was what he was.

[OctoBox]

Jefferson was a slave owner (he DID NOT release all his slaves at the time of his death) -- a slave owner can never TRULY be for free-markets; what oxymoronic drivel.

Jefferson offered to put the American military behind and effort to "retake" Haiti.

For slavery to exist there must be kidnapping and murder -- For it to exist in America you must first masacre, lie, break treaties, and imprison (reservationism) every Indian Nation West of the Mississippi.

[OctoBox]

DiLorenzo is a self-tauted "free-market" economist -- He never mentions ONCE how chattel slavery is 100% against free-markets. There's nothing worse against liberty within a populace than it's opposite slavery.

Even debt-slavery (indentured servant) is not as bad.

There are so many fallacies in DiLorenzo's book that it's shameful he keeps it in circulation. In fact it stays in circulation only because he's trading on Mises name and he knows NO ONE will do the research.

[WanderingSeer]

@OctoBox It's obvious to anyone that chattel slavery is an immoral and horrendous thing.

[OctoBox]

@WanderingSeer -- Save Jefferson, Washington and those who profited directly and indirectly off of it -- save Gen Lee and the entire Confederacy. It's only "obvious" when men are willing to die to end it, it's not "obvious" when people only eternally debate it.

As I've said there are so many logical and historical inaccuracies to Di Lorenzo's position that it's absurd. Chattle slavery must end the second good people "realize" it's wrong, you can't "well 40 mores years of transition"

[VictorLepanto]

@WanderingSeer: "Obvious?" It was obviously not obvious, as millions of people fought to perpetuate & even to expand it.

[OctoBox]

DiLorenzo's first few arguments are pure supposition or just plain "off"

Just one example: Haiti ended slavery in bloody rebellion and all the major Monarchies in Europe became beholden to the Rothschilds owing to slavery.

Slavery: Chattel Slavery, Debt Slavery, and Colonial Slavery

The Greenback was a LITERAL slap in the face of the Rothschilds -- they gave money to the south at low interest and wanted to charge Lincoln 35%. The Rothschilds put a 185% tax on the Greenbacks, hahaha

[furyofbongos]

Perfect and rare example of a first class interviewer -- he lets DiLorenzo finish his thoughts completely.

[CaptBeauregards]

Lincoln saved the Liberal party from the obscurity it had always previously enjoyed, as Federalist trash and Whig thievery, and to the obscurity to which right now it right-fully belongs!

[elitebanktyranny]

Lincoln imposed martial law, spit on the Constitution, and destroyed the Republic.

He massively increased the power of the federal government and forever buried the idea of State sovereignty.

There were much better ways of ending slavery. Lincoln followed the dictator's path.

[dogfan4lyfe]

How? What other ways could he have ended slavery while preserving the union?

[PanzerDivisionBOM]

@dogfan4lyfe

Your question implies that Lincoln ended slavery, which was not the case. That was done later, by people who weren't statist, racist douchebags.

Lincoln himself made it very clear that he was vehemently opposed to abolition, and that he would only free the slaves of his political enemies. When his armies conquered plantations, they didn't free the slaves, but rather appointed his political allies as new slavemasters.

[vinnykster]

Thumbs up for Thomas DiLorenzo! :-)) The Real Lincoln is a great great book!

[ScientificalnessUSA]

Lincoln's nation "conceived in liberty" referred

to the liberties taken by central bankers.

[MachtzuSC]

Dilorenzo books are awsome, though I preferer "How Capitalism saves America" and "Hammilton's Curse" to his books on Linclon.

[kentuckypreacher]

If anyone wants an example of how many can be fooled by not knowing the full truth about something, read DiLorenzo's books. What we thought we "knew" wasn't exactly so after all. Hhmmm...!

[mpd613]

I think lincoln was a brilliant tyrant

[FreakishDonQuixote]

Abraham Lincoln is the best, Lorento is a racist pig

[Apmhflick]

And we know you know what you're talking about because you spelled DiLorenzo's name right and everything!

[CelticSouthland]

Lyin' Lincoln is the great God of Marxism, and criticism of Dishonest Abe is Blasphemy!

Notice that the Marxists in America built a Greek Temple to house a statue of the Marxist God Lincoln setting on his throne of Judgment.

The Jewish Communist Mass Murderer, Lev Davidovich Bronshtein, renamed himself Lenin after his Marxist Hero, Lincoln.

[TeflonMaster]

Lev Davidovich Bronstein was Trotsky not Lenin you dipshit

[MachtzuSC]

Hitler like Linclon too he though the CSA was the "Wrong side of the Civil war"

[mrright911]

No one is demonizing Lincoln. We are here only becaue we are interested in the facts and not opinions.

[OctoBox]

@mrright911 -- Well DiLorenzo does not "give facts" he leaves the most important truths out.

[iratetruth]

Print money and spread it baby I love it money money money. HA HA HA HA HA. Oh yeah he did not free the slaves.

[SpookeyR]

What planet are you from!?

Lincoln freed the slaves by laying the ground work for the passing of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution! He has since consistently been ranked by scholars as one of the greatest U.S. Presidents.

Thomas Dilorenzo is the most politically, socially, & historically ignorant so-called historian of any age!! He has secured for himself a place in hell by defaming Abraham Lincoln and by playing snuggle bunny with slavery, hatred, and pure evil!!!

[fragilefrost]

If anyone can't see the absolute same agenda in Barrack Obama'a plans for us, you need to listen to this again and begin to wake up!

[SpookeyR]

..made slavery illegal throughout the entire United States.

And that's really what you are pissed about, isn't it?! The Emancipation Proclamation was perhaps more symbolic for what it really meant, and it meant an end to your dixie dick sucking ancestors owning human beings as property!

Yea, I really feel bad for you pathetic assholes! NOT!!!!!

[SpookeyR]

It first directly affected only those slaves who had already escaped to the Union side. Hearing of the Proclamation, more slaves quickly escaped to Union lines as the Army units moved South. As the Union armies conquered the confederacy, thousands of slaves were freed each day until nearly all (approximately 4 million, according to the 1860 census) were freed by July 1865. The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in, December of 1865, ...

[SpookeyR]

In practice, it committed the Union to ending slavery, which was a controversial decision in the North and absolute heresy in the south. Lincoln issued the Executive Order by his authority as "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy" under Article II, section 2 of the United States Constitution.

The proclamation did not free any slaves of the border states (Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, Delaware, and West Virginia), or any southern state (or part of a state) already under Union control.

[SpookeyR]

The Emancipation Proclamation consists of two executive orders issued by Lincoln during the American Civil War. The 1st was issued 09/22/1862, declared the freedom of all slaves in any state of the Confederate States of America that did not return to Union control by 01/1/1863. The 2nd order, issued 01/1/1863, named the specific states where it applied.

The Emancipation Proclamation was widely attacked at the time as freeing only the slaves over which the Union had no power.

[SpookeyR]

Have you ever seen the movie "CSA: Confederate States of America"?!? It's a very good film! I highly recommend it!

If the south had won the war slavery might still be in place in the United States TODAY!!!

[SpookeyR]

..they ultimately only wanted it in their states at the very least. In fact, slavery was in the bible!! And that was one of the justifications that they used for why slavery should not be abolished!!!

They tried to accuse Lincoln and all of the abolitionists as being anti-Christian, of being atheists, or even worshiping the devil himself!!

[randyguitarman13]

I just ordered both of his books, I am pretty sure he is going to change my mind against Lincoln and the Civil War.

[forty8r]

The guy is an intellectual fraud.

[ludachris475]

I haven't read the book yet I just downloaded the text to it from the internet.

Was Lincoln really that bad?

It seems to confirm some of my suspicions that the Civil War was totally unnecessary.

[SpookeyR]

This guy is a historical revisionist scumbag!

Hey, Mr. DiLorenzo, where is your confederate flag? Is it in your yard? Is it on your wall? No, it's not there. Where is it?

I have it.

Burn baby burn!

[Jimraynor45]

I take it your a liberal because all you've done is insult and attack and said nothing of real substance. This man is a scholar. And he's right.

[SpookeyR]

Perhaps you should take Mr. Dilorenzos cock out of your mouth before you praise him? (Psst! It kinda makes you look biased!!)

[Jimraynor45]

And your a guy who's probably bent over for Obama and let him stuff you. Your a disgrace to america and your seed should be wiped from the earth.

[SpookeyR]

LOLOL,...Fascist PIGS are funny!

[vinnykster]

You're unAmerican if you think its OK for Lincoln to do what he did. Slavery was not why CW was fought. It didnt require blood to be ended for it was ended in several other countries without war. You're being ignorant Spookey.

[SpookeyR]

I'm more patriotic than you are and it was more than just ok for Lincoln to do what he did to preserve the union and end The Civil War! He taxed your ancestors bitchy little ass and the only thing that your ancestors could do in response was tell their children how badly they got their ass beat, like the inbred podunk retards that you are!

Lincoln was, and still is, and American patriot!!! You and Mr. Dilorenzo are nothing more than historical revisionists stroking it over the confederate flag

[mrright911]

People don't even waste your time with this guy SpookeyR. This person is lost about history and lauds Stalin and Mao so you know why he refuses to believe anything that ruins the image of Lincoln.

[SpookeyR]

WTF have I said about Stalin and Mao!!???

You are the one demonizing Lincoln, right alongside this historically, politically, socially, & racially ignorant Dilorenzo, while you try to downplay the bad things said about Hitler...

YOU FAIL!!

[vinnykster]

Im with DiLorenzo .. Lincoln is what started all the corruption we see today. Violating the constitution etc... Thats how they do it .. they just say "well LINCOLN DID IT!" You're being blind to the facts spookey .. go do your research and his facts cant be denied. Dr DiLorenzo will OWN U

[SpookeyR]

Dilorenzo makes himself my bitch by every book he tries to rewrite history with and you are right there alongside him!

[randyguitarman13]

Retard! LOL HAHAHA:)

[mpd613]

read the emancipation proclamation.

[SpookeyR]

You honor Adolf Hitler in your attempt to honor this man and the books that he has written in an attempt to rewrite history and make Lincoln some sort of a mad serial killer! You also honor the confederate flag as a thing of pure evil and even I wouldn't go that far! You also honor those soldiers who strived to maintain slavery as a way of life! The confederates saw slavery as a right for each individual state, although they did want it to be law across the entire United States, ...

[mpd613]

No one is arguing that slavery was wrong. Dont honor lincoln as the one who freed the slaves. 600000 men did not die to preserve slavery. Only 4 percent of the southern population owned slaves. The emancipation did not free the slaves. The union had control of new orleans when Lincoln issued the proclamation. He specifically did not free the slaves in New Orleans. War was over money just like all wars. The last slave to walk the streets of richmond was owned by US grant.

[SpookeyR]

Soo, basically you're a fucking hypocrite, at least in terms of your views on slavery, right?!!

The Civil War was over a few different things, but slavery was perhaps 80% of the reason for the entire war! For example, after 1830, a religious movement led by William Lloyd Garrison declared slavery to be a personal sin and demanded the owners repent immediately and start the process of emancipation. The movement was highly controversial and was a factor in causing the American Civil War.

[mpd613]

My views on slavery are if it were legal today, I wouldnt pay a nickel for a boatload of em.

[SpookeyR]

Answer this question!

Have you ever seen this movie "CSA: Confederate States of America"?!?

It's a work of non-fiction and it is an excellent film! Seriously, I highly recommend it!!

[latewire]

uhhh.. "CSA: Confederate States of America" is totally fiction. the premise is "what might have happened if the south won".. oh, it also runs under the assumption that the south wanted to actually take over the whole country, which is freakin hilarious, as it wasn't even remotely their intention.

[SpookeyR]

No, ..the story is a work of non-fiction which accurately depicts a realistic version of what history could have been like if the south had won the Civil War.

What planet did you grow up on!?

The Allies during WWII thought that Hitler just wanted this country & that one, besides Germany. And they let him have country after country until it eventually became apparent that he would have taken over all of Europe and eventually the whole world if he could have!

The south was evil as was Hitler!

[latewire]

The story told was that of a history that never happened. What do you call a story that's not true? Fiction. Dictionaries: Invest in one.

Nobody could be that retarded, so you must be trolling. Kudos! I mistook you for a complete moron. Had me fooled. Troll on!

[SpookeyR]

The story told a version of history that could have happened if the south had won the Civil War! Just bc it didn't happen that way doesn't mean that it is fiction, dumbass!

Dictionaries: Invest in one, seriously!!

The south was fighting for slavery, in maintaining it as a way of life, for and inspired by religion, and furthermore as a cashcow which racism became a justification for!!

You are on planet Earth now, NOT whatever rock you think you know everything about!! Get a clue!!!

[mrright911]

your analysis on Hitler is ludicrous. I would ask you, after Hitler was defeated was the world a better place to live? I question this because of the Communist march on all of Eastern Europe and the deaths of over 120million which has been swept under the rug. It is easy to call Hitler evil while ignoring Stalin and Mao with other murders in the communist camp.

[SpookeyR]

Yes, after the coward Adolf Hitler offed himself the world was a much better and safer place from the hatred and the turmoil that he put the world, and specifically Europe, under!

Communism is not better than fascism! Just bc there have been more successful communists recently than there have been fascists, doesn't mean communism is more evil. Stalin & Mao were evil, but how does their evil make Hitler less evil, you historically, politically, & socially ignorant whelp!??

[mpd613]

Its a spike lee film isnt it? Read up on the morrill tariff and see how bad the south was getting screwed. The war of 1812 showed america they werent ready for war. They used a lot of their industry preparing for future wars. A patent for a cotton harvest machine was developed in app. 1850. what if the US would have used that tarriff money for research and development? Black people are worst off now than when they were in slavery.

[SpookeyR]

If a black person did make the movie does that mean that you aren't allowed to watch it?

You're a fucking coward!

[mpd613]

i figured if it was a spike lee movie it should be pretty good. I have told to watch it before, but I havent located on to rent yet.

[SpookeyR]

Well, you aren't very bright are you?!

[AlturaCt]

Great stuff. Thanks for posting this!

[6782485]

Wow

So in a hundred years school kids might be taught that W was a saint?

[RROkDOkA]

It could happen.. lol

[mpd613]

thats the best response you have.? typical liberal, when you lose the argument you try to make the other participant look ignorant. what part am I not accurate on? and give some facts, not just ur wrong.

[delquattro]

Well, they're already trying to ressurect Carter and Clinton.