Abraham Lincoln: Tyrant

When Abraham Lincoln launched his military invasion of the Southern States to prevent their peaceful and democratic assertion of independence, he ushered in a radically different Union than the one the Founders intended.

Whether it was slavery, tariffs, or a redefinition of Federal powers matters little. The question of whether we live in a voluntary government or a compulsory one, enforced at gunpoint, was answered with the death and maiming of almost a million Americans from 1861 to 1865.

At the heart of the ever-encroaching State that we find ourselves living under is the legacy of Abraham Lincoln. Every tyrant, from Karl Marx to Woodrow Wilson, FDR to Adolf Hitler, George W Bush and Barack Obama, have embraced the Lincoln mantle in both their writings and their actions.

For Liberty to reemerge, the Lincoln myth must be shattered and exposed.

Thanks for watching.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Abraham
• Lincoln
• Tyrant
• Tyranny
• Secession
• secede
• Liberty
• Murray
• Rothbard
• Thomas
• Jefferson
• Lew
• Rockwell
• Confederate
• Federal
• Reserve
• Income
• Tax
• DiLorenzo
• Economics
• Tariffs
• Mises
• Constitution
• Alex
• Jones
• Civil
• War
• Ron
• Paul

[TheMedievalMan]

If you ask me, they were both hypocrites (North and South).

[CauseAndEffectPost]

@TheMedievalMan I agree with you. But only one side mobilized an army of invasion and subjugation. For that, and that reason alone, Lincoln has a special place in the annals of the history of tyrants.

[MrMathamagician]

In the phrase "to prevent their peaceful and democratic assertion of independence" please define 'democratic'. Any society that has slaves cannot possibly do *anything* 'democratically' by definition.

[CauseAndEffectPost]

@MrMathamagician Slavery was without argument the most abominable of institutions, but by your assertion, the American Revolution would also be illegitimate and undemocratic. It's important to note that had the South been allowed to depart in peace, slavery as an institution would have self destructed rather quickly on its own. The institution simply could not have survived with a free North only a border away. One need only look to the Brazil example to see this economic law in action.

[MrMathamagician]

@CauseAndEffectPost Excellent point. I think you correctly identify the dangers of making a sweeping generalization based on a narrow definition. In truth things are usually more nuanced and not black or white. This is the reasoning by which I disagree with you assertion that Lincoln was a Tyrant.

It's also important to note that if the US didn't revolt we 'probably' would have become independent anyway just like Canada and Australia. If you rewrite history it's easy to justify anything.

[CauseAndEffectPost]

@MrMathamagician I actually agree with your point about Canada and Australia, and would actually further add that had the colonies NOT revolted (as you put it), slavery would have ended quite peacefully in 1833 when Britain ended it across the empire through compensated emancipation.

It's not a rewrite of history that I'm proposing. It's to say that when the South asserted independence, Lincoln had a choice. And he chose, like King George, to FORCE reunion by military force. Tyranny defined.

[JohnnyCBCS]

@blueasblueis he only "amuses" you, especially since all this is about a terrible war.

[JohnnyCBCS]

@blueasblueis buchanan was actually the reason the Union based on consent survived another four years. despotic? cruel? nothing historical supports these assertions...

[mmaier2112]

@blueasblueis So you can't differentiate between 1776 & 1861. Predictable...

Terribly sorry I'm not a mind-reader like yourself.

[blueasblueis]

@mmaier2112 Too stupid or cowardly to answer my simple questions. Par. "Hurah! Hurah! We bring the jubilee! Hurah! Hurah! It's the flag that makes you free! So we sing the chorus from Atlanta to the sea! While we were marching through Georgia!" I'll think of you on September 12th this year when I am burning the flag of treason.

[mmaier2112]

@blueasblueis I have no idea of the specifics this video's authors meant by that. How would I? If you ignorant of the many reasons the CSA was created, that's hardly my problem to remedy.

You're being an emoting dimwit here regarding the Baptists. The BOR covers your silly example, as would probably every single state constitution as well.

As for coward and traitor? No more than Washington and Jefferson. But you myopic dolts always have reasons 1776 is so different than 1861.

[blueasblueis]

"peaceful and democratic assertion of independence" TOTAL LIE! Seizing federal forts is peaceful? Did the south consult its slaves for this "democratic" choice? Oh that's right! Slave are not people let alone citizens! Keep posting Johnny reb! You amuse us all!

[blueasblueis]

@mmaier2112 by that logic if a state thought it had the "right" to kill all Baptists within its borders you'd be ok with that! You still wont answer HOW "THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS IN VIOLATION OF THE TERMS OF THE CONSITUTUION" as claimed at 1:54? or describe the the cruelties of despostic James Buchanan against whom the poor south went into rebellion against (seven states left before old abe"s inauguration). You're a coward as well as traitor.

[mmaier2112]

@blueasblueis You're pretty dim, ain't ya? The Constitution is silent on the right for a state to leave the country. Therefore it is a right reserved to the states and/or their people.

Is that simple enough for you to understand?

[blueasblueis]

@mmaier2112 WHERE in the constitution does it say states and leave and join at will? Not in the 9th and 10th amendments! And since you are SO smart, reading comprehension boy, try answering the original questions: TELL ME HOW "THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS IN VIOLATION OF THE TERMS OF THE CONSITUTUION" as claimed at 1:54? Then tell me about the cruelties of that montebank James Buchanon against whom the poor south rebelled (seven states left before old abe's inauguration)! WAITING!!

[mmaier2112]

@blueasblueis The right of the states to secede was a given from the start. If you understand the 9th and 10th amendments, you cannot FAIL to understand the point.

But, we understand, reading comprehension is just so damned hard.