FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

What Would Lincoln Do?

by PATRICK GAVIN

Abraham Lincoln must be getting quite a chuckle out of recent events.

The National Park Service, in response to conservatives pumped from their success canceling “The Reagans,” is revising a video that has been shown at the Lincoln Memorial since 1995. In a Fox News world, they hope to make it “more balanced” by toning down the abortion and gay rights marches depicted in the footage and throwing in some clips of a Christian “Promise Keppers” rally and a Desert Storm march after the first Gulf War. Conservatives everywhere, it seems, are worried sick that their favorite Republican will be seen as too liberal.

Then there was Mr. Dean, whose Confederate Flag comment reopened the flood gates of political sectionalism that Mr. Lincoln worked so hard to nail shut.

And, of course, who can forget the name of the aircraft carrier that President Bush used to declare an end to major combat operations in Iraq against the backdrop of a “Mission: Accomplished” banner: U.S.S. Lincoln.

Lincoln resurfaced again last month, on the 140th anniversary of his Gettysburg Address, a gorgeous eulogy that–at 267 words–proves that, when it comes to Presidential addresses, perhaps less is more.

Seven score ago, Lincoln made his way to Gettysburg to, “to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.”

It is equally fitting and proper for us to think about Lincoln on this anniversary and to look to him for answers and insight into our current predicaments, for if you think that homeland security is a problem now, you should have been around in 1863. With a civil war being waged on the farms and in the streets and cities of the United States, terrorism was a daily reality. A recent survey of the American electorate by the Pew Research Center concluded that the United States was “Evenly Divided and Increasingly Polarized.” Perhaps. But you can just hear Lincoln laughing at such a suggestion. “Divided? Polarized? Oh, you have no idea…”

If Bush finds it appropriate to conclude his own war on the deck of a ship named after Mr. Lincoln, it’s worth asking what Lincoln might think of our current President.

Lincoln and Bush are similar in many ways. They both came into the Oval Office with little experience compared to their predecessors. Both were quickly thrust into moments of great enormity during their first year in office, moments that would require great courage and sacrifice. Both came under great criticism for their actions, most notably for their belief that the only way to properly honor the dead was to continue ahead with war in hopes of cleansing the earth of its darkest roots.

Lincoln would support Bush and Ashcroft’s efforts with regards to the PATRIOT Act and civil rights restrictions during a time of war. In his own time, Lincoln found it both appropriate and necessary to suspend habeas corpus, limit freedom of the press, and impose martial law. Between 10,000 and 15,000 individuals were incarcerated without a prompt trial during the Civil War. Lincoln would, therefore, find little wrong with our detainment camp in Guantanamo Bay.

On the other hand, Lincoln make have taken exception to a few of Bush’s actions, especially preemptive strikes. In 1848, as a Whig member of the House of Representatives, Congressman Lincoln spoke out against President Polk’s decision to enter territory claimed by Mexico, justified by Polk’s claim that he needed to “repel invasion.” Lincoln wrote: “Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose, and you allow him to make war at his pleasure. [This logic] places our President where kings have always stood.”

Since Lincoln found it “altogether fitting and proper” to “dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting place,” he may find it peculiar that Mr. Bush has yet to visit any the memorial services for American serviceman, even though one was only three miles away from the White House (Gettysburg, in contrast, is 65 miles away from DC). Lincoln, who used his address as a way of consecrating and dedicating the tombs of others, might find it equally peculiar that Bush has banned the photography of flag-draped caskets at Andrews Air Force base.

Lincoln–unlike Bush–also understood the essential role that allies play in any conflict. European recognition of the Confederacy would have certainly crippled the Union’s war efforts, and it was for this reason that Lincoln spent so much of time carefully navigating the muddy international waters. He would understand Bush’s need to act unilaterally if necessary, but he would urge him to do whatever he could to secure allies for himself, and at the same time to prevent Al Qaeda’s acquisition of sympathizers.

Near the conclusion of his speech at Gettysburg, Lincoln humbly remarked, “The world will little note nor long remember what we say here.” Who was he kidding? 140 years later, it’s almost impossible to forget.

PATRICK GAVIN is a former history teacher, and currently I work as a writer at the Brookings Institution. He can be reached at: patrick_06106@yahoo.com

 

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

July 27, 2017
Edward Curtin
The Deep State, Now and Then
Melvin Goodman
The Myth of American Exceptionalism
Nozomi Hayase
From Watergate to Russiagate: the Hidden Scandal of American Power
Kenneth Surin
Come Fly the Unfriendly Skies
Andre Vltchek
Philippine: Western Media is Distorting Reality, People and Army Unite to Battle “ISIS”
Robert Fisk
Out of the Ruins of Aleppo: a Syrian Community Begins to Rebuild
Andrew Moss
What is Adelanto?
Thomas Mountain
Free Speech or Terror TV? Al Jazeera’s Support for ISIS and Al Queda
Robert J. - Byers
Jamboree Travesty
Thomas Knapp
Send in the Clown: Scaramucci Versus the Leakers
Rob Seimetz
Because the Night Belonged to Us in St. Petersburg (Florida)
Paul Cantor
Momentum Not Mojo
Patrick Walker
In Defense of Caitlin Johnstone (Part Two)
July 26, 2017
John W. Whitehead
Policing for Profit: Jeff Sessions & Co.’s Thinly Veiled Plot to Rob Us Blind
Pete Dolack
Trump’s Re-Negotiation Proposal Will Make NAFTA Worse
George Capaccio
“Beauty of Our Weapons” in the War on Yemen
Ramzy Baroud
Fear and Trepidation in Tel Aviv: Is Israel Losing the Syrian War?
John McMurtry
Brexit Counter-Revolution Still in Motion
Ted Rall
The Democrats Are A Lost Cause
Tom Gill
Is Macron Already Faltering?
Ed Kemmick
Empty Charges Erode Trust in Montana Elections
Rev. William Alberts
Fake News? Or Fake Faith?
James Heddle
The Ethics and Politics of Nuclear Waste are Being Tested in Southern California
Binoy Kampmark
Slaying in Minneapolis: Justine Damond, Shooting Cultures and Race
Jeff Berg
Jonesing for Real Change
Jesse Jackson
The ‘Voter Fraud’ Commission Itself is Fraudulent
July 25, 2017
Paul Street
A Suggestion for Bernie: On Crimes Detectable and Not
David W. Pear
Venezuela on the Edge of Civil War
John Grant
Uruguay Tells US Drug War to Take a Hike
Charles Pierson
Like Climate Change? You’ll Love the Langevin Amendment
Linda Ford
Feminism Co-opted
Andrew Stewart
Any Regrets About Not Supporting Clinton Last Summer?
Aidan O'Brien
Painting the Irish Titanic Pink
Rob Seimetz
Attitudes Towards Pets vs Attitudes Towards the Natural World
Medea Benjamin
A Global Movement to Confront Drone Warfare
Norman Solomon
When Barbara Lee Doesn’t Speak for Me
William Hawes
What Divides America From the World (and Each Other)
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
Was the “Russian Hack” an Inside Job?
Chandra Muzaffar
The Bilateral Relationship that Matters
Binoy Kampmark
John McCain: Cancer as Combatant
July 24, 2017
Patrick Cockburn
A Shameful Silence: Where is the Outrage Over the Slaughter of Civilians in Mosul?
Robert Hunziker
Extremely Nasty Climate Wake-Up
Ron Jacobs
Dylan and Woody: Goin’ Down the Road Feelin’ Bad
Dan Glazebrook
Quantitative Easing: the Most Opaque Transfer of Wealth in History
Ellen Brown
Saving Illinois: Getting More Bang for the State’s Bucks
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail