So why has the great propaganda machine
in the sky told us the exact opposite???
> From: joann <email@example.com>
ABE WAS A SEGREGATIONIST
Abe Lincoln, White Separatist
> by Joseph Sobran <http://www.sobran.com>
> Lately I've read several books portraying Abraham Lincoln as an enemy of
> racism. I've also read one that portrays him as a champion of racial
> segregation and white supremacy, and this book has a distinct edge over the
> other books in that Lincoln wrote it himself. It was a collection of his
> speeches and letters.
> Debating Stephen Douglas during their famous 1858 Senate race in Illinois,
> Lincoln flatly denied the charge that he favored racial equality. In his
> I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing
> about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black
> races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or
> jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry
> with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a
> physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will
> forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and
> political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do
> remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I
> as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position
> assigned to the white race.
> He underlined the point by adding: "I am not in favor of Negro citizenship."
> Addressing the question whether individual states had the constitutional
> power to confer citizenship on the Negro, he said: "If the state of Illinois
> had that power I should be opposed to the exercise of it."
> Lincoln's defenders prefer to believe he didn't mean all this. They explain
> his words away as a politically necessary concession to the popular
> prejudices of his time. But this is unconvincing. Lincoln clearly meant just
> what he said. He spoke cogently and exceeded the requirements of mere
> pandering. He went out of his way to say more than was necessary. And he
> repeated it with great emphasis when he didn't have to.
> Lincoln wanted it clearly understood that opposing slavery was a far cry
> from espousing racial equality; that you could hold the African race to be
> inferior without thinking this justified violating its most basic human
> rights. But he didn't think racial separation violated any rights; in fact,
> he saw it as the solution to racial tensions.
> Later, as president, Lincoln showed the sincerity of his views not only by
> ordering the emancipation of slaves, but also by encouraging the
> colonization of blacks in Africa and Central America (which he preferred
> because it was much closer than Africa). If blacks were going to be freed,
> he believed, they would need a place to go. They couldn't stay in America.
> In August 1862 President Lincoln spoke to a group of black freedmen in
> Washington. He was extraordinarily direct:
> You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than
> exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I
> need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us
> both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among
> us, while ours suffer from your presence.... It is better for us both,
> therefore, to be separated.
> By the end of the Civil War, Lincoln seems to have realized that the
> colonization schemes he favored weren't going to work. Freed blacks didn't
> want to leave America, Central America wouldn't welcome them, Africa was too
> remote, and the cost of deporting them, even voluntarily, would be huge.
> The fact remains that Lincoln was convinced that racial separation was the
> ideal. It was no less ideal for being unrealizable for the time being.
> Lincoln is hard for us to understand because he was a benevolent white
> separatist. Modern discourse equates white separatism with "hate," not
> kindness. But Lincoln thought permanent separation would be best for both
> races; and failing that, he wanted whites to have superior status in a
> racially mixed America. In other words, separate but equal; and if not
> separate, the races couldn't be equal.
> That's right: the author of the Gettysburg Address was a segregationist.
> January 3, 2001