Lincoln was a racist

There is a conception in America that Abraham Lincoln was some kind of civil rights advocate.

Consider the following, written by Honest Abe:

"I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so." Two years later, President Lincoln wrote: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe helps to save the Union (Letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862)."

In 1858,Lincoln had written: "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. 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. 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."

Lincoln was not the humanitarian that you were lead to believe. His values and constitution authority was challeneged by many people, inlcuding the influencial abolitionist/ conservative/anarchist: Lysander Spooner.. Not to mention the entirely new republic of the South! Ask yourself... Was it a war of northern agression???

Lincoln was a lot of things, but he was not the moral authority of the day... He never ended slavery in Union States. In fact, he wanted to ship all back people back to Africa. America, Please learn your history! None of your preconceptions are bullet-proof... and the Lincoln Myth is an injustice on our heritage!

Learn more at mises.org

Buried in History - Lysander Spooner

Lysander Spooner was an extremely influential abolitionist, entrepreneur, philosopher, and legal theorist of the 19th century.

Spooner made headlines in the 1840's when he founded the American Letter Mail Company. This company was to compete directly with the United States Post Office, which he considered to be an illegal monopoly. Spooner's company was run efficiently and turned a profit, but it was short lived. The federal government legally challenged to keep its monopoly over the mail and Spooner was forced to close the company under the weight of legal fees.

In the years leading up to the Civil War, conventional wisdom advocated that the institution of slavery was not only legal, but directly authorized by the constitution. Spooner's most famous text - The Unconstitutionality of Slavery (full text here) - argues that "natural law ties the contract of government, and declares it lawful or unlawful, obligatory or invalid, by the same rules by which it tries all other contracts between man and man."

Spooner, as we can agree today, notes that slavery is: "entirely contrary to natural right, so entirely destitute of authority from natural law, so palpably inconsistent with all the legitimate objects of government that nothing but express and explicit provision can be recognized in law as giving it any sanction. No hints, insinuations, or unnecessary implications can give any ground for so glaring a departure from and violation of all the other the general and the legitimate principles of the government."

Essentially, he argues that slavery cannot be legal because it violates the basic pricipals of natural law. He goes further, pointing out that while the constitution seems to heavily imply slavery in its directives, it is never mentioned by name in the national constitution or in any of the constitutions of the States. So how can a practice that is unnamed in concrete law and is contrary to natural allowed to continue?

Although he was one of the fiercest opponents of slavery (even advocating violence in ending the practice), Spooner was a harsh critic of the Civil War. He supported the South's right to secede from the Union. He held the believe that many of the day held, that secession is non-violent way to solve irreconcilable differences between states.

He was a fierce critic of Abraham Lincoln, which may be a reason that he is not recognized in today's history books.

Later in life, the philosophies of Lysander Spooner shift from a Libertarian perspective to a perspective of Anarchy. He argues that citizens have not individually consented to a particular government, instead they were born into it. In the absensce of consent, all government is invalid.

While we as individuals may agree or disagree with the teaching of Spooner, it is difficult to deny his importance in this era. But somehow, our schools have largely chosen not to teach anything about this man. For example, one text that remains in my possession from my schooling is a comprehensive, 1000 page tour of American history. Spooner's name and voice is notably absent in the text.

Learn more at http://www.lysanderspooner.org/