BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations

Subject: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 02:28 PM

"We may congratulate ourselves that this cruel war is nearing its end. It has cost a vast amount of treasure and blood. . . . It has indeed been a trying hour for the Republic; but I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety
of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless." Abraham Lincoln, November 1864, in a letter.

Verification of Authenticity

I had forgotten this quote and I have a couple of comments and questions:

At the end of the Civil War (which it wasn't. Bobert:), was corporatism a known threat? Why was Lincoln concerned about it?

In today's world I think corporations are in the forefront of every intractable problem we face.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: gnu
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 02:49 PM

Amen.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 03:16 PM

Not so fast:

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/lincoln.asp

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 03:24 PM

OK, well, then, there IS this:

Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights. Nor is it denied that there is, and probably always will be, a relation between labor and capital producing mutual benefits.

Abraham Lincoln: State of the Union Address:December 3, 1861

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: gnu
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 03:51 PM

Lighter... but it's still true. Sobeys has their "Compliments" brand of Honey Nut Cherrios at a much lower price next to the Cherrios on their shelves and they have HUNDREDS of similar items from soup to nuts. When they and Loblaws put the other companies out of business they will be able to charge what they want.

Maple Leaf bought out the meat processing plants here in The Maritime Provinces and are shutting them down. Our chickens are shipped to PQ, processed and shipped back.

It`s true for many goods. It`s sad.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 04:24 PM

Sorry. According to snopes.com as Guest/Lighter pointed out, the verification itself is bogus; I had accepted it at face value.

However, my question remains: Was there, in American history, a time when corporatism was a matter of concern? What about in the UK and Europe- is corporatism feared?

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 04:45 PM

The press was not as 'National' during the years after the Civil War, when the railroad & steel & banking 'barons' were consolidating power, but even then Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Rockefeller and various other 'robber barons' were recognized and fought.

Their excesses led to many of the restrictions we have...(or had until recently.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 05:07 PM

Ah, I just recalled: the Guggenheims were also notorious.

I guess that the more things change the more they stay the same. But even then, it is my understanding that the gulf between the haves and the havenots was not nearly as wide as it is today. Is that correct? I think John D was a billionaire in today's money and even today that is a ethereal designation.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 05:31 PM

There seems to be confusion of 'corporatism' with corporations.

Corporatism "is a system of economic, political, or social organization that involves association of the people of society into corporate groups, such as agricultural, business, ethnic, labor, military, patronage, or scientific affiliations, on the basis of common interests."

Corporations, or large companies with combined operations from field to factory to marketing, can charge less per sale than a company which does not control all aspects.
-----------------------------------
Gnu, your post is inaccurate (makes no sense); Compliments does not make "Cheerios," but Sobey's, whose store brand is Compliments, sell that brand which is made by General Mills in addition to their Oatie-O's, not the same thing but similar.
Sobey's sells many other brands besides those made by them. 'Compliments' items are made partly in Sobey's own plants but some are made by other concerns for Sobey's and given the 'Compliments' name.
Who makes Compliments Oatie-O's? It could be General Mills (see the fine print on the label).

In Calgary, Loblaw's ('Superstore' in Calgary), Co-op and Safeway compete with Sobey's; each has part of the market, but all are profitable. Each of these chains has its 'store' brands. We also have Costco, with membership charge, so the market is split among these five in Calgary (also a number of specialty stores for fish, poultry and meats).

Chicken processing has become regionalized in Canada to keep costs down. Local plants are not cost-effective in a high-volume industry.
Dunno if Maple Leaf, another, or several dominate the Alberta region.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 05:50 PM

Whether the statement was made by Abraham Lincoln or Long John Silver's parrot, it's still true.

While perusing the Snopes page on the supposed Lincoln quote, go down and read what historian Merrill Peterson wrote (the indented paragraph a bit below the photo of Lincoln). Even if Lincoln didn't say it, it's certainly plausible that he might have, because that's where his sentiments lay.

Mussolini adopted the fasces as both the symbol and the basis for the word "Fascism." The fasces is a bundle of sticks tied around an axe. As Mussolini described it, the sticks represent the corporations and the axe represents the power of government. The two act as one.

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power."
                —Benito Mussolini                                                                                                

And who should know better that the man who, essentially, invented it?

Nazism was a local variation of Fascism, with racism tacked on.

In the excellent book by historian Barbara Tuchman, The March of Folly, the author points out several instances of governments and/or societies that essentially destroyed themselves, or at the very least, got themselves in deep trouble by acting against their own interest when they persisted in a course of action that people at the time said was disastrous—but the leaders wouldn't listen and ran full speed off the cliff.

The first example she cites is the Trojan Horse. People at the time said, "Don't bring that thing inside the gates! It could be full of Greek soldiers!" But they were ignored.

Or as a friend of mine puts it, "Beware of Geeks bearing grifts!"

The Supreme Court's recent "Citizens United" decision is a giant step toward turning the United States into a fascist state.

And that's no exaggeration. Think about it!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 06:35 PM

This Washington Post article by Andrew Ferguson claims that the attribution to Lincoln was false, even though Al Gore used the quote in a book. Note, however, that the Washington Post finds fault with Ferguson's article.
So, I don't know what to think....
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: gnu
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 06:41 PM

Q... "Gnu, your post is inaccurate (makes no sense);..." Why are Compliments Cherrios on the shelf next to Cherrios at a lower price? And don't say they are not Cherrios because they have a different name because I don't have enough hairs left to split. The gist of my post is valid. For you to split hairs and say it isn't is upsetting to me.

Same goes for crackers... same goes for potatoe chips... sames goes for your ass when they decide to decide how much to charge you for your food after they have a monopoly.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 07:02 PM

If Lincoln said it or wrote it, that would be news to the historians who compiled the definitive edition of Lincoln's "Collected Works."

The quotation does not appear there.

As for its truth or falsity, today or in the past, that's obviously independent of whoever may have said it.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 07:21 PM

Well, Lincoln was very much correct... Like Ike warned US all the military/industrial complex some 90 plus year later, the corporations continued down Corruption Ave thru the robber baron days of the 1890s into the 1920's... WW I kinda slowed it ever grind... 1927, like 2008, was the year the music died for them... Unlike 27, they are so strong they ara back with a vengeance this time... Today's corporations have a 1890's mentality... All for them and none for you...

1/2 of Americans live at 125% of the poverty threshold OR LESS... (Charlotte Observer piece on poverty, September, 2011)...

NBC reported on the evening news a few months ago that 64% of American adults could not raise $1000 if they had to...

The only time that the corporations have been stopped, or slowed down, was after the 1927 with the New Deal... They hate the New Deal and have been aligned with the Republican Party since FDR to try to destroy it...

They are now in their final push...

Stay tuned...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 08:31 PM

Cheerios is a General Mills trade mark, no one may use the name for another product without authorization. Honey nut Cheerios is solely theirs.
Sobeys (house name 'Compliments' for a variety of products) sells Cheerios (multigrain, honey nut, plain, chocolate, etc.) but they do not make them, they sell them as they do products of a great many companies. All Cheerios varieties are solely from General Mills companies.
Oatie O's is the name of a similar cereal made for Sobey's, and, I believe (never tried them), sold under their Compliments name.

There is no indication that any one of the major chains in Canada will be able to establish a monopoly in the forseeable future.

I suggest to posters here that they look at the definition of corporatism in Wikipedia.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 08:46 PM

OK, who has Lincoln Complete Works Comprising..... (ed. Nicolay and Hay) or similar. It can be had for as little as $100.

I'll accept snopes.com

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: GUEST,999
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 08:49 PM

"The organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction."

And that is precisely what's happening.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: gnu
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 09:01 PM

Q... they still sell their products next to the "name brands" cheaper. My point is still valid. They will tell you what to pay them in the end. To me, that's a baaaad thing. Am I parnoid? Definitely! Scared shitless!

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 09:05 PM

Interesting parallel: In 1860, like today, it was Southerners who were fighting against their own interests... Lincoln with the Southern Democrats and Obama with the same folks...

It should be noted that after the Civil Rights Act the Southern Democrats became the Southern Republicans...

(Interesting footnotes: The real reason why Kennedy picked LBJ as his running mate was to get the pest out of the Senate where LBJ would have certainly busted Kennedy's balls...)

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Rapparee
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 09:18 PM

The growing disposition to tax more and more heavily large estates left at death is a cheering indication of the growth of a salutary change in public opinion. The State of Pennsylvania now takes--subject to some exceptions--one-tenth of the property left by its citizens. The budget presented in the British Parliament the other day proposes to increase the death-duties; and,most significant of all, the new tax is to be a graduated one. Of all forms of taxation, this seems the wisest. Men who continue hoarding great sums all their lives, the proper use of which for public ends would work good to the community, should be made to feel that the community, in the form of the state, cannot thus be deprived of its proper share. By taxing estates heavily at death the state marks its condemnation of the selfish millionaire's unworthy life.

It is desirable that nations should go much further in this direction. Indeed, it is difficult to set bounds to the share of a rich man's estate which should go at his death to the public through the agency of the state, and by all means such taxes should be graduated, beginning at nothing upon moderate sums to dependents, and increasing rapidly as the amounts swell, until of the millionaire's hoard, as of Shylock's, at least

"_____ The other half
Comes to the privy coffer of the state."

This policy would work powerfully to induce the rich man to attend to the administration of wealth during his life, which is the end that society should always have in view, as being that by far most fruitful for the people. Nor need it be feared that this policy would sap the root of enterprise and render men less anxious to accumulate, for to the class whose ambition it is to leave great fortunes and be talked about after their death, it will attract even more attention, and, indeed, be a somewhat nobler ambition to have enormous sums paid over to the state from their fortunes.

          --Andrew Carnegie, Wealth, North American Review,
            June, 1889.

Higher estate taxes supported by someone who was not exactly pro-labor....

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 09:30 PM

Yeah... What are we now exempting??? $700K??? If you can't live on $700K then God help you...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: ollaimh
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 09:50 PM

a mnore edifying defination of corporate power and evolution in society is found reading noam chomsky. but then you have to be able to understand the big words--which q cannot

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 09:50 PM

But never mind "inheritance taxes"...

This is about Lincoln's warnings on the creep of corporations into our lives... We now see, like Ike was right about the military/industrial complex, Lincoln had his thumb on the pulse of the future...

Doubt if Lincoln would have ever seen a corporate-currupted Supreme Court stoop as low as to turning corporations into people???

BTW, "Citizens United" infringes on my "free speech"!!! I can't afford to run my views 24/7 on the media... They can... That means that my free speech is tamped down and their's becomes the story...

That isn't free speech!!! That is purchased speech... Nothin' free about it... No more one man, one vote... It's one man v. Monster $$$ purchased speech!!! My Constitutional rights have been watered down...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Rapparee
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 10:17 PM

Tell it to Ronnie R. He dumped the "Fairness Doctrine" that the FCC had had for years.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Jun 12 - 10:19 PM

Yeah, Ronnie has caused our country a lot of damage...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 01:24 PM

Noam Chomsky- is he still around?

His statements on corporations were many, one that perhaps most strongly reflects his lefty-loonie philosophy-

"An array of mega-corporations, often linked to one another by strategic alliances, administering a global economy which is in fact a kind of corporate mercantilism tending toward oligopoly in most sectors, heavily reliant on state power to socialize risk and cost and to subdue recalcitrant elements."

Such statements not only expose a complete misunderstanding of globalization, but express Chomsky's desire to create a Marxian state- a simplistic idea impossible in the current world condition of large and growing population, with its individuals born with unstoppable competitive instincts who demand goods and services at the low prices (but scaled to reflect personal differences in the ability to acquire) that only a well-organized corporate sector can provide.
The corporate sector, to feed the popular demands, provides income that is user to pay for the goods, and encourages entreneurship to found new corporations that perpetuate and renew the global economy.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Rapparee
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 02:50 PM

Omaha, Neb., February 10, 2012 – When Abraham Lincoln signed the Pacific Railway Act of July 1, 1862, creating the original Union Pacific, his vision for the transcontinental railroad was to connect a nation from east to west. While Lincoln did not live to see the completion of the transcontinental railroad, his vision was fulfilled. Along the way, more than 7,000 cities and towns began as Union Pacific depots and water stops.

And, of course,

Abe Lincoln is best known in Rock Island County for his defense of the railroads against the steamboat company that owned the Effie Afton which ran into one of the pillars of the first railroad bridge across the Mississippi built in 1856.

So Lincoln backed the railroads, and there is some evidence that he was offered the position of Corporate Counsel for the NY Central (which he refused).

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: GUEST,EBarnacle
Date: 08 Jun 12 - 11:24 PM

Rap has illustrated the point I was about to make. Although Lincoln had a very clear vision of corporate power in the future, he was unlikely to have been anticorporate because he was a corporate lawyer before he went to Washington as president.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: GUEST,josepp
Date: 09 Jun 12 - 04:11 PM

Meriam-Webster:


Main Entry:cor£po£rat£ism
Pronunciation:*k*r-p(*-)r*-*ti-z*m
Function:noun
Date:1890

: the organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising some control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction
–cor£po£rat£ist \-p(*-)r*-tist\ adjective

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:30 AM

[Lincoln] was unlikely to have been anticorporate because he was a corporate lawyer before he went to Washington as president.

Agreed- but that was long before the Guilded Age corporate excesses and before the idiotic decision that corporations were "persons".

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 02:02 PM

This is now on Facebook..and about an hour ago I wrote this in response to seeing it..

"Ironic that he did not ALSO see the very reason this would happen to 'his' country was because he helped to take it out of the hands of the Gentle, Spiritual, Caring and Respectful Hands of the Native Americans..38 of whom (Sioux) he gave the order to execute in the biggest mass hanging in American History, on December 26, 1862...And to this day, every year on December 26th, regardless of the weather, the Lakota run together, for many miles to the memorial in Mankota, Minnesota, to honour their Ancestors, who, as they waited to be hanged together, joined hands and sang the Sioux death song together, until the soldiers put hoods over their heads......

Abe Lincoln should be removed from Mount Rushmore, along with the others carved into that Sacred Sioux Mountain by a man who was in the KKK. Native American Chiefs should be carved in their place, but ONLY if that is what the Indigenous People of America want, for it is **their** Sacred Mountain..and should be returned to them as fast as possible...."

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 02:16 PM

"In today's world I think corporations are in the forefront of every intractable problem we face."


I disagree entirely. WE are the main problem we face. WE have given rise to the Corporations, buying their goods, making them sickeningly wealthy and powerful.

We have *continued* to do this, turning away from what was staring us straight in the face.

We have the power to bring down the corporations in an instant, purely by NOT buying their goods, by withdrawing savings/money from banks...etc..

The most powerful thing we can do is to state that never again will we, The 99% buy ANYTHING from any corporation unless the can not only PROVE it has been ethically sourced, made and delivered, that their staff are well cared for and decently paid and that they use 90% of the massive profits they've made over the years to put right all the wrongs they have done to Mother Earth..

Failing this, we could do as the brave Indigenous People do and stand in front of vast trucks who want to take our Water, Land, Mountains, Forests, Clean Air etc..and simply refuse to move...

Their time is coming to an end, but it will end much faster if we remove this Bloody Cloak of Apathy which so many have pulled around them for so long...

And to those in the BBC/Smooth Ops who banned me for refusing to obey their order of NOT speaking out on Social Issues, due to it 'upsetting people', I hope you're resting easy in your beds these days....

Yeesh!!

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:30 PM

I used to harbour a certain respect for the intellect and postings of a certain Mudcatter but the last two posts are beyond the pale. I will not let them go unchallenged. Fomenting a biased, one-sided, incomplete opinion and pretending that it is a true account of an event is unethical and dishonest. This is not an unknown incident in United States of America's history and presenting it in this fashion is USA bashing to the nth degree. (I'll let someone else do the clickies- I'm too po-ed.)

"The hanging, following trials which condemned over three hundred participants in the 1862 Dakota Conflict, stands as the largest mass execution in American history. Only the unpopular intervention of President Lincoln saved 265 other Dakota from the fate met by the less fortunate thirty-eight." Law2.umkc.edu/faculty

"On August 17, 1862, one young Dakota with a hunting party of three others killed five settlers while on a hunting expedition. That night a council of Dakota decided to attack settlements throughout the Minnesota River valley to try to drive whites out of the area. There has never been an official report on the number of settlers killed, although as many as over 800 settlers have been cited and is not out of line. Further consideration is given to maybe just as many settlers being taken captive as slaves, if not tortured to death as was customary."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakota_War_of_1862

"Known as the Minnesota Uprising or the Sioux Uprising, it cost the lives of perhaps 800 settlers, government agents and soldiers and led to 303 Sioux warriors receiving a hanging sentence. Only 39 of the condemned actually hanged at Mankato, Minn., on December 26, 1862, thanks to Lincoln's intervention, but that was still the largest mass execution in U.S. history."

http://www.historynet.com/lincoln-and-the-sioux-uprising-of-1862-book-review.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:28 PM

Chilling, Ebbie.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:39 PM

As I have pointed out in the past here in the Mud-Pit, I have no love for Lincoln...

He misunderstood the South, pushed too hard in re-supplying Sumpter in the late winter of '61 and didn't walk the last mile in trying to avert the Civil (which is very much wasn't) War... He owed the nation that last mile... I don't care how obstinate the Southern Democrats were...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:13 PM

Bobert is quite the historian until you try to get him to enumerate and actually name some of his mythological Dixiecrats.

Suddenly he is too busy with his latest blowhard project.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:21 PM

You are boring, Sawz...

There is enough historical accurate info on the Dixiecrats on Google for you to give up what ever little OCD relapses you have over me to rest...

Get another hobby, man... And get back to your Betty Ford counselor...

(((BTW, do you have a clue what people here think about you when you have these little OCD episodes???)))

Didn't think so...

Check it out... You are losing big time on the attacks and on history...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:34 PM

Bobert is really giving his lungs a workout in order to avoid answering straight-up questions.

Instead of your OCD, bragging, blowhard history reports, why not just direct people to look up your Fort Sumpter trivia on Google? Sumter that is to us knowledgeable people.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:41 PM

Yo, Sawz...

Start a thread entitled "Who cares what Sawz say about Bobert?"

Please start it and you will see that you are talking to yourself and GfinS... In other words... No one!!!

Get help... Your OCD is out of control...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:47 PM

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power."
                "Benito Mussolini "

...came in modern Italian political usage to mean group, union, band or league. It was first used in this sense in the 1870s by groups of revolutionary democrats in Sicily, to describe themselves. The most famous of these groups was the Fasci Siciliani during 1891â€"94. Thereafter, the word retained revolutionary connotations.... The fasci they formed were scattered over Italy, and it was to one of these spontaneously created groups, devoid of party affiliations, that Benito Mussolini belonged...


HMMMMM. Do revolutionary Democrats always turn into dictators?

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:57 PM

Sawz = Delusional...

(((No comprehension of what information actually means)))

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 11:41 PM

"Noam Chomsky- is he still around?"

"I don’t usually admire Sarah Palin," Chomsky said, "but when she was making fun of this 'hopey changey stuff,' she was right, there was nothing there."

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 09:42 AM

Bobert -

I think you're being a bit hard on Ol' Abe by underestimating the role of the "Fire Eaters" in S. Carolina & elsewhere both in the 30-year run-up to the War and immediately prior to the Southern attack on Sumter.

Just outa curiousity, have you read Goodwin's "Team of Rivals" or Foner's "The Fiery Trial" or any of the more recent works on Lincolk and the war?

(And I ain't talking about Shelby Foote's Novels.)

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: EBarnacle
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 12:32 PM

Folks, check out the Honore Morrow "Great Captain" trilogy about Lincoln and the War by whatever name you wish to give it. Though it is a novelization of events, she sticks fairly closely to the known history and makes events accessible.

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 01:07 PM

No, Greg, I haven't read either of those works...

I've long contended that Lincoln, rather than re-supply Sumpter should have left Sumpter and just let the CSA slip away...

Of course that is a radical view that makes unionists go crazy... They say that those of US out there who hold these views are pro-slavery... That's just noise...

Sho nuff would have difficult for Lincoln to have done that but NOT impossible...

I have spent many hours imagining how things would have turned out and just about every scenario is better than what we got...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 02:38 PM

Do us both a favor, Bobert & read 'em. I'm not pushing any particular agenda here- but there's a lot that's come out in the years since you & I were in college.

Dreserves to be considered. Then, lets talk, bud.

Best,

Greg

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 02:54 PM

The fact that's it's been a long time since "you & I were in college" is a good thing... Gave them less time to sanitize history... I remember the centennial...

BTW, I was privileged to catch Dr, Rogers, who was the head of VCU's history department, "History of the South" before he finally retired welll into his 70s...

I'll see about them books... I do better with reviews and articles than books...

BTW, I just opened a box full of Life magazines from 1960-70... Talk about some great stuff...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 06:47 PM

Well, Ebbie, I suggest, politely, that you do your research a little better...

Lincoln ordered the deaths of 38 men. He felt he would be unpopular if he agreed to all the executions that were desired...It is said that he did a deal that in only agreeing to execute 38 of the Sioux, it would be written into law that the remainder of the Santee Sioux would then be driven out of their lands..

And of course, this whole thing happened due to the Dakota being told to 'eat grass' when they were starving to death..so a few young warriors went out to search for food....finding some eggs...and it all took off from there...

But WHO was it who starved them?

And like it or not, Lincoln ordered for 38 men to be executed, despite the trial being horrendously unfair, despite the guilt of most of them being highly questionable in the first place..

Read what they did to their bodies afterwards...read how they were taken away for 'medical research', where the man who started The Mayo Clinic dissected them.....Read how it is also believed the some of them were skinned as well, their skins later being sold.....

Do not tell me that Abe Lincoln was a hero...He was not!

HAD he been, he would have stood up for the Indigenous People of America in every way possible, apologizing profusely for all the evil injustice brought upon them...And he would have done ALL in his power to try to heal deep, deep wounds...Wounds which exist to this very day, in a People who, for so very long, have been told they are almost subhuman, with no rights, no respect due to them...

Well, Ebbie, I have the GREATEST RESPECT for Native Americans and for all Indigenous People who have, in the main, had total shite poured down upon them by the White Man for way too long...and it is STILL going on today!

Abraham Lincoln was a man of no merit whatsoever in my eyes....and I doubt he gave those 38 men, nor any of the other Native Americans who suffered hugely during his 'reign' any thought whatsoever for the remainder of his days...

I have no respect for what the White Man did, my own people included..and the sooner the Americans and the British have the guts to stand up and say "We are so fucking SORRY for what you have endured because of us!" and MEAN it, the better!!

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 07:04 PM

From gnu:
"Chilling, Ebbie"


Not nearly as chilling as the Holocaust which was visited upon the Native Americans by The White Man!

And WHO was it who started all of this, gnu?
WHO was it who created this whole mess in the first place?

Oh yeah, that's right....it was us..

It was the good ol' White Man, who, puffed up with his own arrogance, behaved in the most evil, violent and appalling way imaginable, for centuries...and it's still happening to this very day..

But hey, the Pope had started up The Doctrine of Discovery, so they felt they had the divine right to just mosey on in, kill everything around them, steal the rest and just keep going....

It is the most shocking, vile story ever...
And the Genocide continues, to this day...........

Subject: RE: BS: Abe Lincoln and Corporations
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 07:40 PM

In my opinion, the atrocities perpetrated by governments and other ruling bodies upon their own peoples stand by themselves; I think that burning people at the stake or purposely starving a whole nation or hanging a nine-year old child for stealing a loaf of bread is just as bad as what the US did to its indigenous people. It is a matter only of degree- the mindset is the same.

So clean your own skirts before getting too high and mighty. Incidentally, the first people of the land that became known as the United States of America were not as universally pure and spiritual as you prefer to believe. They were just as human as the rest of us.