Posts Tagged ‘Thomas DiLorenzo’s “The Lincoln Myth”’
Reza Saieedi of the Tasnim News Agency of Iran recently interviewed Mark Dankof on the doctrine of American Exceptionalism and other related controversies. The questions and answers follow:
Reza Saieedi: Regarding the idea of American Exceptionalism, in an article for the Heritage Foundation Matthew Spalding wrote: “America is an exceptional nation, but not because of what it has achieved or accomplished. America is exceptional because, unlike any other nation, it is dedicated to the principles of human liberty, grounded on the truths that all men are created equal and endowed with equal rights. These permanent truths are ‘applicable to all men and all times,’ as Abraham Lincoln once said.”
In spite of decades of effort to achieve equal rights, we still see minorities–notably blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans–who suffer from injustice inside the US borders. So what does this notion of exceptionalism really mean in terms of daily life in America?
Mark Dankof: I would reject the mythological interpretation of the reign of Abraham Lincoln as a defender of the Constitution and human rights as the 16th President of the United States.
Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo has written the definitive book on the Lincoln Presidency in my view. It is entitled The Real Lincoln. I reviewed the book some years ago on one of my web sites. In that review, I stated that: “DiLorenzo’s analysis of Lincoln, accompanied by copious historical documentation, shatters the mythology surrounding the 16th President’s motives and agenda in pursuing the War Between The States. The author provides convincing evidence for Lincoln’s overt racism as expressed in his documented views on racial supremacy as manifested in his desire to colonize all American blacks outside the continental United States (p. 4); that Lincoln’s views were matched by a palpable majority in the North who utilized such tools as state constitutional amendments to prohibit the emigration of black people into Northern states like the President’s home state of Illinois (p.4); and that Lincoln’s war which killed 620,000 Americans [equivalent to 5 million deaths in 2002 population numbers and percentages] and destroyed 40 percent of the American economy, was a singularly terrible, unjustified conflict given the proven success in the 19th century of the peaceful end to slavery through the policy of compensated emancipation (p. 4). DiLorenzo duly notes that, ‘Between 1800 and 1860, dozens of countries, including the entire British Empire, ended slavery peacefully; only in the United States was a war involved (p. 4).’”
What then, does The Real Lincoln lay out as the actual road map for understanding the war and the accompanying strategy and psyche of Abraham Lincoln in resorting to armed force against the Southern states? In his tome, DiLorenzo underscores the mythological President’s political and moral failure in pursuing the bloodshed of fellow countrymen with an evil, unnecessary, coercive methodology. The author insists that the prevailing world-wide trends between 1800-1860 would have resulted in the irenic end to the institution of slavery by; 1) compensated emancipation; 2) an encouraged advance of the industrial revolution in the South with capital-intensive agriculture and manufacturing (p. 277); and 3) the inevitable furtherance of Enlightenment philosophy in the American mind and culture, a philosophy which in the end game would have been ideologically incompatible with the continuation of the institution, as had been the case throughout the British empire (pp. 276-277).
For the Loyola College Professor of Economics, the real Lincoln agenda in the War Between the States is located in the fact that: “. . .the War Between the States so fundamentally transformed the nature of American government. Before the war, government in America was the highly decentralized, limited government established by the founding fathers. The war created the highly centralized state that Americans labor under today. The purpose of American government was transformed from the defense of individual liberty to the quest for empire. . . . Lincoln thought of himself as the heir to the Hamiltonian political tradition, which sought a much more centralized governmental system, one that would plan economic development with corporate subsidies financed by protectionist tariffs and the printing of money by the central government. . . . It was Lincoln’s real agenda. . . . Henry Clay’s ‘American System.’ For his entire political life Lincoln was devoted to Clay and Clay’s economic agenda. The debate over this economic agenda was arguably the most important political debate during the first seventy years of the nation’s existence. It involved the nation’s most prominent statesmen and pitted the states’ rights Jeffersonians against the centralizing Hamiltonians (who became Whigs and, later, Republicans). The violence of war finally ended the debate in 1861. . . . A war was not necessary to free the slaves, but it was necessary to destroy the most significant check on the powers of the central government: the right of secession. (Introduction)”
So essentially, the worst aspects of the modern Imperial American Presidency that would be seen in Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, the Bushes, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama, are all based on the Lincoln reign. Dr. Paul Craig Roberts agrees essentially with DiLorenzo and with me in these conclusions.
Lincoln’s use of the U. S. Army to engage in the mass murder of American civilians in the American South became the prototype of what would later happen to the American Indians in the Manifest Destiny-driven expansion of the United States westward. This is but one example of where White Americans and Non-White Americans were both victimized by the same dynamics and the same ideology of the allegedly Exceptional American Empire. In the present historical milieu White and Non-White Americans are equally oppressed by a Government destroying the American economy with Globalist Trade Agreements, destroying the legitimacy of American elections with a financing mechanism embodied in the Citizens United and McCutcheon Supreme Court decisions, destroying the American dollar by the fiat money policies of the Federal Reserve Board, destroying the lives of American and non-American alike with the endless wars in the Middle East pursued to further the aims of Israel, the International Central Banking establishment linked to the Petrodollar, and the Energy Consortiums, and destroying the earlier cultural mores of a society rooted in Western Christianity and replacing it with a wholehearted endorsement and promotion of the legitimacy of homosexuality, pornography, abortion, and euthanasia.
Scott McConnell of Buchanan’s The American Conservative recently quoted historian Walter Russell Mead in
demonstrating how Zionist Neo-Conservatives have wedded the doctrine of American Exceptionalism to the notion of Israeli Exceptionalism. The perversion of historic Christian orthodoxy on eschatology in the interest of affirming the heresy known as Christian Zionism is the glue that holds much of this dangerous ideological poison in place in the United States:
“. . . Norman Podhoretz’s son-in-law Elliott Abrams backed Netanyahu, quoting in his favor this four-year-old passage from historian Walter Russell Mead:
‘Israel matters in American politics like almost no other country on earth. Well beyond the American Jewish and the Protestant fundamentalist communities, the people and the story of Israel stir some of the deepest and most mysterious reaches of the American soul. The idea of Jewish and Israeli exceptionalism is profoundly tied to the idea of American exceptionalism. The belief that God favors and protects Israel is connected to the idea that God favors and protects America.’”
Reza Saieedi: Given the details in the newly released Senate Intelligence Committee report of inmates in America’s prisons being tortured, it seems that human rights violations are implemented in both US foreign and domestic foreign policy. What is your take on this? After the Senate Intelligence Committee report compilation and release, now what? Nothing is accomplished by simply stating that these illegal actions took place without some form of punishment for the offending parties. What is the next step?
Mark Dankof: Thomas Jefferson and America’s other Founders recognized that a government dedicated to promoting global Empire abroad would be the same Government destroying the rights of American citizens at home. The revelations about CIA torture are accompanied by the revelations about illegal NSA spying, the USA Patriot Acts, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Much of this is aimed at suppressing the Bill of Rights and the Constitutional protections of Americans at home. When you add to all of this the fact that companies linked directly and indirectly to the Zionist State of Israel are procuring contracts with American intelligence, law enforcement agencies, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Transportation Safety Administration, one can say that the best way of understanding what has happened to the United States in this increasing evolution toward evil internationally and domestically, especially since September 11, 2001 is inextricably linked to the fact that our Government has increasingly adopted the attitudes and the ethos of Israel since 1948. This has included the demonization and marginalization of Americans who have protested these developments.
The release of the Senate Intelligence Committee report on CIA torture is mere public relations window dressing.
Nothing will be done to punish the people involved, or to insure these actions will not be regularly repeated. Ominously, most of the American public doesn’t seem to care. Much of the rest of the public will buy the notion that these actions are justified by “national security.”
Reza Saieedi: The US has recently issued sanctions against Venezuela because of reported police brutality. What is being done to remedy the large number of incidents of police brutality inside America? What entity should issue sanctions against America for their own violations?
Mark Dankof: Nothing is being done. Nothing will be. This is the grim reality.
Reza Saieedi: We call Israel the only true democracy in the Middle East and continue to throw our unconditional support behind it, in spite of its terrible human rights record. Does the meaning of democracy lie in the examples we see in places like Palestine and Ferguson?
Mark Dankof: Israel is an illegitimate State founded in a Talmudic racial supremacist ideology and land theft from its inception. The King David Hotel bombing in 1946 and the Deir Yassin slaughter are microcosms of the larger truth I have stated. It bleeds dry America’s credibility in the world, bleeds dry our economy, and destroys the integrity of our elections and what was once a semblance of journalistic integrity in the mainstream American press. I would be most cautious in comparing the Palestine tragedy with the Ferguson, Missouri tragedy. The American media has deliberately spun the latter in a way which blinds both White and Black Americans to considering the Zionist, Globalist, Neo-Conservative hijacking of our Government and basic institutions. Domestically, the American media has spun Ferguson in a way which intimates that only racial minorities have serious vulnerabilities in the United States to irresponsible police actions against citizens; the American media spin on Ferguson similarly diverts attention from the absolute statistical truths on police crimes against White Americans, and the fact that the most overwhelming problem statistically with violent crime in the United States involves African American crimes against other African Americans, and against White Americans.
Reza Saieedi: Israeli PM Netanyahu has ordered actions that brought about the killing of thousands of women and children and continues a policy of siege in Gaza, prohibiting vital supplies and resources from reaching needy Palestinian families.However he was present at the recent Paris vigil denouncing religious intolerance. What can explain this ironic situation? Can these two attitudes co-exist?
Mark Dankof: Netanyahu’s presence at the Paris vigil in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo incident is a sick combination of tragedy and comedy, as is the presence of the illegitimate President of the Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, who was installed by a coup d’etat launched by the United States, the European Union, and Israeli oligarchs opposed to Vladimir Putin’s rule in Russia. Netanyahu’s routine criminality in Gaza is supplemented by the criminal actions of the Poroshenko regime in eastern Ukraine against Russian ethnics as seen by the Odessa Trade Union fire and a shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, a crime with all the finger prints of the Kiev cabal. The United States supports Netanyahu and Poroshenko.
You can draw your own conclusions as to what the larger implications of this happen to be.
Mark Dankof Profile: www.ExpertClick.com/19-2281