Reply #40: bad comparison

[Two Americas]

Lincoln didn't promise Blacks anything, and didn't pander to them or depend upon their support. He also did not invite any pro-slavery ministers to his inauguration or any other pro-slavery people, or even wishy washy people anywhere else near his administration. He had a much smaller and less clear mandate then from the people to oppose slavery than the Democrats do today to oppose the religious right and Reaganomics.

A better comparison would be the Whigs - who kept promising to oppose slavery, but then compromised with and caved to the other party again and again. The arguments the Whigs used were - we are better than the alternative, you have no other choice, these things take time, we can't change things overnight, we are taking baby steps, the public won't support anything that radical, the Abolitionists are fringe radical purists, not all slave owners are evil, you are helping the opposition when you criticize the Whigs, the other party has some good ideas, you aren't being realistic, you want Buchanan???!! Are you insane?? etc., etc., etc.

Any of that sound familiar?

Yes, the unthinkable happened - James Buchanan was elected in 1856, mostly because of Whig voters defecting to the Republicans, and it took a little time before the Republicans were fully in power, but once the anti-slavery forces gave up on the Whigs and their endless excuses and started standing up to them, things were set in motion and it only took four years to complete the transition.


...