![Kindle Store,Kindle eBooks,History]()
3,8
Best Edition "What Shall We Do with the Negro?": Lincoln, White Racism, and Civil War America with Free MOBI EDITION Download Now!
"What Shall We Do with the Negro?" serves as a corrective in offering a more realistic, more nuanced, and less celebratory approach to understanding this crucial period in American history.
At this time of writing, The Mobi "What Shall We Do with the Negro?": Lincoln, White Racism, and Civil War America has garnered 8 customer reviews with rating of 5 out of 5 stars. Not a bad score at all as if you round it off, it’s actually a perfect TEN already. From the looks of that rating, we can say the Mobi is Good TO READ!
Best Edition "What Shall We Do with the Negro?": Lincoln, White Racism, and Civil War America with Free MOBI EDITION!
I have read quite a number of books on Abraham Lincoln. In contemplating all of the books that I've read, I would recommend this one, more than any other, because of its near-obsessive and honest account of the truth. I say this knowing that this book is not specifically focused on Lincoln. One of the things that this book reinforces, and lines up with, in all of the others that I've read, is that Abraham Lincoln's paramount and principle object during The Civil War, was to restore the Union. In that effort, any and everything could be potentially sacrificed, including the potential freedom of African-Americans. No sane, self-respecting African-American reader of History would condone this sacrifice. Lincoln openly said for the better part of The War, that he would not have a problem with slaves REMAINING slaves, if he could restore The Union. I might add to this that Lincoln consistently spent the better part of The War, contemplating, pursuing and scheming, in an attempt to send African-Americans out of the country through colonization. For the total of his life, it was incomprehensible to him that White people and Black people could live together in peace, total equality and harmony. His mind simply could not grasp that. History also shows that Lincoln's second most important priority was conciliating Southern Whites. Think about that. Lincoln was more concerned with catering to a polity of Traitors, The White Confederacy,Traitors-then-in-process of openly killing United States soldiers than he was in providing for the future needs and well-being of patriotic, loyal, African-American soldiers. At no point, was the moral wrongness of slavery nor the political, social or economic well-being of former slaves high on Lincoln's list of priorities. At no point, whether in his words, strategies, actions, intentions or future imaginings or visions did he believe, nor articulate, any kind of universal, racial egalitarianism, whether this equality would be social, political or economic for African-Americans. He did put forth the notion of limited voting rights for African-American soldiers and the “very intelligent” among Black folks, but he did not advocate non-racial, universal equality, since the limits he would have wanted to put out there for Black folks were not to be attached to White folks. He firmly expressed the notion that White people should be the ascendant, superior and dominant people in charge in American affairs, politically, socially, economically, and in every other way, for the current circumstances, and for all-time, in perpetuity. Hence, Lincoln was a strong proponent of White Supremacy. This may sound harsh and cliché to many, but it is the truth, supported by this book and any serious study of History. The fact that Lincoln was a White Supremacist, particularly in 1865 America, should not be considered an exceptional statement, especially since his racial outlook was hardly uncommon for the people of his day. As Escott says in this book, Lincoln's views were relatively progressive as compared to the population-at-large. We also need to keep in mind that Lincoln does deserve enormous credit, through his comprehensive human gifts, in helping to bring an end to slavery. That is a monumental achievement, that bears reflection. However, there is quite a gap between ending slavery and being pro-egalitarianism and pro-equal justice, so to paint Lincoln as an icon of egalitarianism and equal justice is a Historical lie. It is. If one wants to look at that period and locate a White person who fulfills one's longing as pro-egalitarianism and pro-equal justice, History suggests that it might be more fruitful and rewarding to study the lives of John Brown and Wendell Phillips. As I wrap up this portion of my review, let me say that I absolutely love this book. I love it because the first duty of any writer, particularly the Historian, is to tell the truth. This book sticks to its main duty. Now, having said this, this is the first time that I have written a review where the best part of it is the actual writer doing his own review. Here are the words of Mr. Paul D. Escott: “Lincoln wanted slavery to come to an end in the United States, but he did not expect it to be replaced by freedom and equality—not, at least, until generations had passed away. As a practical politician, he had no interest in crusading for a cause so unpopular as racial equality. When he met with the Confederate commissioners at Hampton Roads, he may have been willing to consider a delayed emancipation because he believed that the institution of slavery was dying overall as a result of his war measures and what he elsewhere called the “friction and abrasion” of wartime events. Unquestionably, slavery had been severely damaged by his actions and by the initiative of the slaves themselves. But Lincoln did not expect the realities of life for former slaves to change dramatically and rapidly in the South. Therefore, it mattered little to him whether all slaves became free immediately or some had to wait a bit longer. All would inevitably experience and have to accept restricted horizons for years to come. To his credit, Lincoln grasped that slavery and racism had corrupted the heart of the nation “conceived in Liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” But that corruption meant that any solution for a fundamental racial problem would be agonizing and slow. Although Lincoln was against slavery and claimed an “oft expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free,” he acknowledged on various occasions that inequality was very resistant to change, if not ineradicable. Although he undoubtedly took pleasure in guardedly and carefully moving a racist country toward universal emancipation, his expectations for racial progress thereafter were very slight. He did not fight for equality or put amelioration of race relations on his political agenda because he assumed that little change was possible. Only over a long period of time would progress, or separation, occur. These realities explain a president who at Hampton Roads was willing to bargain away much that was important to blacks in order to conciliate Southern whites. They explain a war leader who took reunion as his primary goal and viewed emancipation as a means to that end. They explain Lincoln's willingness to delay emancipation and his unwillingness to crusade for racial equality or for citizens' rights for black people. In these realities lie unattractive aspects of the national character that are more pleasant to overlook or to subsume in a narrative of unbroken progress. White racism was a central fact of the nation Lincoln tried to lead and reunite, and it was a reality that dominated and constrained his approach to emancipation and postwar freedom. The extent and depth of that racism would be on display in the victorious North only months after Lincoln's death.” (Pages 224 & 225).Thank you Mr. Paul D. Escott for daring to tell the truth, and telling it well. This is an exceptional work of scholarship.
Post a Comment