|
| |
Velma Laborde
Lincoln’s
Morality
Nathaniel Hawthorne, in Chiefly of
War-Matters, describes Abraham Lincoln as "the man of men" (1). At
Lincoln's funeral, Ralph Waldo Emerson said of
Lincoln, "The President stood before us as a man of the
people" (3). Frederick Douglass in his Oration in Memory of Abraham Lincoln
called him "an American of the Americans" (2).
Lincoln
was beloved by Americans before his death and after it. He was the ideal of what
an American could aspire to. Regardless where you were born, you could work
hard, educate yourself, and become successful. He was the epitome of the
American Dream. Yet, just like the American Dream, he is and was not without
controversy. Why did Lincoln
feel the war between the North and the South was necessary? Was he anti-slavery
or pro-slavery? The answer is in the middle. His ability to take a position on
the issue of slavery and somehow stay in-between anti- and pro-slavery
contributed to his iconic status then and today. As seen in
Hawthorne,
Lincoln was
idolized and placed on a pedestal way before his assassination. His death made
him transcendent, projecting his legacy to a higher untouchable status, making
him godlike. This larger-than-life image veils the intention behind his motives
and romanticizes him as a person along with his political priorities.
Initially, Lincoln’s moral beliefs on slavery took second
place to his political objectives. Not to say his political aims were not moral,
only that the idea that his decision to end slavery was based in morality is not
quite completely accurate. Lincoln’s first
priority was the Union. In
The House Divided Speech he says, “I
believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free” and
“It will become all one thing, or the other” (1). Preserving the Union was clearly his ultimate goal from the start.
Considering the issue of slavery was the root cause of division within the Union, it put him in a precarious moral predicament. If he
chose an anti-slavery stand refusing to put aside his personal beliefs or bow to
the South’s demand to expand and continue slavery, the country would go to war
with the potential for permanent division: his greatest fear. If he chose
pro-slavery and gave in to the South ignoring his personal beliefs, the Union may survive intact but would it be a humane one that
his conscience could live with? He decided to avoid moral absolutism and instead
attempted a balance between pro- and anti- slavery in order to avoid alienating
either side. He did not say outright that the South should immediately end
slavery, instead that slavery should not spread so that it could ultimately die
a natural death (1). He still did not dwell on or argue that slavery was in fact
wrong or inhumane. Instead, he avoided addressing it by focusing instead on the
potential of the issue to divide the country. This was his first inclination; to
find a common ground between the two sides by arguing that the
Union must remain together to be strong, but as the war dragged on
he needed a new approach.
He now needed to find a way to end the war. His new approach to justify
his decisions to enter the war, end slavery, and eventually end the war was to
speak on it as if it was something that was out of his hands. The Emancipation
Proclamation was signed in 1863, but the war continued into 1865. In
Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address he said of both sides,
"Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with or even
before the conflict itself should cease" (4). He speaks about the fact that it
was God that "gives both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to
those by whom the offense came" (4). He takes the responsibility for the war and
places it on God's shoulders rather than on the North or the South. While he
does earlier in the speech imply that the South was the instigator of the war,
calling them 'insurgents" who "would rend the Union
even by war," he still attempts to remain non-divisive overall by placing the
continuation of the war with God. God, and a higher power, appealed to both
sides. In this way, he is using his personal beliefs in God as a moral
connection to all Americans. He says, "Both read the same Bible and pray to the
same God" (4). He uses each person's individual sense of morality to try to
bring everyone together. In doing so, he is able to continue to avoid explicitly
alienating either side. Because of this there is much discussion over whether
Lincoln
truly was anti-slavery.
Frederick Douglass in his Oration
in Memory of Abraham Lincoln attempted to answer the complex moral issues
that surround Lincoln. He said, "Abraham Lincoln was not, in
the fullest sense of the word, either our man or our model. In his interests, in
his associations, in his habits of thought, and in his prejudices, he was a
white man" (1). Yet, he goes on to say, "Though Mr. Lincoln shared the
prejudices of his white fellow countrymen against the Negro, it is hardly
necessary to say that in his heart of hearts he loathed and hated slavery…" (8).
Lincoln had made it clear that the Union
was his priority, but he could have caved on the expansion of slavery and
avoided the war. It may have alienated the North, but the North may not have
pushed for war over it. It is more likely that, as Douglass said, "in his heart
of hearts" he did not only want to stop the expansion of slavery, but he wanted
it to end. Douglass understood why it was necessary for
Lincoln to find an approach that would end slavery but still allow America to come
out as a whole country, rather than a permanently divided one. He speaks about
believing in Lincoln
just as they (slaves) believed that the Nation they belonged to would eventually
make things right.
Douglass spoke about their faith in Lincoln "often taxed" but
that their "hearts believed while they ached and bled" (5). Douglass felt that
there was a bigger picture to see than just the fact that
Lincoln
did not come right out and end slavery. Douglass said, "we were able to take a
comprehensive view of Abraham Lincoln, and to make reasonable allowance for the
circumstances of his position" (6). Here, Douglass acknowledges the complexity
of morality. Lincoln
was not in a position to demand support to end slavery. In order for Lincoln to have any chance
of ending slavery, he had to remain in charge. Douglass essentially gives
Lincoln a pass. He understands
Lincoln's predicament and instead of blaming
Lincoln
blames the institution of slavery. At the end of his speech he says, "while a
great nation, torn and rent by war, was already beginning to raise to the skies
loud anthems of joy at the dawn of peace, it was startled, amazed, and
overwhelmed by the crowning crime of slavery - the assassination of Abraham
Lincoln" (11). His assassination became the great triumph over slavery and his
ascension to greatness. Douglass said, "it has filled the country with a deeper
abhorrence of slavery and a deeper love for the great liberator" (11). Douglass
makes the existence of slavery the primary moral issue, not necessarily
Lincoln's handling of how to end it or even why he believed it should be ended.
In the end, Lincoln's
personal moral beliefs regarding slavery do not matter, only that through his
actions it ended. Finally, in his death, he brought together the country he so
desperately wanted to unite.
While Lincoln's priority was always the
Union, and his intentions regarding slavery were initially in favor
of keeping slavery in some states if it would avoid conflict, it was not his
only priority. His moral beliefs evolved and the longer war allowed him to take
action based in morality and not worry about dividing a country that was already
divided. Lincoln's part in ending
slavery was not glamorous or pretty. It happened over time, war, death and
disappointment before the country came out on the other side slave-free and
together. Because of Lincoln's
iconic legacy, most of the grit is forgotten. Much is learned from reading both
Lincoln's
handling of and Douglass' response to morality. The benefit of reading these
types of writings is that individual perspective is gained and could be used in
your own life when faced with moral issues. Further, it provides a unique
historical insight. Everyone knows the facts of Abraham Lincoln, the war, and
his assassination, but actually studying his words and the words of others
creates a greater sense of knowing him through understanding his beliefs and
decisions. Studying morality is a reminder that things are not always what they
seem and there are no simple answers.
|
