Thomas DiLorenzo on Abraham Lincoln's Second American Revolution

[@PJ-ns6um]

"On the day the American people accepted Abraham Lincoln's invasion of a sovereign state the Republic died and the empire was born." -Washington Post, 1905

[@humphreybumblecuck5151]

Truth. Antebellum US was a land of freedom (an imperfect freedom) but now is totalitarian and intrusive to the highest degree. My Family went out to the territories, possibly the freest man has ever been if you include technology. Sic Semper Tyranus

[@kirbysmith8565]

And still feeling it this day. Hamilton and Lincoln would be proud

[@kimobrien.]

@@kirbysmith8565 The Southerns fired the first shot at Ft Sumter in Charleston Harbor.

[@kirbysmith8565]

In defense of Lincoln's invasion.

[@kimobrien.]

@@kirbysmith8565 Nope your guys fired first. Then Lincoln called for troops to enforce the insurrection act of 1807. You bit off more than you could chew and ended up losing your slaves anyway.

[@CaliforniaCarpenter7]

It took me until today to hear about any of Lincolns atrocities against Free Men and The Union he claimed to represent. I was never taught any of this in the public fool system, and I sincerely applaud Dr. DiLorenzo for having the courage to share this with a Nation so blinded by someone else's agenda. This man is a true American.

[@CaliforniaCarpenter7]

@oldman rivers Eleven cucumbers and a sail boat’s mast in Narnia, dear friend.

[@Gnofg]

worth watching kzbin.info/www/bejne/eGSrq5mPjLabfpo

[@TheJunehog]

You were never taught about it in public school because it's bullshit.

[@Gnofg]

@@TheJunehog I took college history and the lecturer was right. It wasn't taught in college. He only went to Harvard.

[@Gnofg]

If you think what he states is inaccurate then pretend you are in college or a court of law and find out where he is inaccurate. That would mean prove that the the individual states did not have slavery as the main reason why the south seceded. secondly, prove the dates that he said most of the statues for the confederacy were erected were not done in the years that he states. Also,, prove that the three massacres of African Americans didn't occur. As soon as you can document that let me know. Also, prove to me that Jim Crow didn't exist and that this type of racism was not also in the north.

[@PJ-ns6um]

"In war, truth is the first casualty. " -Aeschylus

[@SovereignStatesman]

But the law is BASED on truth, and thus PROVING state sovereignty will free them from the USA as 50 sovereign nations.

[@dannylynch7741]

This is the most relevant piece of information to today. It's all happening again.

[@58landman]

I have always despised Lincoln for his damnable determination to start the War between the States. He wanted war and he knew that defeating the South would cement the power of a Federal government to force and continue the serf-master relationship that every single state in the nation between the individual states and the Fed. It cannot be repaired at this late date but John W. Booth was absolutely correct when he uttered his famous quote: Sic Semper Tyrannis!

[@kimobrien.]

Lincoln represented Northern capitalism and in its system of wage labor it had no place for slavery. The private property and wage labor system of the capitalist destroyed the human property of the slave owners by setting them free to be wage laborers.

[@SovereignStatesman]

There WAS no war between the states, since the Union states DENIED their own having the sovereignty power to LEVY war; and meanwhile the Union NEVER HAD such power of its own, since it was never a national union. Rather, each state was always a sovereign nation, and they simply delegated powers to an INTERNATIONAL union. So legally, every state is still a separate sovereign nation, by law.

[@58landman]

@@SovereignStatesman There is a massive gap between the idea that the separate states are sovereign and the reality that the Fed will kill every soul in a state to assert and maintain its dominance. Jefferson's idea got the ball rolling but the lust for Federal power stopped it shortly after the success of the American Revolution. Lincoln's governing behavior during the Civil War cemented this Republic's destruction in place.

[@HelenRundell]

​@@SovereignStatesmaneye concur in principle- lawfully yes, but not in practice. These 'states' legally operate as sub-corporate franchisees of the perceived national identity. If ever an educated grass-roots movement were to build another freedom model without infiltrated interference, that would be my prayer.

[@misss.o.j.]

In a way we are still fighting this battle.

[@sionnachmacbradaigh1010]

That's right, and thankfully, you will lose again and again and again. Better find a new territory just for racists.

[@comesahorseman]

Never give up the idea of states rights. 👍

[@comesahorseman]

@@sionnachmacbradaigh1010 happy trolling!

[@StandWatie1862]

@@sionnachmacbradaigh1010 Little worm that thinks in emotional hysteria immune from logic

[@sledgehammer9739]

And we're losing. Mainly because people who are supposed to be from the South are stabbing the rest of us in the back.

[@kingmiura8138]

Ol' Abe, rail splitter, never went any further south than Richmond in his life. He was elected by a minority since the demrat party split its vote between a northern and southern candidates. President Buchanan likely would not have called or troops if he had been Prez in place of Ol' Abe.....but the South would likely not have seceded if Ol' Abe had not been Prez. The Fort Sumter firing was due to the very stupid Major Anderson who sneaked into the unfinished Fort under darkness and refused to peacefully evacuate for over 3 months. There were some rabid abolitionists in the north but Ol' Abe stood out among politicians in his eagerness for war. Ol' Abe was a very poor military mind....underestimated his enemy from the beginning. He presided over the greatest disaster in the country's history....a million casualties when the population was much less than today...Ol' Abe was truly the greatest villain in US history.

[@sledgehammer9739]

Totally agree.

[@FacelessMan777]

Great commentary, I love it. If you don't mind, I may borrow it from time to time.

[@matthewdavis4655]

Reflection from a guy who, thanks to thoughtful and honest friends, had his mind converted from sjw doctrine to critical recognition of the tyranny and historically dishonest intentions of our government: Learning more and more about certain points in the life of our country there was an option to choose freedom or to choose consolidation of power, I find myself becoming angrier and angrier towards those who did and do now wield that power. And as I'm now digging into the history of Lincoln not taught in government propoganda/mythology factories (public schools), about events overwhelmingly perceived as moral and of the highest good by even the best and most intelligent people that I know, I can't help but feel like a child who, upon birth, was adopted into a family who lied to and abused him his whole life; a family who never told him he was from a different origin, who manipulated him into thinking this was the best possible scenario he could have found himself in, that they were saints for taking him in and he should be grateful and show his gratitude through subservience, who tmstole his property as a punishment for menial or imagined infractions of rules. Who knows what his blood family might have been to him? They might have been awful, they might have been good. But he was lied to and brainwashed. I don't know if things would be better for me or other people had we stayed a confederacy but I strongly suppose that an absence of centralized authority and no federal governmental monopoly on violence would make life better for many of us. It hurts hearing a version of one the most celebrated events in our history be so contradictory to what is nearly unanimously believed and yet seems more true than the modern myth. And I'm irate for the citizens who wanted to be free but their lives were destroyed and their memories villinized and left like skulls on a pike as a moral and political warning to dissenters. And I'm filled with overwhelming frustration that nobody I talk to about this takes this seriously, that they don't see the implications of power consolidation or the possibility of freedom. With as little as I know and understand, I feel like I'm talking to people in Plato's cave, even in my own family. I don't know exactly what I'm getting at. I guess i just needed to say (or type) some things out loud and the KZbin comments section is as good a place as any, I guess. Thanks, Tom, for saying unpopular things. It means a lot to people like me.

[@Gnofg]

worth watching kzbin.info/www/bejne/eGSrq5mPjLabfpo

[@Anon_E_Muss]

You said that very well. Many of us feel the same way.

[@pelly8830]

His personal life was also a disaster. Historians covered up sordid affairs with euphemisms such as "lavender".@

[@kimobrien.]

@@pelly8830 In the end the outcome was to end chattel slavery and replace it with wage labor and capital simplifying the class antagonisms.

[@DaveRosenberg-bv8rz]

Here, here!

[@bryanb.386]

Many comparisons what is going on today, and what we will see in the upcoming months in terms of federal tyranny.

[@kingmiura8138]

Lincoln started Lincoln's War when he invaded Virginia.....he could have stopped the war at any time. The north had over 4 times the population of the South plus over 100,000 troops were recruited from immigrants from Europe. The North had over 20 times the industrial capacity of the South plus an in place navy. If these no.s were reversed, Ol' Abe would have said "Let them go and let us be friends and trade". Deo Vindice.

[@isaiahii6982]

Well said. I don't remember the exact numbers but at the wars peak activity the South had about 450k soldiers in active duty with no reserves. The North had over a 1 million in active duty and over 2 million reserves. The South should have fought a guerrilla war from the start and they may have had a chance. The fact that in most cases they used conventional warring techniques did them in. They were losing too many soldiers in the battles even though they won like 80% of the battles.

[@kingmiura8138]

@@isaiahii6982 Well, the George Washington strategy was to not lose the war....keep it alive until England decided it was not worth it. Another strategy might have been to pounce as hard as possible in the beginning....follow up on First Manassas by marching on to Washington and maybe capturing Ol' Abe and demanding peace. A war of attrition was one the South could not win....New York City had more industrial capacity than the whole South. Deo Vindice.

[@isaiahii6982]

@@kingmiura8138 Even Robert E Lee said before his death if he'd known how the South would be treated after surrendering he would have died with his sword in his hand. I think ultimately the South had no choice but to surrender because of the yankee's war against the Southern civilian population. We know the Yankee's were prepared to commit complete genocide against the South so ultimately it was best to stop fighting. I agree with you that if they had pushed into Washington and captured Lincoln they may have had the chance to end the war right then. The curse of hindsight. Deo Vindice.

[@j.lebowski3917]

The confederacy started it.

[@kingmiura8138]

@@j.lebowski3917 Ol' Abe was a POS and now we have another POS - Joey Biden - creating Zuck Land - thanks Ol' Abe.

[@Gideom007]

Sic Semper Tyrannis

[@sionnachmacbradaigh1010]

Nice -- so you endorse traitors and assassins.

[@kurtsherrick2066]

@@sionnachmacbradaigh1010 He endorses killing a tyrant. No man is a traitor for defending his family and home against a Invading Murdering raping, torturing, burning and pillaging Army. You have been taught a lie and you don't like it.

[@sledgehammer9739]

@@sionnachmacbradaigh1010 Your battery operated Toys must need new batteries. Those poor toys get worn out by you.

[@sionnachmacbradaigh1010]

@@kurtsherrick2066 Your family got its aristocratic status taken away because slave owning was outlawed, get over it. After reconstruction crumbled you put basically the same system back in place. Also, you might not want to bring up rape, we all know what slavemasters did for 300 years. They even celebrated it in literature. You ancestors were the most notorious rapists in history, and used their biracial offspring as supplemental slave labour.

[@kurtsherrick2066]

@@sionnachmacbradaigh1010 My Ancestors didn't own one slave. I actually had a 3 time great grandfather that fought on the Northern Side. I have his release from the Union Army after the war in it's original Picture Frame. He fought at Shiloh and Vicksburg and many other Battles. I also had two fight for the South at Shiloh and other Battles. I know my History and my Ancestors didn't fight to free a slave or keep a slavery. My Northern Ancestor hated the South so much he came back to Marry my Great, Great, Great Grandmother and stayed in Arkansas until they moved to Memphis. You were taught a lie and I use Historical Facts to teach those so what you where taught is a lie.

[@staticintheattic1984]

9:30 declared war without the consent of Congress!

[@fredrezfield1629]

it wasn't technically a war as in you don't go attack your own country right?

[@SovereignStatesman]

Congress only had the POWER to declare war, as representatives of an international union of sovereign nations, each supremely ruled by its respective ELECTORATE. The US government made NO valid legal argument of national union over ANY state, since it was only in INTERNATIONAL union of 13 sovereign nations, that added 21 _more_ by 1861-- and under _popular_ sovereignty, meaning that each new state was ALSO a sovereign nation.

[@onehumanhistory]

As a Lincoln fan, I can’t get enough of this channel. So tired of ppl worshipping Lincoln and ignoring what happened. It’s refreshing to hear fresh perspectives even if I have a different view

[@animeisdead]

Incredibly respectable. Kudos

[@SovereignStatesman]

Then why are you a Lincoln fan? He made NO valid legal argument of national union over ANY state.

[@csrencz6942]

It's July 2020 and I'm watching as people who tear down CSA statues simultaneously reject the federal government protecting federal property.

[@Gnofg]

worth watching kzbin.info/www/bejne/eGSrq5mPjLabfpo

[@kurtsherrick2066]

@@Gnofg This wasn't a Lecture on Slavery. It is a Lecture on how Lincoln destroyed the Constitution and went against everything that was set in place to protect Sovereign States and Control of the Government in the hands of the people. I did watch most of that video and so much of what that man said isn't true. Things like Fort Pillow which I put into a comment under the video about that and other mistruths he was speaking about. Things like Pelham at Fredericksburg. He had only one Canon not multiple cannons. His men were so fast reloading that it seemed like multiple cannons. Also he said Pelham was a murderer. Nonsense. Those Union Soldiers had just destroyed Fredericksburg with pillaging. Even some of the Union Soldiers wrote letters saying how terrible they were and were ashamed at those mens actions. No man is a murderer for defending his own life against a Army that is trying to kill them and destroy their homes. Things like that. I am also Memphis born and raised. Some of his so called facts are conjecture. I did learn a couple of things though and I thank you for sending the video to me.

[@Gnofg]

@@kurtsherrick2066 I think everyone should know the brutality of racism and I think that there is still an issue of romancing the lost cause. That being said the country is coming apart at its seams and it really started with the election of Obama and some of the actions he had to endure. Joe Wilson yelling "you lied" and the subsequent birtherism and Trump asking for his grades was beyond the pale. Those types of actions should be denounced immediately by both parties and the press. The fact that it was not is a stain on our country. The reason why you got that video because this sight to me sounds like a bunch of Southern apologists and trying to paint the North as reprehensible as the south. The north was certainly no angel but how does this "institute" help us going forward . It is looking at the past instead of dealing with the problems we have now. I leave you with this "American by birth southern by the grace of god" No other region of the country promotes itself higher than the country. That statement even to some of my northern conservative friends borders on being unpatriotic. These people have to move on and do what is best for the country and stop setting themselves apart from the country. It is unpatriotic.

[@kurtsherrick2066]

@@Gnofg Michael Knox one is defending the Institute of Slavery by any means. You see you are asking us to be Intellectually Honest when you aren't being honest. Dilorenzo is a Northerner and has more Degrees in Economics than he can remember. You see Lincoln did all these things not to free one slave but to keep the Revenue Flow. I guess you didn't listen to the Lecture because it discredits the lies and Propaganda you were taught. My dad was a Northerner and had a Master's in American and World History. He had a semi photographic mind. He could quote speeches and Entire 9lays and Classics Word for Word. He taught me so much about the Civil War and World War Two because he fought in the Second World War. You see you discredit the facts that Dilorenzo is Lecturing On. If you could just forget slavery and understand how our Republic was destroyed. Lincoln was willing to secure slavery in the Constitution to keep the Revenue Flow that was partially from slavery. Lincoln hated blacks. He actually Colonized 5,000 to Haiti where they all almost died. I suggest a fantastic book by Lerone Bennett Jr. called Lincoln's White Dream. The Author is a Black Professor who we lost a few years back unfortunately. Lincoln told Frederick Douglass that it would be best if he and the other blacks were Colonized. Lincoln told Douglas that both races were keeping the other race down. At the beginning of the Civil War 5 Northern States didn't allow blacks in their States for any reason. Lincoln supported the Illinois Constitution that didn't allow blacks to travel through Illinois much less live there. In the South there were around 600,000 Free Blacks. They had business and some were Post Masters and skilled in the trades. 12% of those free blacks owed slaves at a much higher rate than whites. Blacks doing those jobs were unheard of in the North. I agree that our country is being destroyed. A lot of it because of hatred of white people. That is racism. Blacks aren't omitted from Racism. It is so sad that this is happening and it pulls on my heart. But to close Lincoln was the biggest slave master because he forced a entire region of people to stay in a Government that was terrible to them by gunpoint. Lincoln was the definition of a tyrant and that is what the Lecture is about. I wish you the best and a Merry Christmas to you and yours.

[@Gnofg]

@@kurtsherrick2066 My dad was also in WW2. My point was this website is a crock. I cannot believe that it is the hatred of white people that is destroying the country and I cannot believe that you say Lincoln forged a region that exploited African Americans. That is my point about the followers of this site and like modern day conservatives you have a victim's mentality. I'll let you know my German grandmother was arrested in 1910 for being with my Chinese grandfather in Illinois and I have the newspaper article. My dad was from St. Louis and he could not swim in the public pools in the 1930's and when we went to get a mortgage in 1963 with 45% down the only bank that would give us a loan was the bank of Harlem. The north has ton's of prejudice but one thing the north didn't do was have separate but equal. They did not write laws to have colored water fountains. Did you really watch that video because he did not give the north a pass? FYI, Lincoln died in 1865 and the radical republicans were responsible for reconstruction. I find your premise to place blame on Lincoln as laughable. Lincoln being a tyrant is revisionist at its finest and only a website like this would promote that. It is pure "lost cause" poppycock. That "region" crap of making everyone a slave to government is pure conservative crap. My dad left St. Louis(very southern city and where Jackie Robinson was treated the worst) in 1940 and went to NYC. Was it perfect no however he never went back to St. Louis the rest of his life. Just before his death my brother who lives in KC asked my dad if he wanted to go back to St. Louis and he said what is there for me. Just painful memories. As far as DiLorenzo having a bunch of economic degrees it is irrelevant to the subject at hand. Finally, I am going to assume that you were a fan of Rush Limbaugh. I got Rush thrown off of the Golf Channel. When he made fun of Connie Chung but mocking her with a fake chinese accent( what racists do)I wrote 17 letters to everyone at the Golf channel to the CEO and all of the on air personalities. I heard nothing so I figured it d fell on deaf ears. Four months later my caller ID lights up with the golf channel. I pick it up and they say to me we read your letters and Rush will never be on the GC again. When the repeats of Hank Haney came on with celebrities he was excluded. They were true to their word. FYI, Trump is a racist.

[@toddmartin4084]

In other words Lincoln's Gettysburg address if in truth as it turned out should of said, " And the government of the people and by the people and for the people must perish to start a new birth of intedilments for special interest by the corporations and for big government shall not perish from the earth. Martin Todd 7th removed cousin to Mary Todd Lincoln, who read Doctor Delorenzo's book The real Lincoln.

[@kimobrien.]

Yes Lincoln by abolishing slavery laid the way for wage labor and capitalism the "New Slavery" of the workers to the capitalists.

[@gregscotton5216]

" That statue offends me...tear it down!"

[@carywest9256]

Yeah, bulldoze the building built around the tyrant's likeness.

[@HFD1971]

Growing up in Arkansas, a Confederate State, I was taught history in the government schools, i.e., the public school system. Even in the South the public schools idolize Lincoln and teach the accepted reason for the Civil War and the reason Lincoln is the greatest President was to end the scourge of slavery; preserve the union is also thrown in as an additional sop for the young minds to munch on. Try and contradict this hero worship of A. Lincoln and you will be considered a nut in the least and unpatriotic at the worst.

[@caddy361]

Excellent !

[@MindandQiR1]

Nothing's changed.....

[@SovereignStatesman]

Nothing EVER changes, except KNOWLEDGE. That's why the truth will set us free.

[@gregoryrandall4819]

West pt taught secession

[@pupwizard3888]

It is fascinating how so many Lincoln fan boys DON'T want you to read or listen to Thomas DiLorenzo. Ironically, it was precisely this venom that made me curious. Now I have completely changed my mind on Lincoln. I think I now know WHY they were so against DiLorenzo's books........

[@kimobrien.]

DiLorenzo exposes the richest capitalists for whom they are. They didn't want to lose their source of raw materials and tariff free market in the South. The South didn't want to lose their source of wealth the slave labor. A great battle ensued between the capitalist wage labor n\North and the Southern cotton plantation slave owners. They wanted to continue the process od capitalist centralization. .

[@cuchulainkailen]

Super.

[@tomservo75]

And they call Donald Trump an autocrat.

[@yourmusicguru]

Well likewise, his own party kept saying he was the second coming of Lincoln. Thank God he wasn’t.

[@sionnachmacbradaigh1010]

Because he is

[@tomservo75]

@@sionnachmacbradaigh1010 Explain please. I'm betting you don't even know the definition of the word. In fact I know you don't. The very fact that you *can* call him an autocrat without an FBI raid on your door, the fact that CNN anchors were insulted rather than rounded up in the middle of the night proves that. Learn some definitions before you meddle in stuff you know nothing about.

[@WyattTwerpp]

Trump is the best President we've had. That's precisely why the brainwashed, like yourselves, think he was the worst. How good a pres is is in reverse proportion to the media slant he gets. There's a reason Bushes backed Democrats against Trump. Only idiots think it's about left vs right.

[@Individual_Lives_Matter]

@@sionnachmacbradaigh1010 You have been duped.

[@an-tm3250]

Educated & smart are totally different as is INTELLIGENCE. Common sense also needs to be considered and measured.

[@kimobrien.]

Common Sense was a pamphlet about the British Monarchy at the time of the American Revolution.

[@charlieedwards6315]

Perhaps I misunderstood him, but how could a dissenting judge in the Dredd Scott case condemn the arrest of a Virginia Judge, when this case was ruled in 1857, 4 yrs before the war?

[@kenabbott8585]

Because the Dredd Scot case wasn't the only thing he did in his life. That's how the winning candidate in the 1860 elections authorized warfare against civilians, two years after the elections.

[@howardclegg6497]

Vallandigham is one of my heros.

[@worthdoss8043]

Lincoln Vampire Slayer was and is a Hollywood trashing of the grand old south.

[@Gnofg]

worth watching kzbin.info/www/bejne/eGSrq5mPjLabfpo

[@SovereignStatesman]

Because Lincoln sucks more than Dracula.

[@staticintheattic1984]

18 minutes jailed for talking bad about Lincoln!

[@WJack97224]

Another excellent history review. America went wrong when the colonists supplanted God with the new god, We The People, and then imposed the manmade constitution and "law." Jehovah God gave us free will, freedom to choose, and He did not anoint any politicians with the authority to override our free will. God wanted us to have leaders/"kings" who were true believers as per Genesis 14:18 and 1 Peter 2:9. Genesis 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God (Jehovah God). 1 Peter 2.9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light; So the message is clear that manmade political governments are not approved by God because they are not His men. Tolstoy long ago observed that politics is violence. Political governments are not Christian; they are diabolical. Politics is not a solution. After 200 years of repeated destruction of life and property and repeated failures of politics it is way past time to call a halt to the insanity of political governments. If ye seek a solution then identify the root cause of the failure, debacle, "disease" or other fault and avoid squandering time of symptoms. Sadly, Amerika has allowed the commie/socialist politicians, mostly but not exclusively Democrats, to impose all 10 Planks of the Commie Manifesto (www.criminalgovernment.com/docs/planks.html ). Commie/socialism is opposed to Jehovah God and the Democrat politicians have thus sold out to ol' Beelzebub. Amerika is doomed and sorry to say it.

[@thephoenixcycle8854]

So interesting that this is fresh off 911.. crazy times

[@DrJeffreyMSeder]

Lincoln was a communist. Watch the following videos: Lincoln, Republican Marxist: The Forgotten History; Karl Marx's letter to Abraham Lincoln w/reply (January 28, 1865) audio

[@1776blues]

I'll bring this up in the next few days on my main computer so I can provide what Hitler said about America. I searched through the english version of Mein Kampf by James Murphy considered to be the most accurate and these three words "federalism and centralization" do not appear in that order. In fact, a search reveals he opposed centralization. I like Thomas D's work on Lincoln but like so many others they feel the need to drop the H word. Any other version of MK is considered mistranslations either on purpose or lack of understanding German.

[@gch8810]

Good point. We need to stop buying into the left’s paradigm by constantly hating on Hitler.

[@fredrezfield1629]

and adolf Hitler was not a lincolnite he was drawing parallels between different states in different countries so in the case of Germany there existed STATES then the REICH was formed from them while in the case of united states the union consolidated all these states into one.

[@richardaurre4840]

Same as marriage, can't tie the wife to the bed posts if she wants to leave.

[@adamnoman4658]

Timing's Everything You should have tied her to the bedpost * before * she said se wanted to leave -- preferably the bed in the basement!

[@SovereignStatesman]

Technically a national union can; but the USA was never a national union, only international.

[@dawnemile7499]

I thought about this scenario before I heard Dr. DiLorenzo describe the aim of the civil war was to maintain a marriage that the weaker party did not want. The South should have been allowed to secede and there should then have been peaceful negotiations to end slavery over a period of time. There was no need for violence because slavery was ending worldwide anyway.

[@HelenRundell]

So glad the author mentioning a forced marriage describing the concept of 'saving the union', one not recognized by any God-fearing People's values of which our country was founded upon. It is to our great shame this truth has been erased.

[@CalebDiT]

Lincoln took us from a union to a unit.

[@SovereignStatesman]

No, from an international union to a rogue empire of lies, where truth is treason-- just as Orwell said.

[@fredrezfield1629]

the excerpt from MK is weak defence by both sides actually but Dr delorenzo is misunderstanding Hitler this is from the FIRST PARAGRAPH!!! German-Austria must be restored to the great German Motherland. And not indeed on any grounds of economic calculation whatsoever. No, no. Even if the union were a matter of economic indifference, and even if it were to be disadvantageous from the economic standpoint, still it ought to take place. People of the same blood should be in the same REICH. The German people will have no right to engage in a colonial policy until they shall have brought all their children together in the one State. When the territory of the REICH embraces all the Germans and finds itself unable to assure them a livelihood, only then can the moral right arise, from the need of the people to acquire foreign territory. The plough is then the sword; and the tears of war will produce the daily bread for the generations to come.

[@SovereignStatesman]

The problem is, that Dilorenzo doesn't know enough about law and history to prove his argument; so he just gives a lot of anecdotes. FACT: The American Revolution established each state as a separate nation-state, legally. And the Constitution did not shift sovereignty from the individual state, to a federated state; but simply shifted political supremacy from the state legislature to the state ELECTORATE.

[@Individual_Lives_Matter]

Do you really think the states are independent from the federal government while suckling voraciously at its teat? They are addicted to our stolen money.

[@porcudracului]

Anecdote? How does proof look the if this is Anecdote? As opposed to what?

[@thomaswayneward]

If you are so smart about this argument; where are your books and papers published?

[@SovereignStatesman]

@@thomaswayneward When did that prove anything? By that standard, Harry Potter is real.

[@thomaswayneward]

@@SovereignStatesman I must have answered the wrong post. Your original statement is true. Sorry.

[@jackflashproductions6898]

Vlandagam, Trump now Putin!

[@gregorybaker1385]

I appreciate all the discussion on Jeffersonian government/theory....I do not trivialize the bombing of Fort Sumter for 24 hours, however. I gather from that that secessionists cared not for dialog.

[@karenbartlett1307]

On the contrary, the Confederacy sent delegates to negotiate with Lincoln, but Lincoln refused to see them (Charles Ramsdell, "Lincoln and Fort Sumter", 1930, can be found entire in the book "Slavery Was Not the Cause of the War Between the States: the Irrefutable Argument", written in 2014, by Gene Kizer, Jr.).

[@davidwebb8217]

Here's some dialog for you...Union troops fired the first shots of the war at Fort Barrancas, Fla. on January 8th,1861 3 months before Fort Sumter

[@karenbartlett1307]

@@davidwebb8217 Also, Lincoln sent three armed warships to Charleston Harbor, accompanying the "resupply" ship to Fort Sumter. This was a direct threat to Charleston. Under international law, the party which provokes war is the party who starts a war. Lincoln provoked war with the Confederacy when he threatened Charleston with war ships.

[@thomaswayneward]

Lincoln had five ships loaded with troops on the way to Fort Sumter before a shot was ever fired. Their intention was to land and take over the area. I guess Lincoln cared not for dialog.

[@timothymeehan181]

Ahhhh, good ol’ Abbeville Institute, down there in good ol’ South Carolina(- “South Carolina- too small for a republic, too large for an insane asylum..”). Still singing that old “Lost Cause” revisionism, the specious sophistry embodied in the ghost/spirit of Johnny Calhoun, Jeffy Baby Davis, Alexander Stevens, Toombs, et al. Thank God that we had Lincoln at the helm of our ship of state in those very complicated, troublesome days and not Tommy de Lorenzo, who’s free to opine from the safety of his ivory tower, or the secessionists would’ve succeeded in creating the largest, most powerful slave empire ever known to man, covering every inch of both central & South America. Lincoln saved the Union according to original principles, preserved the Constitution, and ended slavery forever here. I wonder how many of the people in this room or those commenting here have actually read & studied ALL of Lincoln’s writing & speeches. Very few, probably. Which is why they’re so easily led astray by men like “little Tommy”…..🙏🎩🇱🇷

[@excaliburironforce9908]

Enjoy eating bugs

[@thomaswayneward]

I have read his speeches but more importantly I have studied his actions. Much better to study his actions since he was a professional liar.

[@albertcamerato7673]

Lincoln saw the framers of our constitution praying,hoping,and planning the end of slavery. The consent of the governed must include all Americans or it need not be considered important to any American. The speakers disregard of the hope for freedom on the part of the slaves also denies the fear many in the south had of revolt of slaves, the fear of slaves learning of the possibility of freedom, denying them the hope of the Oldand New Testament . Ultimately the slave labor system would have moved to include industrial as well as agricultural production in the south. Would the free men of the nation consented to compete against slave labor in the factories and steel mills and mines of our country?

[@Individual_Lives_Matter]

Your framing of this issue as a national issue shows a lack of understanding of what the United States really are. Centralized decision making was never the intent of the union and competition is just fine. You don’t consent to competition.

[@Gideom007]

Slaves were not Americans and were never intended to be

[@patrickcleburneuczjsxpmp9558]

The questions you raise are as completely irrelevant to the question of whether DC had a right to rule over the southern states without its continued voluntary consent (especially but not only after the southern states had declared the constitutional compact broken by the northern states) as the questions you raise are irrelevant to the question of whether King George had a right to rule over the 13 colonies without their consent.

[@thomaswayneward]

one of the silliest statements I have read in a long time.

[@EireAnPoblacht]

Interesting, but in no way definitive on the balance of history, though so many beg to differ. I wonder if this is just something y'all want to hear, or why his facts rise above the mountain of facts to the contrary? My willingness to consider it is a reliance on the objective truth, not a political one. Get researching, don't just accept it at face value! 🙄

[@davidwebb8217]

"If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that." ~ Abraham Lincoln Abraham Lincoln repeatedly stated his war was caused by taxes only, and not by slavery, at all. "I have no purpose, directly or in-directly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so," Lincoln said in his first inaugural on March 4 of the same year. Lincoln did not claim slavery was a reason even in his Emancipation Proclamations on Sept. 22, 1862, and Jan. 1, 1863. Moreover, Lincoln's proclamations exempted a million slaves under his control from being freed and offered the South three months to return to the Union (pay 40 percent sales tax) and keep their slaves. None did. Lincoln affirmed his only reason for issuing was: "as a fit and necessary war measure for suppressing said (tax) rebellion." His views became clear during an 1858 series of debates with his opponent in the Illinois race for U.S. Senate, Stephen Douglas, who had accused him of supporting “negro equality.” In their fourth debate, at Charleston, Illinois, on September 18, 1858, Lincoln made his position clear. “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races,” he began, going on to say that he opposed blacks having the right to vote, to serve on juries, to hold office and to intermarry with whites. The north ran slave ships into the Americas for two hundred years before the civil war that's the historical facts that never gets talked about but the yankees are more that willing to let the south take the blame for the entire sin of slavery but the north hands are bloody their hearts are guilty and their shame is great.The norths hands are just as bloody of slavery as any southern plantation owner. Those were slave ships not cruise ships sailing out of NY and Nantucket, Cape Cod. Massachusetts,Philadelphia.Connecticut,Rhode Island,New Hampshire and New York. New England was sending slave ships to Africa and around the world from the 1600s and after 1870s. Yankees and race baiters never want to defend that dirty little fact.

[@diabloblanco88]

@@davidwebb8217Fantastic retort, sincerely. I’m from the north and if it were to happen again today I’d be fighting with the south, absolutely no doubt about it. The only issue I want to contextualize is who owned and operated the slave ships. It’s the same group of dual citizens that now run the country and own the largest and most influential political action lobby in America. AIPAC. Main stream media and government calls them our greatest ally. This fact always gets left out of these historical conversations.

[@davidwebb8217]

@@diabloblanco88 AIPAC was founded in 1954

[@diabloblanco88]

@@davidwebb8217 Yes I’m aware and by whom was it founded and for what country does it benefit. The same group of people owned and operated the ships and the slave trade. The same group that runs America today. This specific group never gets mentioned when it comes to this topic.

[@davidwebb8217]

@@diabloblanco88 Jews contributed only 36,000, or 1.2 percent. In 1656, seven of 167 major shareholders were Jews

[@xandrewbrown]

Consent? I can think of a whole bunch of people who were denied any kind of consent down there in the South. Then this loser speaker dares liken the plight of the South to being enslaved to Washington. Such arrogance. WW2 was not fought to free the Jews from the camps. But the fact was the Jews were freed due to the prosecution of the war. The North may have been motivated by preserving the Union but one of the other results was that slavery was ended. The slave states were as reprehensible as NAzi Germany. This speaker should show some humility about the foul history of his forefathers. He is openly proud of a very disgusting and diseased society. The poison of slavery atrophied all aspects of those southern states to the point that the only remembered legacy should be eternal shame. The NAZIs built some great roads and pushed some cutting edge science. But none of that matters and Germans today do not push these aspects because the shame of that period of their history demands respect to those harmed and humility from the descendants of the perpetrators. In behaving this way Germany has regained some respect since ww2. This speaker makes me feel physically sick. Where is shame for any defence of the slave states.

[@karenbartlett1307]

Don't you realize that slavery was a national problem rather than a Southern problem? The entire Transatlantic Slave Trade to the US was conducted by Northern slave traders, not Southern. The South never sailed a slave ship and outlawed the importation of slaves. There were still slaves in the North at War's end, and Grant didn't free his slaves until the 13th Amendment was passed after the War. kzbin.info/www/bejne/hnm3Z4djo96BnKc

[@karenbartlett1307]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/hnm3Z4djo96BnKc

[@porcudracului]

Read more you arrogant idiot. Or throw up. Probably it's better for you. Reading hurts

[@deborahdean8867]

And today germany is still a defeated and occupied state because of this guilt. It wasn't the subservience of the boomer generation in germany that brought forgiveness. It was the presence of the USA and their reconstruction money that assuaged the heart of Europe. And the Jews were certainly not peculiarly oppressed people, in fact they were lesser persecuted than most. But this attitude about slavery is wrong, as is the common teaching. War was not necessary to end slavery. Lincoln wanted the south to sell the north cheap goods do they could compete with European industrialization. The blockade on Fort sumter was stopping an export ship from leaving for France. Lincoln, with his supposed concern for a union started a war within that union to subjugate parts thereof. Indeed it does look like a transfer of slavery from the person to the labor. And just like the slave owner, the federal government now considers it its responsibility to take care of the personage of their wage labor slave...... welfare. The civil war wasnt about slavery,bit was about resources and centralized government power. Specifically about using the resources of the whole for the benefit of federalists. Federalism is the new, sneaky way to reinstitute the monarchy.

[@xandrewbrown]

@@deborahdean8867 So you think the jews had it easy in ww2 Germany and that wealthy slaveowners were going to just voluntarily end slavery on a whim. You are poorly read and something of a paranoid conspiracy theorist. The Civi War was fought by the North to maintain the union and by the South to maintain slavery. The facts speak for themselves. My main point is that this speaker is a sick demented parochial twit who can't see beyond his own pompousness to understand how 99% of the entire world views his beloved south. It was a sick and depraved society with perverted understandings of what decency and culture truly were. The utter crushing of the South was the only way to purge the stench of its corruption and the foulness of its lack of morals.

[@daleg.9673]

Prof. DiLorenzo seems shocked that Lincoln failed to follow the letter of the Constitution as the union disintegrated around him.

[@karenbartlett1307]

Secession was legal. Lincoln went against the Constitution when he declared the secessionists to be "insurrectionists". (They weren't going against the federal gov't. They were seceding from the Union, which was perfectly Constitutional. Three States, NY, RI and VA, had secession clauses in their accession to the Union. Since all States are equal under the Constitution, this clause was legal for all States.)

[@karenbartlett1307]

Lincoln did not simply fail to "follow the letter of the Constitution". He violated it at every turn. invading other States, refusing to let them secede as was their right under the Constitution, blockading Southern ports (an act of war), suspending habeas corpus in the North, arresting people who disagreed with him or criticized as unconstitutional his war upon the Confederacy, letting the military arrest and lock up journalists, editors and newspaper publishers who wrote newspaper articles against the war, not to mention Judge Taney and legislators, closing down and destroying newspaper offices, arresting ordinary people with no due process who were deemed sympathetic to the Confederacy, claiming "war powers" which he said allowed him to violate the Constitution, making war on civilians (50,000 Southern civilians were killed in the War) all these actions and more were severe violations of our Constitutional rights and of his oath of office in which he swore to uphold the Constitution.

[@daleg.9673]

It's not clear whether the southern states had a right to secede. But once they left the union, they could no longer claim the protections of the constitution.

[@RightToSelfDefense]

Dale G., "It's not clear whether the southern states had a right to secede."? It is absolutely clear the States had a right to secede. Beyond disputable, historical evidence. When Lincoln gave his 1st Inaugural address said that the Staes were never sovereign and that it was some kind of mystical union that created the States. This is totally propagandistic lie. In the previous constitution to the US constitution, the Articles of Confederation, it expressly says that "the States retained their Sovereignty". You "retain" something if you had it before. The States were Sovereign even before the Articles were written. When the US constitution went to the States for Ratification approval, Four states approved it on TWO Conditions: 1. They have another convention to have a Bill of Rights to suppress the powers of the new federal government. Read the Preamble to the Bill of Rights. 2. That if this new government becomes too tyrannical They RESERVEd THE RIGHT TO SECEDE. These conditions were sent back with their Ratification Letters to the Continental Congress. Those conditions were Accepted by ALL. The Sovereign States created the Voluntary Union. They had the RIGHT to leave the union AT WILL. Update. The federal government was a mere product of the agreement or compact between the States. They called it a compact, like contract. The federal government was not party to compact. The States were the only parties to the compact. According to the 10th Amendment, The federal government only had the powers granted to it by the States. Nowhere was the federal government granted the power to stop any seceding State from leaving the union. Nowhere did any State give up its right to secede. You also said, "But once they left the union, they could no longer claim the protections of the constitution." I understand what you are saying. Since the States were no longer in the union of the US, they were considered their own country (?), federation or confederation, just as Canada and Mexico were their own State. So international laws would apply. So would it be legal for the US today to invade a sovereign State, like Cuba, or Mexico, or Canada? I don't think so. But international law is not my thing.

[@karenbartlett1307]

Glenn Billings: thank you, sir, for this excellent reply. The Tenth Amendment, also, reserved the powers not specifically delegated to the federal gov't To The States. And few powers were delegated to the fed.

[@TheJunehog]

What rubbish. A selective cherry-picking of facts, taking facts out of their context, in order to create a Libertarian caricature. Just laughable. And not anything remotely resembling history.

[@PETTIGREW1861]

Christopher Shelley www.newswithviews.com/Stang/alan30.htm

[@TheJunehog]

Hilarious! Thanks for the laugh.

[@PETTIGREW1861]

Christopher Shelley maybe a lobotomy can help you with that laugh . Enjoy your Lincolnite fantasy .

[@backyardboosters9128]

Christopher Shelley another righteous cause myth cultist.

[@isaiahii6982]

I'm sure you aren't bias at all. BTW, that sure is an interesting avatar you're using.

[@multipipi1234]

Second civil war.