Add a Comment
- Hollywood is constantly trying to re-write history to suit progressives who want to turn this country into a socialist utopia through State control.
The fact is, while it's true that Lincoln believed slavery to be deeply immoral, it couldn't be farther from the truth that he prosecuted the American Civil War to free the slaves. Lincoln believed in an all-powerful central government -- in fact, an all-powerful Executive, so powerful that he suspended habeas corpus by fiat and dared the other branches to do anything about it. And rather than fight a war to free slaves, Lincoln freed slaves (by executive order, and only in the rebellious states) as a tactic to win a war.
If you doubt that, fact check this letter he wrote to Horace Greeley, the publisher of the New York Tribune, in 1862: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery," Lincoln wrote. "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. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union."
By today's standards, Lincoln was extraordinarily racist. The fact that he was on the right side of the slavery issue as that issue ripened does not change that. The last thing Lincoln wanted to see was a racially integrated, color-blind society. In fact, he wanted freed slaves to be repatriated to Africa (Liberia, to be exact). But today's liberals love to paint the statist Lincoln as a saint and the libertarian Jefferson as a devil, because Jefferson inherited slaves from his father and failed to free them before the slavery issue ripened. Liberals find the statist Lincoln convenient and the libertarian Jefferson to be inconvenient.
I am a Civil War history junkie so of course I will see this movie. But there seems very little question that Spielberg will have re-written the history about Lincoln about as radically as Oliver Stone re-wrote the history of the JFK assassination. Neither will be taken seriously by historians, but the purpose of misleading uneducated Americans about their history will be served in the interest of increased statism. - Reply to this comment
- "I totally want to see this movie when it comes out in November." I've seen other Lincoln movies in this past year that do very little justice to this Presidents legacy and his great contributions to our country. He sacrificed so much and dedicated his life to saving the Union, The least we can do is honor him with a decent theatrical movie presentation. Not some mind numbing horror flick about killing Vampires or Zombies!
- Reply to this comment
- Although I am looking forward to watching the Lincoln movie, it would be nice to see a movie made about the life of a obscure 19th or 20th Century president that the American public doesn't know much about.
- Reply to this comment
- Why would anyone say that Lincolin's story is political? Facts
on any subject can be verified. In Texas the lawmakers have deemed
it necessary to approve actually re-writting history due to what
they consider 'liberal agenda' maybe the new books will have the
South winning the Civil War and women's right to vote never becoming
law. I agree that Pres Lincolin's Republican party would not recognize
today's hate filled,bigoted,war mongering GOP that tries to pass
it self as the Party Of Lincolin. - Reply to this comment
- Concentrating on only the 4 months it took Lincoln and others to get the 13th amendment as a part of the constitution, is not much better than rewriting history. While the result may be accurate, it does not tell the full story of Lincoln, but, rather, presents a half-truth. Maybe that's why it took 10 years to make.
- Reply to this comment
- I hope the movie shows clearly how Lincoln and his supporters saved the U.S. from becoming a group of disconnected underdeveloped neo-feudal states run by local agrarian oligarchies (which is what would have happened had the South won the war), thereby paving the way for the full development of capitalism in this country and its present-day status as imperial world superpower. If the movie falls short of this, then it will have missed a great opportunity to actually explain 19th century American history.
- Reply to this comment
- I think Spielberg is one of the greatest filmmakers, but the political leanings of the main writer for this film appears to me to be "left of Left". I just hope they don't plant seeds of Marxism or Socialism in the Lincoln script. The man was too great to deserve revisionist history.
(Crosses fingers and waits.) - Reply to this comment
- Thank God for Steven Spielberg and Danial Day Lewis! Puting their talents together on a film depicting Lincoln, could anything be better! If any director, actor pairing can show us the soul of Lincoln these are the two artists that can make that happen! I can't wait!
- Reply to this comment
- Lincoln is almost an equal to Toussaint Louverture.
- Reply to this comment
- Lincoln (R) wasn't perfect, but he did say a lot of things the modern-day GOP would find disgusting. Such as "labor creates all wealth", but there are a number of sites that spout any number of quotes, talk about Lincoln's history, alternative viewpoints, and the obligatory chapter on the chocolate mousse he ate one day for all we know...
- Reply to this comment
