Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis on Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War
Essay about Abraham Lincoln
Analysis on Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Analysis on Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War
Abraham Lincoln is perhaps one of the most interesting characters to have ever graced the American political arena and presidency. He is most noteworthy, obviously, for his role in saving the United States from its own destruction and the eradication of the vile Southern tradition of slavery. However, upon deeper inspection, one finds there was much more to Lincoln than his political achievements. Throughout his years as a politician, there's a noticeable shift in terms of his character, and political persona. He seems to go from ambitious and boisterous to being more solemn and reserved. Also, it should be noted that some remark that Lincoln was, quite ironically, both America’s most democratic and autocratic President to have ever held office. However, it seems that though there is abundant evidence for his democratic values, there are little to suggest his autocratic intentions. As though some lines revealing such intent can be found, many are also directly rebutted by powerful democratic rhetoric. All of this can be found in Lincoln’s four main speeches; “A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand”, his Inaugural Addresses and the Gettysburg Address. Basically, in order to properly analyze Lincoln it may be best to look at Lincoln’s personal and political changes within the terms of his antebellum and Civil War “personalities”, as well as to examine his democratic and autocratic leanings; all through scrutinizing Lincoln’s major speeches. If one is to look at Lincoln’s speech, “A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand”, one would find Lincoln’s younger, more brash self. To start, he boldly goes to declare that, “A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave an... ... middle of paper ... ...he former. Also, Lincoln shows a remarkable change in character from his ambitious ante bellum days, to his later years concurrent with the civil war, which are drenched in solemnity and even a little bit of religious zeal. It is interesting to watch his growth as a politician, from what could be considered a firebrand, insensitive to the issues at hand, to the unforthcoming fresh president fearful of civil war, to the previously mentioned zealous patriarch. As one can see, his personal and political growth goes hand in hand; being very difficult to separate. Ultimately, by examining Lincoln’s major speeches, one can arrive at a variety of conclusions, being that one can trace the changes of Lincoln’s character and political personality over the years, and determine as to what extent was Lincoln a democratic autocrat; the answer to the latter conclusion being hardly.
Dilorenzo, Thomas J.. The Real Lincoln: a new look at Abraham Lincoln, his agenda, and an unnecessary war. Roseville, Calif: Prima, 2002
Williams portrays Lincoln in a very positive light, allowing the reader to realize the greatness of Lincoln, in his compassion, strategy, statesmanship and lack of ego. Williams has provided numerous instances wherein he provides ample support to his arguments and facts. In spite of the unnecessary detail and verbosity that Williams sometimes uses, there is no doubt that this book is a remarkable insight into Lincoln’s persona.
Disapproval, the Confederacy, and slavery were amongst the many crises Abraham Lincoln faced when addressing his First Inaugural speech (Lincoln, First Inaugural, p.37). Above all, Lincoln’s speech was stepping on the boundaries of the southern slave states. Once states began to secede, new territories formed and the disapproval of Lincoln grew. Despite Lincoln’s attempts of unifying the antislavery and confederate views, many whites refused to follow his untraditional beliefs. Lincoln encountered hostile and admirable emotions from the people of the Union and the Confederacy. However, despite his representation of the Union, not everyone agreed with his views.
The American Civil War not only proved to be the country’s deadliest war but also precipitated one of the greatest constitutional crises in the history of the United States. President Lincoln is revered by many Americans today as a man of great moral principle who was responsible for both preventing the Union’s dissolution as well as helping to trigger the movement to abolish slavery. In retrospect, modern historians find it difficult to question the legitimacy of Lincoln’s actions as President. A more precise review of President Lincoln’s actions during the Civil War, however, reveals that many, if not the majority, of his actions were far from legitimate on constitutional and legal grounds. Moreover, his true political motives reveal his
In Richard Hofstadter’s book “American Political Tradition” he describes twelve biographical portraits of American statesmen, breaking them from longstanding reputations and putting them under scrutiny. Shockingly, among these statesmen is Abraham Lincoln. Hofstadter criticizes both his legacy and his political intentions. Lincoln, a president nationally regarded as a “self-made” man, nicknamed “Honest Abe,” and generally well liked, is not typically heavily criticized (Hofstadter 121). Hofstadter believed his reputation of being “self-made” was simply just a myth that he used to advance his political career and to seize opportunities of advancement (122). Although Hofstadter believes Lincoln’s reputation is not as notable as history says
“A house divided against itself cannot stand (Document M)”, said by Abraham Lincoln about how the North and South couldn’t continue being half free and half slave states it would slowly destroy the government that they tried to create. Lincoln also stated that, “Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it… or its advocates will push it forward till it shall become lawful…(Document M)”. Scott Dred a slave while wanting to become a member of the political community as told by the legislative and the historians that, “...a Negro of the African race was regarded by them as an article of property (Document L).” With the help of the rights given to him from the North it was stated that, “..in the territory of the United States north of the line therein mentioned, is not warranted by the Constitution, and is therefore void (Document L).” Politics assisted with the cause of the Civil war because the Southern and Northern views on freedom were too different that their would never be a real resolution that would make both political parties within the states
Frederick Douglass goes on a journey to help stop slavery. Anti-Slavery movement. February 1818 – February 20, 1895. Frederick Douglass, Anna Murray, African American people, Slaves. To stop the people from being slaves. Frederick Douglass Cuts through the Lincoln Myth to Consider the Man. Frederick Douglass. 1849. Ireland, Britain, United States. Learning to be equal with others. In Frederick Douglass “Cuts through the Lincoln myth to consider the man”; he motivates his/her intended audience during the Anti-Slavery Movement by using the rhetorical devices or tone and imagery.
Abraham Lincoln’s original views on slavery were formed through the way he was raised and the American customs of the period. Throughout Lincoln’s influential years, slavery was a recognized and a legal institution in the United States of America. Even though Lincoln began his career by declaring that he was “anti-slavery,” he was not likely to agree to instant emancipation. However, although Lincoln did not begin as a radical anti-slavery Republican, he eventually issued his Emancipation Proclamation, which freed all slaves and in his last speech, even recommended extending voting to blacks. Although Lincoln’s feeling about blacks and slavery was quite constant over time, the evidence found between his debate with Stephen A. Douglas and his Gettysburg Address, proves that his political position and actions towards slavery have changed profoundly.
Lincoln was a very smart lawyer and politician. During his “House Divided” speech he asked the question, “Can we, as a nation, continue together permanently, forever, half slave, and half free?" When he first asked this question, America was slowly gaining the knowledge and realizing that as a nation, it could not possibly exist as half-slave and half-free. It was either one way or the other. “Slavery was unconstitutional and immoral, but not simply on a practical level.” (Greenfield, 2009) Slave states and free states had significantly different and incompatible interests. In 1858, when Lincoln made his “House Divided” speech, he made people think about this question with views if what the end result in America must be.
. .’, concludes James Oakes’ book with the aftermath of the Civil War and Lincoln’s assassination. Oakes discussed the respect Douglass gathered for Lincoln over the years and the affect his assassination had on both himself and America as a whole. Oakes even brushed over Douglass’ relationship with Andrew Johnson, the president succeeding Lincoln. Analyzing his experience with the new president, it was safe to say that Andrew Johnson had no consideration as to what Douglass and Lincoln previously fought for. Johnson did not have the same political skills as Lincoln did, and he did not retain the same view for America that Lincoln did. It was obvious that Douglass held Lincoln at a higher standard than Andrew Johnson, stating that he was a “progressive man, a humane man, an honorable man, and at heart an anti-slavery man” (p. 269). Oakes even gave his own stance on Andrew Jackson, “It was a legacy that Andrew Johnson could ever match. When all of Lincoln’s attributes were taken into consideration - his ascent from the obscurity to greatness, his congenial temperament, his moral courage - it was easy for Douglass to imagine how much better things would be ‘had Mr. Lincoln been living today’.” (p. 262). It is hard to imagine the pre-war Douglass to have said something like that as opposed to an older, much more reserved Douglass. With the abolishment of slavery, so came much discrimination. Without
In Lincoln, I believe the thesis would be: Abraham Lincoln was a man who was controlled by circumstances rather than determining his own destiny. Lincoln grew up at a farm and if nature intended he would have died in a farm too, but during the times that Lincoln grew up, extraordinary things were happening to the nation in politics and the society. He always despised of farm work and loved to read. "Once he got the hang of it, he could never get enough. (p. 30)" The first books he read were brought from Kentucky when his father re-married to Sarah Bush Johnston. There weren't many books available to Lincoln so he "...read carefully rather than extensively. (p.30)" At a young age, Lincoln was exposed to anti-slavery sentiment His parents moved away from a church because of slavery, even thought Lincoln was never interested in religion. He said once said "When I do good, I feel good, and when I do bad, I feel bad, and that's my religion. (Quote DB)" In 1816 Lincoln's father went to Little Pigeon Creek in Perry County in Indiana to look for a good spot to construct a house. He constructed a "half-faced camp, a rough shelter, with no floor, about fourteen feet square, enclosed on three sides, but open on the fourth. (p. 25)" Years later Lincoln said that they left Kentucky "partly on account of slavery, but chiefly on account of the difficulty in land tiles in Kentucky. (p. 23)" Rapidly growing railroads and canals helped populate the rest of the continent. Lincoln was also affected by family issues.
During the Abraham Lincoln’s short time as president, he managed not only to save a nation deeply divided and at war with itself, but to solidify the United States of America as a nation dedicated to the progress of civil rights. Years after his death, he was awarded the title of ‘The Great Emancipator.’ In this paper, I will examine many different aspects of Lincoln’s presidency in order to come to a conclusion: whether this title bestowed unto Lincoln was deserved, or not. In order to fully understand Lincoln, it is necessary to understand the motives that drove this man to action. While some of his intentions may not have been for the welfare of slaves, but for the preservation of the Union, the actions still stand. Abraham Lincoln, though motivated by his devotion to his nation, made the first blows against the institution of slavery and rightfully earned his title of ‘The Great Emancipator.’
The House Divided Speech was an address given by Abraham Lincoln in 1858 with the goal to make a distinction between himself and Douglas, and to openly talk about a prognostication for time to come. Unlike Douglas, who had long supported popular sovereignty, under which the settlers in each new territory determine their own place as a slave or free state, Lincoln considered that all states had to be the same in order to become a united country. Although Lincoln’s intentions seemed to be pure, the complication with the speech is that it is not absolutely probable because of the fallacies within its wording. This speech may have appeared to be powerful and even authentic in its upholding points, but the fallacies must be recognized. Among these fallacies are false dilemma, ambiguity, appeal to authority, name-calling, and sequential fallacies.
The Last Best Hope of Earth: Abraham Lincoln and the Promise of America by Mark E. Neely, Jr. Thesis Statement: Neely has simplified the multifaceted events of Lincoln's presidency into an extremely legible sequence of events. For those who desire to comprehend Lincoln's political life, no better preliminary overview exists. Neely has actually suspended a political life history. By using Lincoln's own expressions, he illustrates us the immensity, reservations, as well as pettiness of the man. Strongly patriotic, Lincoln had a well-built conviction in the foundation and an innate indulgent of our forefathers' thoughts. Neely exhibits Lincoln's clutch of military stratagem, extension of presidential influence, and limitations on public. “Neely's life history is excellent and unyielding in its analysis of Lincoln's life. It has, on the other hand, amazing of the expressiveness as well as apparition of the title and of Lincoln's words. It helps us to learn why Lincoln well thought-out the United States "the Last Best Hope of Earth" or what that can signify for our nation at present”. Wills, Garry. Lincoln at Gettysburg: The Words That Remade America. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1997. Neely does an outstanding job of relating and explaining Lincoln's Whig viewpoint, his regard to trade and industry development through industrialization, his anti-slavery feelings as well as his move to the Republican Party in 1856. He believes Lincoln made a cognizant decision to stay in New Salem after being overwhelmed for the state government in 1832 since it gave him a foundation to work from if he could stumble on a way to make ends get together until the next election. Lincoln, by means of the third person accent, said he stayed in New Salem as ...
In his work, The Real Lincoln, economic historian Thomas J. DiLorenzo tells quite the different tale. Daring to criticize this beloved president, DiLorenzo defends his antithetical statements with several key points: Lincoln was more similar to a dictator than an American President. Arguing that the War Between the States was wholly unconstitutional, DiLorenzo corrects the popular misconception that Lincoln’s war was one of abolition. War was not necessary to end slavery, but it was necessary to fulfill Lincoln’s true agenda – to destroy the most significant check on the powers of the central government: the right of secession.1