Possibly, a political pretext and justification for starting a civil war?
Lincoln didn’t care about ending slavery any more than he cared about “defending liberty.” He cared about coercing the secessionists to remain in the union, and increasing the power of the federal government while making himself look morally upright, which he succeeded spectaculary in doing.
In his inaugural address, he actually proposed amending the constitution to make slavery unrepealable. Its cus the north was coming up with all these lucrative tarrifs to be born by the south, which was pissing them all off, so it was an attempt to try and get them to stay in the union.
But as far as ending slavery… there’s a really easy and peaceful way to do it. You probably learned about how northers were forced to return escaped slaves to the south. This is actually a huge deal. Its how slavery in Brazil was destroyed. They eventually outlawed slavery (probably to save face), but slavery was becoming increasingly unprofitable since slaves could just escape to Ceara, where slavery was illegal.
I.e. the cost of slavery increases when you have to monitor them 24/7.
“It was only government power that ended slavery and abolished Jim Crow, neither of which would have been eliminated by a purely free market. It was government that rescued the economy from the Depression and promoted safety and equality in the workplace.”
Again, from the wiki article on the Corwin Amendment:
Lincoln said he “had no objection” to the Corwin Amendment, but then went on to do precisely what it forbade, namely, “interfere with the domestic institutions of the states.” When trying to understand Lincoln’s priorities, I focus on his actions, not his rhetoric. Lincoln’s actions clearly suggest that concentration of federal power took precedence over the abolition of chattel slavery, but he was able to exploit the issue of the latter as a means to accomplishing the former.
edit:
I’ve got this wrong.
What the Corwin Amendment forbade was not “interference with the domestic institutions of the states,” but rather, any constitutional amendments granting congress the power to do this.
Although logical, Boudreux’s answer is too long. He should have said: “Impossible. That capital was all destroyed during the waging of the civil war and the ensuing inflation, death and destruction.”
So, while Lincoln didn’t (seem to) actually “propose amending the constitution” in his first inaugural address, it seems he was its “behind the scenes promoter.”
I wasn’t really trying to make a counter-claim…I don’t know too much about it, so I was trying to find out. I’m interested to read what you post about this.
Yes. i didnt just accept what you said on face value, i went and tried to find some way that lincoln had supported the Corwin amendment. The Wikipedia article claims that he sent around a letter telling legislators to endorse it, but when I clicked on the source, the letter he sent around was in fact just a copy of the amendment, containing no overt endorsement. Although if you want to interpret this as a tacit support for the amendment, I won’t fight you.