"You shall know the Truth, and the Truth will set you free"
Publisher / Editor:
Paul Hayden

Was Abraham Lincoln a Racist?

When anarchists rule, then freedom disappears.

June 29, 2020

Anarchists want to take down the statue in Washington, DC, commemorating Abraham Lincoln’s signing of the Emancipation Proclamation. These anarchist protestors are trying to convince Americans that Abraham Lincoln was a racist, and therefore statues honoring him must come down. It's clear to me that these anarchists have not studied American history, for if they did, they would find another name that the black people of the time called Abraham Lincoln. The name that the ex-slaves used was Father Abraham. The reason they chose that name is that the slaves saw Lincoln in the biblical sense as Abraham, leading his people to “the land of promise.”

Black people had such a favorable impression of Abraham Lincoln and what he did on their behalf that former slaves were the most significant financial contributors for the statue. I find it ironic that black people today think about taking down the statue because they believe Lincoln was a racist. Getting back to the study of history, if you read any of Lincoln's speeches, one of the most famous statements was that the house divided would fall. In this speech, you would clearly see that Lincoln believed that this country could not survive if half were free and half were slaves.

Greater New York Black Lives Matter President Hawk Newsome said, "If this country doesn't give us what we want, then we will burn down this system and replace it. All right? And I could be speaking...figuratively. I could be speaking literally. It's a matter of interpretation." I would like to ask Mr. Newsome why his people are looting and destroying black-owned businesses? How does the destruction of these businesses, built by this country’s black men and women, who are trying to improve the quality of life for themselves, solve any problems? Would this help these families gain more freedom?

I understand that a statue of a Confederate general like Robert E. Lee could anger some black people. If I tear down the statue in anger, do I out of anger also want to rip the pages out of the history books? If the black lives matter movement wants to remove all traces of those responsible for slavery, none alive today, what is the message about slavery going to be in American history books? 

I have probably spent more time in Washington, DC, than any other city in the United States, or anywhere else in the world. I love American history, the good, the bad, and the ugly. Without the bad and the ugly, we truly don't know who we are and how we got here. No pun intended, but if we try to whitewash history, then what we have is not real history at all. 

For most of my adult life, I have been a student of the Civil War. Not so much because of the battles, but rather for an understanding of the people and the decisions they made, both good and bad. These decisions, I might say, have had a long-standing impact on how our country evolved. I, too, many times, have raised questions about the decisions and actions of people, both before, during, and after the Civil War. I play the what-if game trying to guess in hindsight as to whether I would have made a different decision than that of the historical person. That person’s decision was made in real-time. If I had made a different decision, could I possibly figure out what the impact of that new decision would've been on the outcome of the war? More importantly, though, what would've been the outcome for the country?

When a mob decides that only they can make the most appropriate decisions concerning issues for all of us, without seeking our opinion, then we have real anarchy. Our Constitution is no longer valid, and the rights and privileges extended to us as citizens under the Constitution disappear. 

The destruction of the signs and symbols that have helped define us as a nation will lead to the toppling of the world’s last great and successful freedom experiment. When anarchists rule, then freedom disappears. A nation of people will live in fear and anger for they will realize just how much was allowed to be given away. By then, the dictators will be in charge, and we will have to do what we are told to do. We will no longer have the freedom that was paid for by the lives of over 600,000 people from what we call the Civil War. Will it take another 600,000 Americans or more to prevent the anarchists from achieving their objectives?

The longer we go by not facing the challenges in front of us, the more we lose our country and our freedom.

Comments: 3
  1. Email address is REQUIRED, in case we need to contact you about your comment. However, we will not display or use your email address for any purpose other than to contact you about this comment.
  2. Nickname should be a short nickname that you choose to use. Please do NOT enter your full, real name. Nickname will be displayed along with your comment.
  3. Comments will not appear on our website until they have been reviewed by our Editorial Team. Inappropriate messages will be rejected by the Editorial Team. Free speech is important here at ConservativeTruth, however, the Editorial Team reserves the absolute right to determine what content appears on this website.
    • Comments that contain foul language, profanity or vulgarity will be rejected.
    • Comments that contain links will be rejected. (send email to the editor if you wish to let us know about another website)
    • Comments that advertise a product or service will be rejected.
    • Comments that contain email addresses will be rejected.
2500 characters max
The Right-Wing
Well, the fact Abraham Lincoln was actually a racist liberal white supremacist and was claimed to be the founder of the Republican Party and the NRA. Even the books from the David Horowitz center said the truth about the North being progressive, liberal and proslavery from the politically incorrect guidelines book series. There always been a rebel against government plot like the 13 colonies had rebelled against the British government and the Texans rebelled against the brutal Mexican government. The confederate flag was not really a hate symbol, but the Union flag was used by the KKK and why is there still inequality against African Americans after the so-called civil war ends. Why does BLM also destroy confederate statues, memorials, and displays. The Northern Democrats have taken over the south after they win their war crimes. Thankfully the Nixion and Regan Election had many southern votes and had taken the south back from the Democrats who stole it.
Apologies for being a year late. This comment is be a rebuttal to Mr. Perkins opinion. I agree with the previous comment, albeit for different reasons, probably. I appreciate how Mr. Perkins subtly equates tearing down statues with anarchism, as if there could not be any other reason. Author states many Black people named their children after him. This is true, but some dispelled the Lincoln myth. Read Frederick Douglass’s speech at the unveiling of the “Freeman’s Statue” on April 14, 1876 in its entirety. Here is a brief quote, “…truth compels me to admit, even here in the presence of the monument…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. He was preeminently the white man’s President, entirely devoted to the welfare of white men. He was ready and willing at any time during the first years of his administration to deny, postpone, and sacrifice the rights of humanity in the colored people to promote the welfare of the white people of this country.” Maybe honesty is a reason to take down a statue? Mr. Perkins invites us to read any of his speeches…okay… 1. from 9/23/1854, Bloomington Il. Lincoln stated, in support of the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law, “I own, if I were called upon by a Marshal, to assist in catching a fugitive slave, I should suggest to him that others could run a great deal faster that I could…” 2. Continuing support for the act during his last debate with Douglas “We profess to have no taste for running and catching n——-s, at least, I profess no taste for the job at all. Why then do I yield support to a Fugitive Slave law? Because I do not understand that the Constitution, which guarantees that right, can be supported without it.” 3. From first Douglas debate, “I will say here…that I have no purpose directly or indirectly 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. I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which in my judgment will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality…” The author never answers the question in the title, but those who know history, can answer it.
Well written , Dan.
Copyright ©2020

Dan Perkins is the author of 9 books, a nationally syndicated talk show host, an expert on energy, the founder of the Black and White radio and TV network promoting free speech, and the host of two shows on the network, Blacks and Whites and Dan After Dark. His newest outlet for commentary is https://yournews.com/33908. You can find more info about Dan and his works at danperkins.guru.
Visit Dan Perkins's website at www.DanPerkins.guru