[internetworkers] response to question of rights
jdasher at ibiblio.org
Mon Nov 8 07:34:35 EST 2004
On Nov 8, 2004, at 7:03 AM, Michael Czeiszperger wrote:
> On Nov 7, 2004, at 11:17 PM, James Dasher wrote:
>> It was actually a bunch of right-wing religious Republicans who were
>> the big advocates for ending slavery.
> I've read several histories of Lincoln's time, and our current notions
> of conservative and liberal can't be applied to a totally different
> period. Suffice it to say that people who were advocating getting rid
> of slavery were considered radical and unelectable. Lincoln himself
> never advocated outlawing slavery, which is one of the reasons he was
> able to get elected.
That's true. But those unelectable people were very religious, and
very Republican. And the "better a war than two nations with slavery"
faction is ... well, they might not have called it "right-wing" back
then, but we'd be calling them war-mongering right-wingers today.
Just as an "outlaw abortion" candidate couldn't win the presidency
today, but a "limit the expanse of abortion" candidate can.
Alternatively, you could argue that the "let the states decide" people
(Democrats in 1860 and Republicans today) were right, and that the
"this is a federal issue" people (reversed) were wrong. But that's an
argument about the approach to the problem, and not support for one
side or the other in resolving the problem.
N.B.: I'm not equating abortion and slavery with this point. I'm just
clarifying how religiously motivated issue-voters interact with the
broader electorate on certain issues, and how they get described
differently today than we describe their historical counterparts.
misterdasher dot com
More information about the InterNetWorkers