Was Abraham Lincoln a Republican in Name Only by present-day standards?

[Trausti]

The Republican party has long had a bit of cognitive dissonance on Lincoln. They love claiming him as their own, as he is widely recognized as one of the greatest presidents. At the same time there is a segment of the party (probably a large segment now) that considers him a tyrant, and responsible for the 'war of northern aggression. Maybe some of them praise him in public, but denounce him in private, to appeal to whatever audience they have.

It's comments like this that make me wonder if people on this board actually know any Republicans. I've met a few, even talked with them.

You may be onto something Jason.

The Moral Stereotypes of Liberals and Conservatives: Exaggeration of Differences across the Political Spectrum

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Actually, ever since the party was founded, the rival party has always described Republicans as anywhere from intellectually incurious at best to downright unintelligent. Including, yes, even Lincoln.

Lincoln did have an unbending ideology, he was consistently and unyieldingly in favor of using the power of the government to the benefit of the corporations.

Since Lincoln was a pragmatist not an idealist, he could not possibly have satisfied a true libertarian.

Lincoln was an idealist, his ideas were Hamilton-Clay Corporatism.

His ideas could not possibly satisfy Lysander Spooner.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

It's comments like this that make me wonder if people on this board actually know any Republicans. I've met a few, even talked with them.

What do you think that Republicans *really* think about this issue?

I'd have to ask them. I suggest you do the same. I don't think there are any Republicans in your social circle, but there is at least one on the board. Go ask Underseer. He thinks he's got us fooled by his poe act but people have seen through it.

 

[ideologyhunter]

By present day "standards" -- and maybe "pathologies" is more to the point -- Eisenhower, Nixon, and most certainly Bush I are Republican in name only. Gerald Ford, speaking privately back in Newt's heyday, for posthumous attribution, said that the party as it existed in the 90s was strange and foreign to him, and that he knew he would not be accepted in it. The worse and more primitive this party gets, the sharper its propaganda skills. Witness the fat jackass we have now in the Oval Office.

 

[marc]

The Republican party has long had a bit of cognitive dissonance on Lincoln. They love claiming him as their own, as he is widely recognized as one of the greatest presidents. At the same time there is a segment of the party (probably a large segment now) that considers him a tyrant, and responsible for the 'war of northern aggression. Maybe some of them praise him in public, but denounce him in private, to appeal to whatever audience they have.

It's comments like this that make me wonder if people on this board actually know any Republicans. I've met a few, even talked with them.

Yes, I know a few, and have talked with them. Also, I know how to read the news, and see the comments of some republicans.

Rep. Bryan Stevenson (R) - compares pro-choice bill to the ‘War of Northern Aggression.’

Rep. Broun Calls The Civil War "The Great War Of Yankee Aggression"

 

[DrZoidberg]

Republican in Name Only = RINO = rhinoceros = fake elephant

In fact, he was much like a present-day Democrat.

• He got the most votes in the northeastern and west-coast states, just like present-day Democrats.
• He raised taxes: the Revenue Acts of 1861 and 1862, and the second and third Morrill Tariffs.
• He did government giveaways to people without a lot of money: the Homestead Act of 1862.
• He supported higher education: the Morrill Land-Grant Colleges Act of 1862.
• He supported infrastructure development: the Pacific Railway Acts of 1862 and 1864 for constructing the Transcontinental Railroad.
• He led the Northern side of the Civil War, fighting the South.
• He expanded the Federal Government and increased its influence.

By comparison, the Republican Party is now the party of Jefferson Davis. Senator Trent Lott (R-MS): "The spirit of Jefferson Davis lives in the 1984 Republican Platform."

Didn't republicans and democrats switch positions mid 20'th century? The Democrats used to be the racist and cheap ones. I think it was the civil rights movement which made them switch positions.

 

[skepticalbip]

Was Abraham Lincoln a Republican in Name Only by present-day standards?

Could be. Both Lincoln, a Republican, and Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, suspended the right of Habeas Corpus. Lincoln imprisoned news paper editors, elected officials, and etc. who spoke against the war while Roosevelt imprisoned American citizens who were of Japanese descent.

https://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jala/2629860.0005.103/--lincoln-administration-and-arbitrary-arrests?rgn=main;view=fulltext

As most students of the Lincoln administration's racial policies agree, a historian must pay careful attention not only to what Lincoln said but also to what he actually did. The administration's statistical record on arbitrary arrests is persuasive testimony that Lincoln was not particularly embarrassed by the policy. No careful work on the numbers of civilians arrested by military authorities or for reasons of state has ever been done by a historian, and those historians who have attempted an estimate previously have been writing with the goal of defending Lincoln in mind. Even so, the lowest estimate is 13,535 arrests from February 15, 1862, to the end of the war. [3] At least 866 others occurred from the beginning of the war until February 15, 1862. Therefore, at least 14,401 civilians were arrested by the Lincoln administration. If one takes the population of the North during the Civil War as 22.5 million (using the 1860 census and counting West Virginia but not Nevada), then one person out of every 1,563 in the North was arrested during the Civil War.[4]

 

[lpetrich]

Could be. Both Lincoln, a Republican, and Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, suspended the right of Habeas Corpus. Lincoln imprisoned news paper editors, elected officials, and etc. who spoke against the war while Roosevelt imprisoned American citizens who were of Japanese descent.

So Real Republicans act like card-carrying members of the ACLU? Republican Presidential Candidate George Bush I implied that his Democratic opponent, Mike Dukakis, was one, as if that was an insult.

This is a cheap attempt at rhetorical triumph, because all the defenses of Japanese internment I've ever seen come from the Right. Michelle Malkin's  In Defense of Internment, In Defense of Internment | Michelle Malkin | Conservative Book Club, Intern(ment) Scandal | The American Conservative, Trump supporter cites Japanese internment 'precedent' in backing Muslim registry - POLITICO

 

[J842P]

The Republican party has long had a bit of cognitive dissonance on Lincoln. They love claiming him as their own, as he is widely recognized as one of the greatest presidents. At the same time there is a segment of the party (probably a large segment now) that considers him a tyrant, and responsible for the 'war of northern aggression. Maybe some of them praise him in public, but denounce him in private, to appeal to whatever audience they have.

It's comments like this that make me wonder if people on this board actually know any Republicans. I've met a few, even talked with them.

I have personally met many Republicans that talk about Lincoln as a tyrant who "raped the South" in the "War of Northern Aggression."

 

[J842P]

Republican in Name Only = RINO = rhinoceros = fake elephant

In fact, he was much like a present-day Democrat.

• He got the most votes in the northeastern and west-coast states, just like present-day Democrats.
• He raised taxes: the Revenue Acts of 1861 and 1862, and the second and third Morrill Tariffs.
• He did government giveaways to people without a lot of money: the Homestead Act of 1862.
• He supported higher education: the Morrill Land-Grant Colleges Act of 1862.
• He supported infrastructure development: the Pacific Railway Acts of 1862 and 1864 for constructing the Transcontinental Railroad.
• He led the Northern side of the Civil War, fighting the South.
• He expanded the Federal Government and increased its influence.

By comparison, the Republican Party is now the party of Jefferson Davis. Senator Trent Lott (R-MS): "The spirit of Jefferson Davis lives in the 1984 Republican Platform."

Didn't republicans and democrats switch positions mid 20'th century? The Democrats used to be the racist and cheap ones. I think it was the civil rights movement which made them switch positions.

Only really on one issue, that of Civil Rights, and yes, there was a subsequent shift in demographcis, where the South used to vote almost uniformly Democrat, it switched to voting almost uniformly Republican. The Old-School democrats did stick around in congress for a while, known as "Dixiecrats".

But with regards to other policies, it is a much more complex evolution for both parties.