lets stop sucking lincolns cock
>"And if I could save the union by sucking all the dicks of all the slaves you bet your fucking tophat I'd be all over that shit."
>>74054199
no words....
>>74054148
>North invades and conquers South that doesn't want to be in their """""""union""""""" anymore, painted as the good goys
>USSR invades and conquers Eastern Bloc countries whenever they try to rebel against the """""""union""""""", painted as evil oppressors
Wait a minute.........
Lincoln was seriously a KEK
>>74054148
Lincoln was an amazing president, better than Obama and on par with Clinton.
>>74054148
This is literally the reason why American historians like him though. He set terrible precedents for overreach of power in the executive branch, he went against his own personal beliefs, but he did what needed to be done to keep the nation together and he continued doing it and keeping it together for the bloodiest years in American history. He was a pragmatist who saved our country for the time being.
What historians disagree on is whether or not the Union was worth saving (most say yes) and whether or not Lincoln fucked up our checks and balances and set poor precedent for states' rights. On that one it's about 50/50.
I would argue that the Union was worth saving, but it should have never taken secession to force the governments hand. The divide should have been addressed long before that with there being a larger senate to keep the South enfranchised without slavery. Lincoln made the best out of the worst situation a president has ever been handed.
>>74054148
As a Southerner I'm obligated to hate Lincoln.
However, he had a goal and be damned he accomplished that goal.
>>74056038
Also I'll add that in saving our Union he forever fucked up the way power works in our country. Make no mistake, he had some of the qualities of a tyrant, but they were largely born out of necessity. Unfortunately, that's usually the case with tyrants, so make of that what you will.
I honestly don't see how people can defend Lincoln. And I say this as a yankee with ancestors that fought in the Civil War. The way he treated people was disgusting. What he did in Maryland, the draft riots he caused, unleashing millions of wild, uncivilized niggers on our communities, causing the suffering of several generations of Americans, the rigging of elections, the way he silenced people that spoke out against the war (google Clement Vallandigham), the confiscation of firearms. He was a one man Constitution-breaking machine. And for what? To save a union that did not want to be unified. A union based on a set of principles, all of which Lincoln willfully violated.
Sorry, but he was a piece of shit. Very competent man and there's no doubt he believed he was doing the right thing, but his methods were utterly grotesque and the cause did not justify the suffering.
>>74054148
I never did
>>74055432
Now you're finally swalling the redpill
>>74054148
Lincon actually saved America.
Fight of the North vs South was a fight between New world vs Europe. Its good that America won.
>>74056473
>Sorry, but he was a piece of shit. Very competent man and there's no doubt he believed he was doing the right thing, but his methods were utterly grotesque and the cause did not justify the suffering.
methods of war...it was legit. Stonewall also comited many war crimes, and the mere fact that he let general Lee after the war showed a huge sign of good will towards the South
>>74056868
I'm not talking about war crimes. War is war. What Lincoln did in peaceful areas, and to peaceful people, was utterly disgusting and wrong. People like to pretend Lincoln only abused the South, but that simply is not true. His tyranny extended into the north as well. He rigged elections, he imprisoned people who spoke out against the war, he seized and shutdown anti-war newspapers, he confiscated firearms in northern states, he illegally imposed marital law on Maryland, a state that never seceded, and unleashed countless horrors there.
None of this was war. It was suppression. And it can't be justified. Especially not by such a flimsy cause.
>>74057035
When the fate of the nation itself is at stake, anything is justified.
>>74056774
TAKE THAT YOU COMMIE BASTARD!
>>74057243
ayy
>>74057164
The fate of the nation was never at stake, at any point in the war. The fate of the south remaining in the union were the only stakes.
And no, I disagree anyway. Lincoln unleashed untold horrors on millions of Americans, north and south alike, and violated our very principles as a nation on a daily basis, a thousand times over. He was a tyrant, plain and simple. And for the worst possible reasons. Not to save and preserve his own people, but to preserve another peoples who were not a part of this nation, at the expense of his own people.
That's just treason.
>>74057035
>I'm not talking about war crimes. War is war. What Lincoln did in peaceful areas, and to peaceful people, was utterly disgusting and wrong. People like to pretend Lincoln only abused the South, but that simply is not true. His tyranny extended into the north as well. He rigged elections, he imprisoned people who spoke out against the war, he seized and shutdown anti-war newspapers, he confiscated firearms in northern states, he illegally imposed marital law on Maryland, a state that never seceded, and unleashed countless horrors there.
its all war, he had to supress rebelion and that never goes clean. was it justified idk, but it was a method.
I had Confederate sympathis for some time, but realized it was a good thing that South hasnt won. Yuppies might be huge snobs, but held much higher morals and cleaner socities than the South that was basically a European type country - it was a very deep conflict not only by means but by the cultural differences.
>>74057333
The union is the nation you fucking treasonous snake.
>Not to save and preserve his own people, but to preserve another peoples who were not a part of this nation, at the expense of his own people.
When a war is that close to home, everyone is part of it.
>>74057420
No, it's not all war. The war was confined to a specific geographical area. The idea that peaceful places where not a single shot fired in war was ever made were subject to endless abuses by a tyrant because that tyrant chose to wage war is not even close to being justified. It doesn't matter if the CSA was "good" or not. What matters is that the means employed to bring them back into the fold were worse than their secession in the first place. Not to mention the terrible precedents that were set.
>>74057497
The union was not jeopardized. It continued after the south seceded. The south was just no longer a part of that union. You just don't stand for anything at all and so you have no principles that you believe are worth defending, aside from your love of Africans, I guess. But that's not how America was founded. What you're defending is a completely different nation from the one that was founded.
>>74057164
>>74057035
See
>>74056295
There's no easy answer in my opinion. I've never liked what he did. I'm a native Georgian. My family's lived here for longer than we can accurately trace back. We all think of Sherman's march and Reconstruction, but the real damage was in how the Union was governed. Hard times have shown that presidents will do things that otherwise people would not tolerate. All in all, I have to say it was worth it though. I think it was likely the best thing for our nation seeing as America's future only got brighter, but it was terrible for the South. The South suffered all the same consequences as the North and then some, but reaped absolutely none of the benefit until very recently.
>>74056149
t. Southern man.
I am obligated to Hate Lincoln as well. The true tragedy was the passage of the 14th amendment by gunpoint. That is what destroyed the South.
>>74057783
Ideologically, I should say, I'm wholly against him; but pragmatically speaking, he did the right thing. You can't argue with results.
>>74054199
Go to bed Quentin Tarantino
>Possible pic for ants
>>74054148
He wanted to send all the nigs back to Africa but Boothe offed him before he could implement his plan
>>74057783
>>74057908
I don't know that it was the 'right thing.' That's impossible to know, because we don't know what's happening right now on the timeline where the south won the war. For all we know, in that timeline humans have colonized Mars and cured cancer by now. You can't know what would have happened.
All we can do is judge Lincoln by what he did and why. What he did was horrible, and the reason he did never really impressed me, to be honest, especially not in light of the incredible suffering that was caused in its name. Suffering that continues to this day. Entire cities have been all but burnt to the ground because of the hallowed negroes he unleashed on us.
>>74054199
>you bet your fucking tophat
>>74054148
Lincoln was awesome, even Trump admires him
>>74056473
Give a source for that rigged elections thing. The man did what he had to in order to prevent the country being torn apart. He needed the war done with, I don't see how OP's picture shows him as bad. He wanted to free slaves but his obligation to the country took precedence. From accounts he was a good man who genuinely cared about his people and betrayed his own ideals and dedicated his life to fight for his nations best long term interests. He did this whilst suffering the death of a son, a lunatic wife, deep depression and still he managed to retain good humor and strength. He isn't perfect but he is pretty damn close.
>>74058079
The business model of the South was destined to go extinct. You're right though. That's the part I have such a hard time reconciling myself. What could have been? It's possible the South could have adapted, but we never got a chance to find out. Reading my own state's letter of secession was the best insight I ever got as to why the Union was broken. The South was already disenfranchised. They had their rights and laws ignored and were left with no other recourse than to secede. The South was wholly in the right legally. However, when faced with your subjugated political opponents attempting to simply leave, I doubt you would stand idly by. While I despise what he did, I can appreciate why he did it. No one wanted to be the president who let the nation fall apart.
>>74058464
http://aomol.msa.maryland.gov/000001/000667/html/am667--32.html
Also, you guys just keep repeating yourself. Yes, he did what he had to do to win. And what he had to do to win was commit 8 years of widespread tyranny and ceaseless violations of the rights of the American people, up and down the United States. Tyranny is what he had to do to win. We agree on that.
What we do not agree on is whether tyranny is justified to win a war with a questionable cause.
>>74058629
Some form of compensated emancipation should have been rolled out. We are the only country that has abolished slavery via civil war. Every other country managed to do it peacefully, some through compensated emancipation systems.
>>74059263
>Some form of compensated emancipation should have been rolled out.
Agreed. It could have saved a lot of lives and legally it was the proper thing to do. People dislike the idea now because they find it distasteful, but I don't think most people are fully aware of the realities of Lincoln's alternative.
>Libertards hating Lincoln and spilling general idealist retardation
Grow up.
http://www.friesian.com/civil.htm
General Lee freed his slaves before the war as well, didn’t he?
Can anyone here tell me how they can be so ostensibly against slavery but celebrate this horrific expanse of federalist power on free men?
See, my problem with slavery is human ownership. But obviously you guys are fine with that. So what’s your objection to slavery?
