14 votes

Before you see the movie "Lincoln"

Here are some excerpts from Reassessing the Presidency: The Rise of the Executive State and the Decline of Freedom

Contrary to the impression one gets from reading popular historical accounts of Lincoln as a statesmen and constitutional philosopher he spent virtually his entire political career prior to 1860 engulfed in the dirty works of party politics. Lincoln was not a guileless naïve and unsophisticated backwoodsman and rail splitter. He was a shrewd cynical manipulative politician who was not above playing dirty trick such as writing anonymous letters to the editor of newspapers denouncing his political opponents.

From the moment Lincoln first entered political life as a candidate for the state legislature during the 1832 presidential election “writes historian Robert Johannes” he had demonstrated an unwavering fidelity to Henry Clay and “The American System”.

By 1838 Lincoln had worked his way up to the position of leader of the Illinois Whig party. Lincoln spent nearly three decades preceding his election as president working tirelessly in the trenches of the Whig and (after 1856 the Republican parties) to organize voters in Illinois and other states of the Whigs mercantilist agenda.

Mercantilism which reached its height in the Europe of the seventeen and eighteen centuries was a system which employed economic fallacy to build up a structure of Imperial state power as well as special subsidy and monopolistic privilege to individual or group favored by the state.

This is what the Whigs stood for: the acquisition of political power through the dispensation of patronage. They had no grand philosophy or ideology; they wanted political power and private riches and had no qualms about using taxpayer’s money as the mechanism for acquiring these things.

Clay was the champion of that political system (the Whigs) which doles out favors to the strong in order to win and keep their adherence to the government. His system offered shelter to devious schemes and corrupt enterprises. He was the beloved son (figuratively speaking) of Alexander Hamilton with his corrupt funding schemes, his superstitions concerning the advantage of a public debt and a tax to make certain corporation profitable when they cannot stand alone.

In 1859 Lincoln declared that he was always a Whig in his politics. And indeed he was. Both he and his wife were ardent admirers of Henry Clay the leader of the Whigs. In his 1852 eulogy to Clay, Lincoln declared Henry Clay as the undisputed leader of the Whigs and “The American System” and Lincoln professed Clay as his idol and role model.

The American Whig party was founded in 1832 as a reaction to President Andrew Jackson abolition in 1832 of the Second bank of the United States. The name “Whigs” was chosen to imply that these men were opposed to despotism and centralized government tyranny as were the American Whigs of 1776 and earlier the British Whigs who advocated Classical Liberalism ( today refer as Libertarian).

But the vary name Whig was a cleverly contrived deception. The nineteenth century American Whigs were in face the champion of centralized consolidated government and all students of political philosophy understood at the time (Much better than they do today) that centralization of political power was destructive to liberty.

Mercantilism relies crucially on the spreading of economic fallacies. Lincoln also believed in a crude version of the Marxian labor theory of value. Announcing that “free trade perpetuated a system whereby some have labored and others have without labor enjoyed a large portion of the fruits to secure to each laborer the whole product of his labor or as nearly as possible is a most worthy object of any good government.”

Like all Whigs Lincoln was in favor of inflationary finance through the printing of paper money by a central bank or if need be by state government banks and was an ardent opponent of a monetary system based on gold or any other precious metal.

Lincoln was always a Whig and was almost single mindedly devoted to the Whig agenda of protectionism, central banking and corporate welfare for the railroads and shipping industries –euphemistically referred to as “Internal Improvements”, Lincoln was such a blind follower of the Whig party line that many of his economic policy speeches were embarrassingly illogical and sounded dumb and foolish.

He was influential in passing legislation with regard to the third major element of Whigs corporate welfare or internal improvements. At the time the use of federal funds for so called internal improvement, such as subsidies to the railroad industry were widely unconstitutional. But thanks to Lincoln’s political skills Illinois was a leader in using state tax revenue for such purposes, The Illinois experience in government funded: internal Improvement: under Lincoln political leadership provided a case study of why such uses of tax dollars were viewed with great suspicion. The internal improvement system the adoption of which Lincoln had played such a prominent part had collapsed with the result that Illinois was left an enormous debt and an empty treasury.

Lincoln understood that patronage was the route to political power and potentially to personal wealth.

The battle with Andrew Jackson over the recharting of the Second bank of the United States is what ignited the creation for the Whig party in the North. The Whig political strategy was as simple as it was corrupt; promise to plunder the taxpayers for the benefit of corporations and banks in return for the everlasting financial support ( and kickback) from those same entities all the while drowning the public in the false rhetoric opposing executive tyranny, championing the small family farm.

A central bank and high protectionist tariff were the key stones to the Whigs plan for political plunder for that’s how the massive internal improvements schemes were to be funded and monopolies created. Jackson was the mortal political enemy, for he regarded the bank as dangerous to liberty of the American People because it represented a fantastic centralization of economic and political power under private control. Jackson understood the implication of a politicized money supply as well as the Whigs did. The difference between them was that Jackson thought the results would be unequivocally bad for the country; the Whigs understood that a politicized money supply was a key to their personal advancement and wealth accumulation. Jackson condemned the bank as a vast electioneering engine which had the power control the government and change it’s character. That’s exactly what they wanted and have done……..they won the war.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Great article

Especially the distinction between English/Georgian Whigs and the Lincoln variety, never picked that up before. Would it be correct that you are in a sense saying that the Republican party itself was created as a deception? That it never was what it pretended to be, even from the very beginning?

Obedience to God is resistance to tyrants.

Yes ....very much so

Just as they use deceptive names on legislation passed these days....really does anyone believe that O'Bamacare is the "Affordable Healthcare Act"...but that's its official title.

The Lincoln Whigs/Republicans roots are in the British Tory Party. Thomas Jefferson formed the Democratic-Republican (Anti Federalist) Party in response to the Federalist Party of Alexander Hamilton….which in reality should have been named the “Nationalist Party(If you wanted the party name to be descriptive). But they became the New Whigs just before the Civil War and then the Republican Party sometime around the Civil War…..Lincoln was a Republican.

If you want to uncover a real deception study the founding of the US Constitution…..talk about a deception.

Thanks for the kind words......of course I didn't write it, I just posted it. The real credit goes to the author of the article in the book "Reassessing the Presidency"

"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"


Wow! Great research, I love learning new things on DP

Especially when they save me money. My husband and I do not enjoy historical fiction much, so we will not be seeing the movie, Lincoln.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

"Before you see the movie

"Before you see the movie Lincoln..."
...think, and save your time and money.

Southern Agrarian

A New Perspective

I am familiar with this more reasonable understanding of Lincoln, and if the official story being put out there in every public middle school is way off the mark, then it just gets me thinking that the circumstances surrounding his supposed assassination is way off the mark as well. If this is the case, who really wanted him killed and why?

Lincoln was a boring movie...

nothing interesting in the movie.

No mention of the Lincoln letters that were recently uncovered and donated to the University of Rochester.

No mention of the Lincoln Greenbacks.

No insight to his assassination.

sooooooooo boring...

To say nothing of his

To say nothing of his documented racism.

I am not a big fan of fantasy films.

So, I do not plan to see "Lincoln".

Spread the news

First of all I would like to thank y’all for the nice comments and keeping the discussion civil. I take no credit for writing of the article……..just the rearranging the words to enlighten others and I LOVE MY COUNTRY.
Before answering the questions I would like to share my station in life you so you will better understand why I think what I think. I have been at this a long time, long before Ron Paul gained any traction, I like to tell people I learned what I learned from books, lots and lots of books…….from the same books Ron Paul learned from, we didn’t have an internet when we were learning.
I have worked in the financial world for over 30 years and now trade options for myself to make a living. So I believe I know something about the financial world.
With that being said I don’t not believe in conspires. I believe that there are two competing philosophies. One of Liberty of Men and one of Power over Men. One of self-governance, free exchange of ideas and SOUND MONEY. The other uses every tool they can think of to promote and protect their station in life, including coercion, corruption and inflation. This even goes back to 1784…..if you want a real education about this government learn about the Federalist Papers and their context in time. (Sounds like Tommie Paine knows what I am talking about)
So when I am asked to comment on conspiracy theories I shy away from them……what we are living through are the “eventualities” of the inflationist philosophy granted to connected people by a ruling class that we have “given” our self’s over to. We have done this to ourselves, by taking the path of least resistance. This is not the only time this has happened…….it’s just the only time we all are living through it and it is painful…….it’s painful to watch because we believe that if we can see it others should to, but we should all ban together, like Ron Paul would say, for the ideas of LIBERTY!
Our only tool is to shares ideas and the truth with others and let them decide for themselves where they would like to stand. So thank y’all for making the stand…….you are better people for it…….Join together to promote our ideas and expose the truths of what they believe philosophically and why we differ with them………We want to win because our ideas are better, not because we are a better choice to control the system.
Maybe we should print the excerpts of the article and go to the theater and hand them out as you leave the movie.

"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"



I find it interesting that the Whig Party was a trick to get people to support them, claiming to be pro-liberty when in fact they were not.

This reminds me of the Federalists. The term "federalism" means a decentralized system, whereas "nationalism" means concentration of power at the central government level. Alexander Hamilton was a strong nationalist, but he knew it was not popular. So, he used the term "Federalist" as his political faction (political party), leaving the true federalists to then use the term "Antifederalist" to name their faction, to try and show that the true nationalists were calling themselves the "Federalists," and doing so to deceive people. This is a tricky distinction to keep in mind when reading the "Federalist Papers." The REAL federalists were the Antifederalists.

Also reminds me of the Neoconservatives, who are not in any way shape or form true "conservatives." They are the opposite, or collectivists -- basically, modern day "Whigs" or "Federalists."

This sort of deception runs right from Hamilton to Clay to modern day Neocons. And it's why so many Republican voters cannot figure out why the hell the GOP always runs for election on conservative ideas, but once in office, they VOTE for socialist ideas.

I'm definitely on the side of believing Lincoln was a tyrant..

but I have a question. Many in the 'alternative' theory world give him credit for fighting the international bankers. Lincoln allowed the government to artificially create money out of thin air instead of having the Rothschild private bankers do it for interest. There is even some suggestion that bankers killed Lincoln. What is your response? Was there really conflict between Lincoln and the bankers? Was he just a tyrannical statist rather than a crony-capitalist fascist?

9-11 Media Fakery: Did anyone die on 9-11?


9-11 Actors:

Pysops.. media.. actors.. propagandists... disinfo agents.. fake videos.. fake photos

Since there was no central bank (due to Jackson) ...

... when Lincoln needed more money for war, he went to the wealthy people (Rothchild types) in New York. You see, the system without a central bank is a REAL monetary system. You need REAL money of some sort to fund things.

But the bankers wanted HUGH interest rates, like 30% (though, without knowing if the USA would win the war against the CSA, is it really so outrageous?).

So, Lincoln just had the US Treasury print up the money and make them "legal tender," which required everyone in the USA to accept them as money.

It was not that Lincoln was philosophically opposed to central banking. It's just that it was not a tool in his arsenal, so he choose a different tool.

He was still a dictatorial bastard.

That make sense to me.

Thanks for the info.

9-11 Media Fakery: Did anyone die on 9-11?


9-11 Actors:

Pysops.. media.. actors.. propagandists... disinfo agents.. fake videos.. fake photos

Very good article

Here are some lectures on Lincoln by Thomas DiLorenzo of the LvMI:




...Lincoln represented exactly the same kind of system that we are all fighting today. You could call it mercantilism, the "American System," fascism, corporatism - point is: big government of, by, and for big special interests.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Thanks Mike from Ohio

If you liked this article you should read one I posted a couple years ago titled " The winners get to write the history".

"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"


egapele's picture

Counter-propoganda at its best

This is definitely worth taking a close look at, thx for posting.

Amazing article on lincoln.

Amazing article on lincoln. About 10 years ago, I read a couple of books, The Real lincoln by Thomas DiLorenzo and When in the Course of Human Events by Charles Adams. Wow! Talk about blowing everything you ever thought about someone all your life!

You should see what Judge Napolitano thinks of him as well. He skewers him in Constitutional Chaos and destroyed him several times on the air on Freedom Watch. Damn, I miss that show!

Most of what I knew of lincoln was of his later war years, but the things you bring up, much of it I hadn't heard before.

Congrats on an excellent article about a tyrant who's been lionized by the country by and large. And now we've got this idiot movie that every so-called conservative feels patriotically compelled to see. It's just ridiculous. It's my opinion that if there is a Hell, it burns hotter for lincoln being there.