The early Republicans were not doctrinaire libertarians, but the Homestead Act was exemplary of Lincoln's Lockean self-reliance ideal: give a man a plot of wilderness, let him reclaim it from nature by sweat of his brow & keep the fruits of his labors.https://twitter.com/JohnCraiHammond/status/1152354742468775938 …
-
Show this thread
-
Also, the land grant colleges established under the Morrill Act were funded by the sale of federal land, not perpetual taxpayer exactions, and their focus was on practical education in agriculture.
7 replies 0 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
Dan McLaughlin Retweeted
Polygamy was a new innovation - it had never been legal in America, nor sanctioned by Christian churches. 19th century Republicans were resisting an effort to redefine marriage. Lincoln argued as well that the Founders had intended slavery to die off https://twitter.com/higgins_ke/status/1152372896351825920 …
Dan McLaughlin added,
This Tweet is unavailable.2 replies 0 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
Dan McLaughlin Retweeted Dan McLaughlin
BTW, this is still truehttps://twitter.com/baseballcrank/status/1024340373018210304 …
Dan McLaughlin added,
3 replies 1 retweet 8 likesShow this thread -
Dan McLaughlin Retweeted
The idea that this is a killer rejoinder misses the point. Lincoln himself stood for leniency & charity towards the defeated Confederates. Grant befriended some of them. Lincoln would likely have said, "let them have their monuments" & focused on policy. https://twitter.com/ASFleischman/status/1153701921099849728 …
Dan McLaughlin added,
This Tweet is unavailable.2 replies 2 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
The hard question of Reconstruction, which has never been satisfactorily answered, is how you reconciled Lincoln's view of leniency towards the vanquished white South with vigorous protection of the freed black South.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likesShow this thread -
But neither Lincoln nor Grant ever started from the position that you should not want to appeal to white Southerners - as a partisan matter, as a matter of personal friendship, as a matter of the American nation. Very much the contrary.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 likeShow this thread -
And yet, much of the "Lincoln's Republicans were not like this" shtick takes as its premise that Lincoln's party would not have wanted *those* people in its ranks.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
Now, where you see the greatest continuity between the GOP of 1856, 1896, 1924, 1956, 1980, 2004, & 2014, is in the Midwest, the real heart of the original party & of revived importance since 2010. Many of the Midwestern Republicans of the past two decades fit that bill.
2 replies 2 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
Now, as I've noted upthread & many places elsewhere, maintaining the Lincoln-Grant-McKinley-Coolidge-Eisenhower-Reagan line of the party is, in fact, a real challenge in the Age of Trump. The party has had factions like Trump before, but never as leader of the party.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread
But it would be useful for historian-written columns like this one to grapple with more of the history & in particular the philosophy of the GOP over time, & not reduce both the Lincoln & Trump era parties to caricature.https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/23/opinion/lincoln-republican-party-trump.html …
-
-
Replying to @baseballcrank
Ignore what we do and focus on our “philosophy” to not to those things.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.