Book Review: the Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War by Thomas DiLorenzo

If you are looking for a radically different perspective on Abraham Lincoln rather than the classic grade school story, The Real Lincoln will certainly provide a head-scratching, eyebrow-wrinkling experience. This book is written by Thomas DiLorenzo, an economics professor at Loyola College in Maryland (www.loyola.edu). I wanted to get more than the traditional tale when I picked up The Real Lincoln, and I certainly got that and more. Be warned, I do not claim to be a historian or other Lincoln or law expert. I had to read this book with my copy of Black's Law Dictionary, Webster's Dictionary, the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence. While I think any other bookworm could easily read The Real Lincoln without these accompanying references, I had so many questions I felt compelled to look further than what I saw in DiLorenzo's book.

The Real Lincoln provides an extremely saturated negative-bias portrait of Lincoln, so don't expect a happy Honest Abe recounting here. For example, he tries to claim Lincoln was a racist. I have a hard time with this assertion. If Lincoln was such a racist, why did Frederick Douglass, the famous black abolitionist, who at first called Lincoln the "white man's president" (because Lincoln initially only opposed expansion rather than all out elimination of slavery) later develop a deep respect for Lincoln, as seen in his tribute speech after Lincoln's death at Lincoln's memorial? Lincoln was the first president to personally invite a black man to the White House. Lincoln represented black clients during his practice in Illinois and opposed the Dred Scott decision. There are many examples of Lincoln's behavior towards black people personally and professionally that cast doubt on the racist moniker.

DiLorenzo tries to prove his point of Lincoln supposedly opposing racial equality with a quote from one of Lincoln's speeches here from the first joint debate with Stephen Douglas at Ottowa, August 21, 1858:

"I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality; and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well, as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary."

That's where DiLorenzo conveniently cuts it off mid-sentence. He so conveniently forgets to add what followed (dear Mr. DiLorenzo, I, the average dumb American, have a copy of this speech too, thanks)

"...I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that, notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man." This is from my copy of Stories and Speeches of Abraham Lincoln, edited by Edward Frank Allen. Surely, a racist would never go on record saying that.

Certainly, Lincoln was not a radical abolitionist and struggled with himself on the race subject living in such an entrenched bigoted and segregated society. It is easy to sit back in our progressive modern day easy-chairs and cast judgment. Back then, to be a radical abolitionist would have been political suicide, if not bring personal harm to self or family from anti-abolitionists in that day and age. I think Stacy Pratt McDermott in her essay, "Lincoln and race" aptly puts it this way:

"Throughout his lifetime, Lincoln had contemporaries who were more radical on the question of race than he was, and he had contemporaries who were more conservative. Lincoln enjoyed meaningful personal and professional connections with individual black people, yet it took four years of bloody Civil War to begin to change his attitudes about the possibilities for black freedom and equality. Did these attitudes make Lincoln a racist? Or do they reveal complexities in his character?" Something to think about.

I can try to see DiLorenzo's point of view for other things. For example, he says Lincoln took too many presidential liberties without gaining consent from Congress: suspending habeas corpus, censoring the media, starting the war, etc. I do not know if these allegations are true or not, but I can see how that might be troublesome if it was. On the other hand, during times of war, the rules cannot be the same as peacetime. Also, I do not know to what extent these issues were really that big a deal. For example, if the media was censored as much as DiLorenzo claims, why do we have so many examples of newspapers that harshly criticized Lincoln? In fact, the Abraham Presidential Museum has a whole exhibit of political cartoons severely slamming our sixteenth president. I'm guessing the contemporaries of Abraham Lincoln did not have to look far to see criticisms in public print. While I cannot agree with everything DiLorenzo presents, these topics make for interesting discussion and thought.

The author also asserts that Lincoln basically caused all our problems with big government today (i.e., wasteful spending, corruption, special interests, etc.) and makes such grand notions as there might not have been World War I or World War II if it was not for Lincoln. He loosely compares Lincoln to Lenin and Hitler. I think this is a little over the top. Certainly, a president's actions will have repurcussions for longer than his length of office, but there are many other factors at play for things like world wars decades down the line. And, I'm not even going to touch the Hitler comment, for it is too ridiculous to argue.

If you are looking for a different point of view on Lincoln, this book is the one. Despite DiLorenzo's obvious one-sided narrative, I would recommend reading this book (while overlooking the wild rants, repetitious mantras, and conveniently edited quotes) if for no other reason than to see another point of view of the legend that is Lincoln.