Yesterday I posted the following status update on my Facebook account, little imagining the tempest I was about to unleash:
You are just on with the statuses today Matt.
except that he was talking about the war, not government control of our healthcare system. I would apply this statement, much more aptly, to Bush.
Actually, Lincoln was specifically rebutting an argument used by oppressors of African-American rights - namely, that not being allowed to subjugate black people constituted an injustice against themselves. I think this is very much in keeping with the logic used by the wealthy who oppose economic stimulus, by the insurance companies in trying to halt health care reform, by Wall Street companies in trying to halt financial regulations, etc. If you wish for the greater context of the speech, check out "Address at Sanitary Fair, Baltimore, MD - April 18, 1864".
PS: Let it be noted that there were many poor white people in America who, despite not owning slaves and therefore deriving no personal profit from supporting that institution, were nevertheless duped by plantation owners into supporting the wrong cause. I would lump the millions who have thrown their lot in with the superwealthy, the insurance companies, Wall Street, and the Tea Party movement in with the Copperheads of yore.
I've read the address before, and I still say it related to the war, insofar as the war concerned itself with slavery. I don't see a damn thing about plantation owners. Lincoln's legacy was an era that created the first super-wealthy class this nation ever knew, and his triumph the clearing of the way for big business as we know it.
Wow. Let me deal with this point-by-point:
Look matt, I have neither the time nor the energy to respond to that. IT WAS A WARTIME ADDRESS that made mention of the war itself and referenced slavery, during a war particularly concerned with slavery. Jeez. I was speaking generally, saying that the wealthy class AS IT EXISTS TODAY was made possible by Lincoln, and no that is not an attack on Lincoln; I'm part of that class. Also, none of this changes the fact that there is no mention in that address of the "super-wealthy". How a metaphor about slavery has anything to do with Nancy pelosi putting people in prison for not buying their neighbor's abortions is unclear.
Wow Jim. Well argued Matt.
Lincoln was using the wolf/sheep thing as a metaphor to describe a situation. I think both the metaphor and the situation--whilst deriving from different issues-parallels the pitched battle between those in favor of healthcare reform and those opposed. Metaphors can be applied to many situations other than the ones they were originally spoken in.
"While we do not propose any war upon capital, we do wish to allow the humblest man an equal chance to get rich with everybody else."
Why get so vicious, Matt? I've been writing my comments as casual musings, via iPhone, in between classes, so I don't feel like an attack on my argument style is very warranted. I didn't even had italics handy, had to use all caps. I did not enter into a formal debate here, and like I said I don't have time for that. I'm sorry if that disappoints you, but please don't insult me. I stated my opinions, and I'm pretty sure I didn't say anything unsound or irrational.And to restate, I was familiar with that address prior to your posting of it. I would not have chosen to comment on its context had I not been. That would be foolish. I just feel like this radical devotion to healthcare, and intense demonization of all of its opponents by the left is a little unfair, views aside.
Lol, yes because the right CERTAINLY hasnt demonized the left AT ALL when it comes to Healthcare...
What do you consider to be vicious? I won't deny that I have been extremely candid about what I perceive to be the glaring logical and substantive weaknesses in your argument, but I haven't name-called or in any such way directly insulted you. You say that you did not intend to enter a debate, but if that is the case, why did you post your opinions in the first place? Did you expect people to simply note what you thought without responding to it? Did you anticipate that everyone would agree with you? Or did you assume that those who disagreed with you would simply state bald opinions based on their pre-existing ideological leanings (as you did), instead of aggressively identiifying and exposing the inaccuracies and flaws in your own position?
1) I said I did not enter into a "formal" debate, as in, I did not intend to go gathering quotes ad nauseam and go much past a you think, I think discussion. Again, via iPhone, between class, not sitting at desk, digging up sources.
1) Not to brag, but it didn't take me very long to write those posts. I already knew all of the information that I provided to support my positions, so the only research I needed was to do quick Google searches on key phrases from the quotes so that I could put down their exact wording. I also type at over 80 wpm, so it doesn't take me long to reply.