A few years ago, I startled some friends by saying Lincoln got the credit for what John Brown did. Lincoln’s mission was to save the Union and stop the expansion of the plantation system into the new territories. The war was about the new territories (conquered from Mexico), integrating the riches of California into the expanded union, isolating the agrarian aristocracy in the South, expanding the exploitive wage -slave system of the North, funding the railroads for expansion into “Indian” territory, etc. Freeing the slaves was a passionate issue for the abolitionists, those moved by “Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” etc., but for a hard-nosed politician like Lincoln not one of the major concerns.

The situation was very different for John Brown. He’d earned his stripes in “Bleeding Kansas” (the pre-Civil War!) in 1856, retaliating against the pro-slaver massacres with a five-man massacre of his own. By 1859, his and the nation’s dye was cast; he’d lose sons and comrades at Harper’s Ferry, get wounded, and pay for his rebellion with a badly stretched neck.

Speaing of hanging–during the Civil War, Lincoln sanctioned the public hanging of 38 Sioux “Indians” for their role in rebelling against Union authority. It was the greatest mass execution in US history–and it remains a permanent stain on this nation’s silly (Winthrop/Regan/Memorial Day) claims to being a “shining city on a hill”–as, of course, so many other incidents, including the War itself remain so. Lincoln met with Frederick Douglas and others to try to fashion a plan for massive re-settlement of freed slaves in Liberia and other parts of Africa and the Caribbean. (Douglas opposed the idea.) When one investigates, one finds the great “rail-splitter’s” reputation tarnished. (As a candidate he also made much of his participation in the brief “Black Hawk War”–another instance of US land-grabbing imperialism against the native population.) Thoreau and Emerson, the sharpest literary and social critics of their time defended and praised John Brown’s actions. Thoreau was especially bitter about the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850–surely one of the chief symbols of Northern politicians’ hypocrisy–their willingness to “compromise” with the plantocracy. Thoreau said that he liked to stand at the end of the Cape Cod peninsula so he could put all of the American nation behind him. (He’d probably put it more colorfully today.)

In this Age of Hype we hear much from the sanctioned official historians (those who ride the air waves at PBS, NPR, etc.) about the greatness of Lincoln, his wisdom, his courage, etc. Our 44th president is happy to ride the long coat-tails of our 16th. But “harsh truths” (as Abolitionish William Lloyd Garrison put it) must be spoken if we are ever to get past the myths that govern our lives and cause so much waste and destruction. Thanks to Ron Jacobs for reflecting on these vital issues again.