Review of The War Before the War by Andrew Delbanco review by David Blight.
We have never stopped arguing about whether the Constitution was fundamentally proslavery---in effectively sustaining the system---or whether it contained antislavery elements that were revealed over time. What we do know is that eventually a strong segment of political abolitionists forged an antislavery interpretation of the Constitution that energized the original Republican Party and helped foment disunion.
"Humanity cries out against this vast enormity, but not one man knows a prudent remedy." Herman Melville
For fugitives like Douglass, the nation's devotion to prudence and the law became irrelevant.
As Delbanco puts it, "before the fugitive slave law, northerners could pretend that slavery had nothing to do with them. After the fugitive slave law, there was no evading their complicity."
Because slave owners considered them a besieged minority vulnerable to the expansion of federal power, there was in allowing the federal government to assume control over the slave property.
America's institutions could not contain a conflict between two discount visions of the future.
Defense of the Tenth Amendment states rights was a front for proslavery ideology.
The US in the pre civil war 19th could be seen as 24 little sovereign nations.
Stowe said that slavery could only die in violence.
Calhoun as Ahab a la Melville.
The Age of Trump is not as bad as the 1850's, or is it?
How could people in the past not see what is so clear and evident to us in the present?
Slavery was a factory for manufacturing monsters.
The fugitive slave question made a united country impossible. History is not inevitable. It could always go differently. History seeks no goal. Beware of certainties. The 19th Century ended up a battle between armies. One of them won on the battlefield but did not necessarily win the political war. Self-tortured by slaver, the US slipped into disunion. Still disunited today.
Dec. 18, 2019 at 4:34 p.m. CST
Of course there is partisanship on both sides — and Democrats should rue their hyperbolic criticisms of past Republican standard-bearers, which leave them open to the charge that they are crying wolf today. But just because George W. Bush, Mitt Romney, John McCain and other Republicans were not as bad as Democrats said doesn’t mean they are wrong about Trump. I disagreed with Democrats then, but I agree with them now. Democrats are right to call Trump a uniquely awful president — and they are right to impeach him for his attempted extortion of Ukraine. Republicans are a dishonest disgrace for defending Trump despite his admission of guilt.
Remember that on Oct. 3, Trump was asked by a reporter: “What exactly did you hope Zelensky would do about the Bidens after your phone call?” Trump replied: “Well, I would think that, if they were honest about it, they’d start a major investigation into the Bidens.” (He also went on to brazenly demand that “China should start an investigation into the Bidens.”) Trump delivered the same message to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in their July 25 phone call. The rough transcript has Zelensky asking for weapons and Trump responding, “I would like you to do us a favor though,” before going on to ask for an investigation of Joe Biden and conspiracy theories involving the 2016 election.
Because Trump impeached himself with his own words, the only defense Republicans can muster is to simply ignore the evidence. “The Daily Show” aired a hilarious segment in which Trump supporters repeat his mantra of “read the transcript” before admitting that they actually haven’t read it.
Republican politicians are just as egregious in dodging inconvenient truths. On Sunday, CNN’s Jake Tapper asked Sen. Rand Paul (R.-Ky.) whether “you would be okay with a president, say, Elizabeth Warren, asking a foreign government to investigate her top Republican rival?” Paul replied, in a masterpiece of sophistry, that the premise of the question “is completely untrue,” because Trump did not “call up and say, investigate my rival.” Instead, Paul claimed, Trump said to “investigate a person.” So Paul’s defense boils down to the fact that Trump demanded an investigation of “Biden” rather than a “rival.” This makes as much sense as Republicans arguing, as they did all day Wednesday, that Democrats are wasting too much time on impeachment — and also that they are concluding the investigation too soon. Both can’t be true.
Today’s Republicans echo the late Rep. Earl Landgrebe, who during Watergate famously said, “Don’t confuse with me with the facts. I’ve got a closed mind.” They ignore their obligations to the Constitution and the country. How can they possibly pretend that the author of the bizarre, rambling letter that the White House sent to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) on Tuesday — a screed full of lies, rage and self-pity — is fit to hold the nation’s highest office? Pelosi’s speech on the House floor to kick off the impeachment debate, striking a somber, dignified and patriotic tone, reflects a contrast between the two parties that is deeply unflattering to the GOP.
Contrary to Republican accusations, Democrats are not pursuing partisan advantage by impeaching Trump. If politics were all that mattered, they would never have proceeded with impeachment because of the risk of a political backlash. That is, in fact, why Pelosi refused to move forward with impeachment even after special counsel Robert S. Mueller III documented numerous examples of obstruction of justice. She was finally compelled to act after Trump was discovered trying to solicit foreign election interference — again.
Even as the impeachment proceedings continue, the president’s personal lawyer is continuing to solicit help from shady Ukrainian politicians. Rudolph Giuliani has practically taped an “Impeach Me” sign on Trump’s back, yet Republicans pretend not to notice. By encouraging Giuliani’s escapades as he is being impeached, Trump makes clear that he considers himself above the law. Republicans evidently agree. Democrats do not.
I am not a Democrat, but I have nothing but admiration for all of the Democrats representing pro-Trump districts who are aware of the political peril they face but support impeachment anyway, simply because it is the right thing to do. One of those vulnerable members, Rep. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, told MSNBC on Wednesday: “I’ve had countless people tell me that this going to be the end of my career. There just are some moments where you can’t look at a poll and you can’t make a decision based on political expediency.”
Slotkin and other vulnerable Democrats who vote for impeachment because the evidence compels it are profiles in courage. Republicans who vote against impeachment despite the evidence are profiles in cowardice. Don’t speak of the two parties as if they were somehow equal. The Democrats are upholding the rule of law; Republicans are undermining it.Opinions
Impeachment isn’t Democrats vs. Republicans. It’s right vs. wrong.
Dec. 18, 2019 at 4:34 p.m. CST
Of course there is partisanship on both sides — and Democrats should rue their hyperbolic criticisms of past Republican standard-bearers, which leave them open to the charge that they are crying wolf today. But just because George W. Bush, Mitt Romney, John McCain and other Republicans were not as bad as Democrats said doesn’t mean they are wrong about Trump. I disagreed with Democrats then, but I agree with them now. Democrats are right to call Trump a uniquely awful president — and they are right to impeach him for his attempted extortion of Ukraine. Republicans are a dishonest disgrace for defending Trump despite his admission of guilt.
Remember that on Oct. 3, Trump was asked by a reporter: “What exactly did you hope Zelensky would do about the Bidens after your phone call?” Trump replied: “Well, I would think that, if they were honest about it, they’d start a major investigation into the Bidens.” (He also went on to brazenly demand that “China should start an investigation into the Bidens.”) Trump delivered the same message to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in their July 25 phone call. The rough transcript has Zelensky asking for weapons and Trump responding, “I would like you to do us a favor though,” before going on to ask for an investigation of Joe Biden and conspiracy theories involving the 2016 election.
Because Trump impeached himself with his own words, the only defense Republicans can muster is to simply ignore the evidence. “The Daily Show” aired a hilarious segment in which Trump supporters repeat his mantra of “read the transcript” before admitting that they actually haven’t read it.
Republican politicians are just as egregious in dodging inconvenient truths. On Sunday, CNN’s Jake Tapper asked Sen. Rand Paul (R.-Ky.) whether “you would be okay with a president, say, Elizabeth Warren, asking a foreign government to investigate her top Republican rival?” Paul replied, in a masterpiece of sophistry, that the premise of the question “is completely untrue,” because Trump did not “call up and say, investigate my rival.” Instead, Paul claimed, Trump said to “investigate a person.” So Paul’s defense boils down to the fact that Trump demanded an investigation of “Biden” rather than a “rival.” This makes as much sense as Republicans arguing, as they did all day Wednesday, that Democrats are wasting too much time on impeachment — and also that they are concluding the investigation too soon. Both can’t be true.
Today’s Republicans echo the late Rep. Earl Landgrebe, who during Watergate famously said, “Don’t confuse with me with the facts. I’ve got a closed mind.” They ignore their obligations to the Constitution and the country. How can they possibly pretend that the author of the bizarre, rambling letter that the White House sent to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) on Tuesday — a screed full of lies, rage and self-pity — is fit to hold the nation’s highest office? Pelosi’s speech on the House floor to kick off the impeachment debate, striking a somber, dignified and patriotic tone, reflects a contrast between the two parties that is deeply unflattering to the GOP.
Contrary to Republican accusations, Democrats are not pursuing partisan advantage by impeaching Trump. If politics were all that mattered, they would never have proceeded with impeachment because of the risk of a political backlash. That is, in fact, why Pelosi refused to move forward with impeachment even after special counsel Robert S. Mueller III documented numerous examples of obstruction of justice. She was finally compelled to act after Trump was discovered trying to solicit foreign election interference — again.
Even as the impeachment proceedings continue, the president’s personal lawyer is continuing to solicit help from shady Ukrainian politicians. Rudolph Giuliani has practically taped an “Impeach Me” sign on Trump’s back, yet Republicans pretend not to notice. By encouraging Giuliani’s escapades as he is being impeached, Trump makes clear that he considers himself above the law. Republicans evidently agree. Democrats do not.
I am not a Democrat, but I have nothing but admiration for all of the Democrats representing pro-Trump districts who are aware of the political peril they face but support impeachment anyway, simply because it is the right thing to do. One of those vulnerable members, Rep. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, told MSNBC on Wednesday: “I’ve had countless people tell me that this going to be the end of my career. There just are some moments where you can’t look at a poll and you can’t make a decision based on political expediency.”
Slotkin and other vulnerable Democrats who vote for impeachment because the evidence compels it are profiles in courage. Republicans who vote against impeachment despite the evidence are profiles in cowardice. Don’t speak of the two parties as if they were somehow equal. The Democrats are upholding the rule of law; Republicans are undermining it.
SUBSCRIBE NOW
Subscribe today and get unlimited access to OnPoint, the Big Picture, the PS archive of more than 14,000 commentaries, and our annual magazine, for less than $2 a week.