Big Enough to Be Inconsistent: Abraham Lincoln Confronts Slavery and Race

The W. E. B. Du Bois Lectures

by George M. Fredrickson

“Cruel, merciful; peace-loving, a fighter; despising Negroes and letting them fight and vote; protecting slavery and freeing slaves.” Abraham Lincoln was, W. E. B. Du Bois declared, “big enough to be inconsistent.” Big enough, indeed, for every generation to have its own Lincoln—unifier or emancipator, egalitarian or racist. In an effort to reconcile these views, and to offer a more complex and nuanced account of a figure so central to American history, this book focuses on the most controversial aspect of Lincoln’s thought and politics—his attitudes and actions regarding slavery and race. Drawing attention to the limitations of Lincoln’s judgment and policies without denying his magnitude, the book provides the most comprehensive and even-handed account available of Lincoln’s contradictory treatment of black Americans in matters of slavery in the South and basic civil rights in the North.

George M. Fredrickson shows how Lincoln’s antislavery convictions, however genuine and strong, were held in check by an equally strong commitment to the rights of the states and the limitations of federal power. He explores how Lincoln’s beliefs about racial equality in civil rights, stirred and strengthened by the African American contribution to the northern war effort, were countered by his conservative constitutional philosophy, which left this matter to the states. The Lincoln who emerges from these pages is far more comprehensible and credible in his inconsistencies, and in the abiding beliefs and evolving principles from which they arose. Deeply principled but nonetheless flawed, all-too-human yet undeniably heroic, he is a Lincoln for all generations.

Genres: History, Civil War, African American, American History

168 pages, Hardcover

First published February 28, 2008

About the author

George M. Fredrickson was the Edgar E. Robinson Professor of United States History at Stanford University, where he taught from 1984 until his retirement in 2002.

Reviews

[Nathan · Rating 1 out of 5]

A hard book to review; because it defies (as it should) either mere castigation or adulation.

Taking as its main source material Lincoln's own speeches and writings, this short, punchy little book ultimately casts him as a political pragmatist, tailoring his public sentiments on the race issue to whomever his present audience happened to be. Because that audience was largely racist, so too, was Lincoln. This is not to say, Frederickson is careful to make clear, that he led lynch mobs, flogged slaves, or even approved of the institution itself. He did, however, see Africans as inherently "other" and lower than whites-- incapable of full integration and participation in white society, and perhaps "better off" under a system of deportation and colonization.

This approach, paternalistic and arrogant as it is, is not harshly criticized in this book, just presented as the main difference between Lincoln and the other factions in the racial debate (pro-slavery and abolitionists).

It is what it is. It's a little vague, because Lincoln was a little vague. It's a bit inconclusive, because Lincoln never really solidified his stance either. If that makes for a bit of an unsatisfying read, it is the fault of history, and not the writer. Frederickson has distilled a complicated and thorny subject into a calm (if occasionally tedious) monograph, and that is itself a service. A reference, not the last word.

[C.Douglass · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book delivers a good summary and analysis of some of the main apologists and critics of Abraham Lincoln. As with most things, reality seems to lie somewhere between the two extremes, that he was an egalatarian champion vs a hardcore racist. So if you have ever thought about familiarizing yourself with or weighing the arguments for and/or against Lincoln, this is a great place to start.

[Edgar Raines · Rating 4 out of 5]

The title derives from a quote by W. E. B. Du Bois, who, after comparing Lincoln's often contradictory attitudes and actions on race declared that Lincoln was "big enough to be inconsistent." Fittingly for a book so titled, it consists of three chapters each of which began as a lecture delivered in November 2006 as part of the W. E. B Du Bois series of lectures given at Harvard University.

The first lecture considers the historiography of Lincoln's views on race. Specifically, Fredrickson contrasts the views of those who consider Lincoln as very much a part of the white supremacist culture in which he grew up to those who see him as an exponent of racial equality. Historians of the white supremacist school, most notably (and most outspokenly), Lerone Bennett, Jr., argue that Lincoln both reflected the white supremacist ideas and attitudes of the culture in which he was born into and gave forceful expression to them, particularly in his famous debates with Stephen A. Douglas. Bennett even goes so far as to deny that Lincoln ever genuinely opposed slavery. Bennett's argument, as Frederickson notes, is heavily ideological. He believes that blacks in the United States have never been and never can be accorded equal treatment. Emancipation and the Civil Rights movement were but snares convincing black people that it would be easy. Lincoln deserves to be attacked because he contributed to this false consciousness. On the other side of the argument are historians such as Gary Wills and Allen C. Guelzo. Wills saw Lincoln as a great constitutional innovator; a president who took the Constitution of 1787 with its concern for the rights of individuals and converted it into the Constitution of the Gettysburg address in which the national government had the power to intervene to protect the rights of individuals. Guelzo believes that Lincoln intended to free the slaves from the moment that he took office and that any statement or action that he took (such as extolling colonization) were just expedient shifts in a long campaign to reach that goal. Frederickson advocates looking at Lincoln in the context of his times and circumstances, which he does in the next two chapters--the first devoted to the Illinois years and the second to the years of the presidency.

Fredrickson finds no reason to doubt that Lincoln was opposed to slavery from an early age. In 1837 as a first-term member of the Illinois State Legislature Lincoln publicly affirmed that slavery was founded on "both injustice and bad policy" but then condemned abolitionism as it tended, he argued, to increase rather than decrease the evils of the system. While the Constitution protected slavery in the states, but it had the power to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia. Lincoln, however, believed that Congress should only act if a majority of the inhabitants petitioned for its removal. While a member of Congress he sponsored legislation to abolish slavery in the District provided with the consent of a majority of the free inhabitants. The legislation went nowhere. After the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854, he opposed the expansion of slavery to territories where it had been prohibited Lincoln was a believer that all men--black as well as white--should have the freedom to better their condition in life. He was thus antislavery, but his legal and constitutional views gave him very limited scope in which to push for antislavery measures.

Fredrickson argues that Lincoln saw moral leadership in antebellum America as a contest between lawyers on one hand and ministers on the other. The law--and lawyers--represented "reason, moderation, and the resolution of disputes through calm deliberation and judicious compromise." Religion--and clergymen--stood for "emotionalism, perfectionism, and an uncompromising commitment to absolute truths and ideal solutions to complex problems." (p. 52) He obviously equated abolitionists with ministers.

[Robert · Rating 3 out of 5]

A quick, succinct book that sheds some light on Lincoln's historical legacy. The author does a great job pointing out the inconsistencies in Lincoln's thought when it came to race, slavery and politics. Yet, Lincoln is ultimately depicted as a man for all ages: human, ever-changing, and a champion of social justice.

[David Robins · Rating 4 out of 5]

Brings a solid factual base to Lincoln's attitudes on race, slavery, and emancipation, combating many hagiographies that attempt to excuse or deny Lincoln's racist beliefs. Lincoln believed in white supremacy and the right of states to decide the slavery issue for themselves, and only ever freed slaves when it became convenient to his war of aggression against the South.

[Jonathan Minnick · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very short book but it's definitely concise. This book provides a look at another side of Lincoln, one that was at times racist or perhaps just politically motivated to say whatever suited the crowd. Good read.

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

a short but seemingly comprehensive book on the complexities of Lincoln's
evolving and ambiguous views of slavery and race