The Gettysburg Address is sometimes spoken of as the greatest 272 political words ever uttered in the United States. I actually had to memorize it in the sixth grade, and we repeated it, aloud, with some regularity throughout that school year.
But when you actually look at the text, its meaning is not entirely clear, it is grossly partisan, and it significantly misrepresents not only the battle(s) of Gettysburg, but the Civil War itself. This becomes obvious when you read it and try to paraphrase what you are reading.
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Here's what he's saying: 87 years ago the Founding Fathers created a nation that was dedicated to the proposition that "all men are created equal."
This is balderdash. The founders created a nation in which slavery was perfectly legal and Constitutional. Clearly, to the founders, all men were NOT created equal; some were mere chattels. Surely there were some among the Founders who were uncomfortable with slavery, but they lost the debate. Uncle George actually traveled with his slaves when he was acting as Commanding General.
The civil war was not a fight over the aforementioned principle. In fact, the States in rebellion sought to RETAIN the concept adopted by the Founders when faced with the threat by the Union to CHANGE the basic principles that prevailed in the beginning (87 years ago), which threat was purportedly made real by the Emancipation Proclamation - a totally unconstitutional and preposterous edict that had no force of law or Constitution - it was a legal and Constitutional nullity.
Those soldiers - on both sides - would have been shocked to learn that they fought and died on the principle of "all men being created equal." A tiny fraction of the Confederates owned slaves, and a similar fraction of the Union soldiers thought themselves fighting to advance the "equality" of slaves.
And what does any of this have to do with Government "of the people, by the people, and for the people"? The Confederates couldn't have cared less how the Union government operated, and from all indications, the Confederacy would have operated pretty much the same way. The war was over both slavery and the power of states to secede, for which there is no prohibition in the Constitution. Indeed, all of the States joined the Union voluntarily; why couldn't they leave voluntarily?
Many people believe that Jefferson Davis was never tried for treason because the Feds feared that the Federal courts might ultimately conclude that the States in rebellion had the Constitutional right to secede.
The Gettysburg Address sounds great, but it makes no sense.
But when you actually look at the text, its meaning is not entirely clear, it is grossly partisan, and it significantly misrepresents not only the battle(s) of Gettysburg, but the Civil War itself. This becomes obvious when you read it and try to paraphrase what you are reading.
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Here's what he's saying: 87 years ago the Founding Fathers created a nation that was dedicated to the proposition that "all men are created equal."
This is balderdash. The founders created a nation in which slavery was perfectly legal and Constitutional. Clearly, to the founders, all men were NOT created equal; some were mere chattels. Surely there were some among the Founders who were uncomfortable with slavery, but they lost the debate. Uncle George actually traveled with his slaves when he was acting as Commanding General.
The civil war was not a fight over the aforementioned principle. In fact, the States in rebellion sought to RETAIN the concept adopted by the Founders when faced with the threat by the Union to CHANGE the basic principles that prevailed in the beginning (87 years ago), which threat was purportedly made real by the Emancipation Proclamation - a totally unconstitutional and preposterous edict that had no force of law or Constitution - it was a legal and Constitutional nullity.
Those soldiers - on both sides - would have been shocked to learn that they fought and died on the principle of "all men being created equal." A tiny fraction of the Confederates owned slaves, and a similar fraction of the Union soldiers thought themselves fighting to advance the "equality" of slaves.
And what does any of this have to do with Government "of the people, by the people, and for the people"? The Confederates couldn't have cared less how the Union government operated, and from all indications, the Confederacy would have operated pretty much the same way. The war was over both slavery and the power of states to secede, for which there is no prohibition in the Constitution. Indeed, all of the States joined the Union voluntarily; why couldn't they leave voluntarily?
Many people believe that Jefferson Davis was never tried for treason because the Feds feared that the Federal courts might ultimately conclude that the States in rebellion had the Constitutional right to secede.
The Gettysburg Address sounds great, but it makes no sense.
