|
The
Michigan Socialist | Features | History
269 words
By MARTIN
SCHREADER Editor, The Michigan
Socialist
|
Lincoln's Gettysburg Address November
19, 1863
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
here on a great battlefield 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 cannot
dedicate -- we cannot consecrate -- we cannot 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. |
AMERICAN HISTORY is a history of extreme
contradiction. It is, at once, a history of revolutionary
progress and barbaric backwardness.
Often times, these contradictions are bound
together throughout whole episodes of history. However, there
are also moments when one of these two stands out so
prominently as to overshadow all that surrounds it.
Many radicals, revolutionaries and socialists
are content to dwell almost exclusively on the history of
barbarism and backwardness we see throughout American history.
But to do so is as problematic and politically restraining as
concentrating equally exclusively on the progressive elements.
That is why it is sometimes necessary to take
a step back into history, to see what it is that shaped both
the positive and negative elements of "the American
experience" -- and, most importantly, how they helped create
each other.
IN THE AUTUMN of 1863, the United States was
feeling that a new breath of life had been taken. Only six
months before, the armies of the rebel Confederate States of
America had successfully kept the forces of the United States
from winning any decisive battle.
In the western areas, Confederate forces had
kept the armies under the command of Ulysses S. Grant from
driving into Mississippi and taking the key city of Vicksburg.
In the east, the Army of Northern Virginia had managed to
thwart all the plans of the Union, culminating in the rout of
the Army of Potomac at Chancellorsville.
These victories led the Confederate military
and political leaders to once again stage an invasion of the
northern states. Their view was that, if the Confederate
forces could defeat those of the Union north of Washington,
they could force a peace settlement on the basis of
independence.
The strategic goal for the Confederacy was the
seizure of Harrison, Pennsylvania, and an attack on
Philadelphia.
But the plan was executed poorly, with
Confederate cavalry -- the "eyes and ears" of the army, in an
age without aircraft or electric-powered reconnaissance --
being too far from the main force to communicate. The result
was that Confederate forces were dragged into a battle with a
Union force of unknown size and ability.
For three days, Union and Confederate forces
slugged it out on the lush fields and rolling hills of
southern Pennsylvania. When the battle was over, close to
53,000 soldiers -- both Union and Confederate -- had been
wounded or killed.
The battle of Gettysburg was a decisive Union
victory -- arguably the first decisive victory the Army of the
Potomac had won since the Civil War began.
The day after the last shot was fired in the
battle, Lee began withdrawing his forces from Pennsylvania. On
that day, July 4, Grant received the surrender of the garrison
at the city of Vicksburg, thus re-opening the Mississippi
River to Union traffic and trade.
IN THE FOUR MONTHS following the battle of
Gettysburg, Union medical teams combed the battlefield for the
remains of the tens of thousands of soldiers who died. Almost
immediately after the battle, the first cemeteries were laid
out for the fallen soldiers.
By autumn, those first gravesites had grown
into a sprawling cemetery, taking up dozens of acreage. In
addition, the Gettysburg battlefield had been set aside as an
historical site by Congress (a lesson they learned after
speculators bought up the land where the first battle of the
War, around Manassas, Va., was fought).
In November, the National Cemetery at
Gettysburg was ready for opening to the public.
The main speaker at the dedication ceremony
for the Gettysburg National Cemetery was Edward Everett, one
of the best known and respected orators of the age. Everett
spoke for nearly two hours (which was common at the time),
invoking the cause of the Union and praising the bravery of
the men (and women) wounded and killed.
After Everett finished, another well-known
speaker stood and addressed the crowd. This person had been
invited almost as an afterthought, and was not prepared to
make a long and studied speech.
He spoke only 269 words, and only for about
two minutes.
After he was finished, there was only light
applause. The speaker, when he sat down, told his confidant
that he felt his speech had been a failure.
Indeed, he was not the only one. The
Chicago Times, for example, called the speech "flat"
and "dishwatery." The pundits that haunted the European press
felt similarly, chiding the speaker for his "gift of
mediocrity."
However, many others disagreed, including
Everett himself, who wrote the speaker a note expressing his
hope that he "had come as close to the central meaning of the
occasion in two hours as you had in two minutes."
Today, almost 140 years after that cold, windy
November day in 1863, only those 269 words remain as something
other than a footnote in American history.
WHEN ABRAHAM LINCOLN delivered his Gettysburg
Address, the Civil War had been transformed from a
constitutional conflict over Union to a revolutionary conflict
over the meaning of freedom. The clash of social and economic
systems, which lay at the heart of the Civil War, had yielded
a socially progressive movement.
It came as little surprise to those who were
most affected by the success or failure of the Confederate
rebellion, the millions of Africans held as slaves, that the
War had moved in this direction. They knew, before the first
shot was fired, that the War would be about the freedom or
slavery of African peoples in America.
But, for the majority of pro-Union Americans,
it took years of hard lessons to even begin to understand what
the meaning of the Civil War was about.
Among this mass of pro-Union Americans can be
included Lincoln. When he first ran for president in 1860, he
expressed many of the same white supremacist views that were
common for the time, and, while he personally thought slavery
immoral, he only called for slavery's containment to areas
where it existed.
For abolitionists of the day, Lincoln was a
"cold" politician, "tardy" to the idea of slave liberation,
and, in the words of one prominent anti-slavery orator, "a
first-rate second-rate man."
But as the War progressed, Lincoln displayed
his ability to learn and develop politically. By the summer of
1862, he was ready to issue a preliminary emancipation order
(which, incidentally, did not free a single slave). The
stalemate at Antietam in September 1862 gave Lincoln the
"victory" he needed to issue it.
Throughout 1863, he continued to explore the
role that slavery played in the maintenance of the Civil War
and Confederacy. Spurred on by abolitionists like Frederick
Douglass and Wendell Phillips, Lincoln began to see the need
to transform the War into something more -- to understand the
"higher object" for which the forces of the Union fight.
Since the middle of 1862, Union forces had
hired runaway slaves as laborers and teamsters. The
Emancipation Proclamation allowed for the enlistment of Black
men as soldiers, but it took another six months before the
first Black regiment saw action at Ft. Wagner, in South
Carolina.
At the same time, Lincoln had to fight off
criticism that he was, in fact, transforming the War. "You say
you won't fight for Negroes," Lincoln wrote to his critics in
1863. "Some of them seem willing to fight for you."
Clearly, his opinion was changing. All ideas
of repatriating Blacks to Africa, repeating the process that
led to the formation of the African state, Liberia, were dead.
It was now a question of establishing a formal equality
between Black and white within the borders of the United
States.
THIS IS THE CONTEXT in which the Gettysburg
Address was delivered, and it gives us insight into why he
chose the words he did.
Lincoln consciously chose to link the struggle
for this equality to the Revolution of 1775, which freed the
American states from British colonialism. By doing so, he
declared quite openly that this War was a second, democratic
revolution aimed at resolving the problems that had remained
from early years of the Republic.
For Lincoln, the question was no longer one of
preserving the Union, but rebuilding it. That
is, it was no longer a case of "the Union as it was,"
as was the line of his opponents; now, it was a case of the
Union as it must be, purged of its "original sin" of
slavery.
This was the meaning behind Lincoln's call for
the United States to undergo "a new birth of freedom." If the
Union was to be restored, it would not be based on the old
forms of power and privilege. A fundamental transformation was
necessary.
At the same time, though, he did not wish to
detract from the struggle that had been waged by 90,000 Union
soldiers at Gettysburg, and the nearly 2 million Union
soldiers who served throughout the conflict. In his view, the
men (and women) who died for Union had done more to resolve
the outstanding problems of America than any other group of
people -- including Lincoln and his government in Washington.
But the democratic revolution Lincoln led was
not going to be carried out solely by the soldiers in blue. It
was up to the people of the United States to do its part and
do what is necessary to see that the democratic principles
that now guided the Union's effort in the Civil War were not
wasted -- that "these dead shall not have died in vain."
In a sense, Lincoln's speech was meant to make
Americans aware of the great tasks that were to confront them
in the following years, as War became Reconstruction, and
African Americans, freed from the bonds of slavery, were to be
brought into the body politic.
THE NOTED WRITER, William Faulkner, once
quipped that history is not "was," but "is." That is, history
is not a disconnected series of events, dates and names, but
an ongoing experience. What has been done throughout "history"
affects us always; what we do today, will affect the "history"
and contemporary experience of those who come after us.
For us, as citizens of the United States,
living and being affected by that history, the Civil War is
not "was," but "is." The Civil War did not end with the
surrender of the Confederate armies, or with the end of
Reconstruction. The Civil War continues, and we have a role to
play in it.
This is not mere hyperbole or poetic flourish.
The Civil War was more than a military or constitutional
conflict. It was a political debate about freedom -- what it
means, who it applies to, and, most importantly, how far it
extends -- that was resolved, momentarily, through the medium
of shot and shell, at the tip of a bayonet.
But the debate did not end. It continues
today. As long as there is inequality in society, the Civil
War continues. As long as there are those who exploit, and
those who are exploited, the Civil War continues. As long as
there are those who oppress, and those who are oppressed, the
Civil War continues.
The only difference is in the form of slavery
underlying the "irrepressible conflict;" instead of
chattel-slavery (humans as property), it is now
wage-slavery (humans as commodities).
As the 21st century unfolds, we are once again
confronted with an "irrepressible conflict" that can only lead
to one of two outcomes: revolutionary liberation or
reactionary barbarism.
Socialists worthy of the name stand firmly on
the ground of revolutionary liberation from wage-slavery,
exploitation and oppression. Even though we advocate such a
revolution take place in the most peaceful and non-violent way
possible, it is still a revolution we seek, as opposed to
petty reforms that give capitalism a makeover.
Opposed to us are all those who wish to
maintain the vicious circle of war, repression and
exploitation -- from the lowliest manager on the workplace
floor to the highest circles of power, not the least of which
is the existing government.
(And it should not be taken as mere
coincidence or merely "bad politics" that so many of those in
the highest seats of power look to the rebel Confederacy as
ideological inspiration.)
Fighting for a Third American Revolution,
which seeks to abolish wage-slavery and the class system that
perpetuates it, is how we, today's generation, play our part
and "take increased devotion to the cause for which they gave
the last full measure of devotion" -- how we make history
"is."
The Civil War continues; on this 140th
anniversary of the Gettysburg Address, we must all recommit
ourselves to bringing about "a new birth of freedom" and carry
forward the pledge of Lincoln, and his generation of radical
and revolutionary democrats, "that government of the people,
by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the
earth." |