Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Thomas DiLorenzo Responds to the Hit Job on Judge Napolitano

DiLorenzo writes:
Jon Stewart is Very, Very Afraid
Of us, apparently.  Several emailers have written to inform me that Stewart did a small hit/smear job on Judge Napolitano on “The Daily Show” last night.  The “hit” was about how the Judge wrote in one of his publications that the U.S. probably could have ended slavery the same way that New York, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and all the other Northern states did, as well as the British empire, Spanish empire, the French, Danes, Dutch, Swedes, and others during the nineteenth century, namely, peacefully.  (See Jim Powell,Greatest Emancipations: How the West Abolished Slavery
; and Joanne Pope Melish, Disowning Slavery: Gradual Emancipation and "Race" in New England, 1780-1860).   No, no, said Stewart and pals, 750,000 dead Americans , more than double that number maimed for life, and the total destruction of the voluntary union of the founders was the only way to go.  Southerners, six percent of whom owned slaves, “were willing to die to preserve slavery” announced the renowned historian Jon Stewart.  The Great Oz (er, I mean, The Great Abe) did what was necessary said the great historical sage and his cast of clowns.
The above originally appeared at LewRockwell.com.


  1. Of course, in true progressive fashion, Stewart distorts the tariff issue and fails to present all the facts. While he's able to unearth the Mississippi secession document, he somehow manages to miss Lincoln's first inaugural address, in which the man's own words undermine his idolaters' assertions:

    "The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts."

    "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."

    There is no ambiguity in the first inaugural. For Lincoln, the coming war would be about preserving federal hegemony and collecting the tariff. Let John Stewart--or his bizarrely titled "Senior Black Correspondent"--quote the Great Emancipator himself next time.

  2. Let there be no mistake, these same immoral rotten Lincoln-worshipping progressive morans would kill another 700,000 americans to make the rest of us bake or serve a wedding cake to two gay folks or to force us to send money to a select few to control the climate.
    It's what statists do.

  3. I like to ask people if they think Lincoln would have invaded the south and freed the slaves if those states had not seceded. And why was West Virginia exempted from the Emancipation Proclamation? All of the states' secession documents mention slavery as the major reason they seceded. Slavery was not, however, a major driving force in Lincoln's decision to reverse the secession.