Scan barcode
dngoldman's review
4.0
This scholarly book delves deeply into the differences between Lincoln and Douglas's political philosophy. The book provides many amazing insights on both a micro and macro level and sets forth the differences in a way that still reverberate in today's political environment. (Douglas sounds a lot like the non-crazy version of very conservative republicans and Lincoln, well he's Lincoln).
Jaffa does the reader a favor by taking Douglas' arguments seriously, saving him from the 1850's version of George Wallace. Douglas, Jaffe argued, was truly dedicated to the theory of local rule. He thought anything requirement from the federal government on slavery would amount to the tyranny that the founders fought to escape. For Douglas, "we the people" was the founding and ultimate principle. His noncommittal attitude toward slavery made sense given his official position - if people should decide why should Douglas care. Yet, Jaffe indicates that Douglas did think that his method would eliminate slavery. Most recent new states were non-slavery and the proportion of slave states was much less than when the union started.
This raises the question were both Lincoln and Douglass shooting for the same aim of eliminating slavery through different means, with Douglass having the better (or at least as reasonable good argument). Well, no. First Jaffe discounts Douglass arguments saying that the new non-slave states were influenced by the fact that federal gov did prohibit slavery.
Yet, in the end the real debate is about the proper role of government particularly the federal government. For Douglass, we the people - democracy was an end to itself. Not so for Lincoln. For him, it was “all men are created equal” that had to be the guide that democracy strove toward. While Lincoln was true to the spirit of the original meaning, yet expanded the meaning. Jaffa argues that Lincoln expands the spirit. The original intent of the declaration was in line with Locke’s negative rights - the minimalist amount of rights needed to be free from a dictator. Lincoln sets the declaration as an aspiration something that can never quite be reach but must always be striven to. Lincoln understands that democracy qua democracy was not an organizing principle to hold a union together of people to govern themselves.
The book is written for academia and gets into a level of detail that most readers don’t need. Jaffa is also engaging in arguments with other academics that is not really all that interesting. Yet, the parts that are relevant are brilliant. For those interested in political philosophy and the role of government - this is a must read.
Jaffa does the reader a favor by taking Douglas' arguments seriously, saving him from the 1850's version of George Wallace. Douglas, Jaffe argued, was truly dedicated to the theory of local rule. He thought anything requirement from the federal government on slavery would amount to the tyranny that the founders fought to escape. For Douglas, "we the people" was the founding and ultimate principle. His noncommittal attitude toward slavery made sense given his official position - if people should decide why should Douglas care. Yet, Jaffe indicates that Douglas did think that his method would eliminate slavery. Most recent new states were non-slavery and the proportion of slave states was much less than when the union started.
This raises the question were both Lincoln and Douglass shooting for the same aim of eliminating slavery through different means, with Douglass having the better (or at least as reasonable good argument). Well, no. First Jaffe discounts Douglass arguments saying that the new non-slave states were influenced by the fact that federal gov did prohibit slavery.
Yet, in the end the real debate is about the proper role of government particularly the federal government. For Douglass, we the people - democracy was an end to itself. Not so for Lincoln. For him, it was “all men are created equal” that had to be the guide that democracy strove toward. While Lincoln was true to the spirit of the original meaning, yet expanded the meaning. Jaffa argues that Lincoln expands the spirit. The original intent of the declaration was in line with Locke’s negative rights - the minimalist amount of rights needed to be free from a dictator. Lincoln sets the declaration as an aspiration something that can never quite be reach but must always be striven to. Lincoln understands that democracy qua democracy was not an organizing principle to hold a union together of people to govern themselves.
The book is written for academia and gets into a level of detail that most readers don’t need. Jaffa is also engaging in arguments with other academics that is not really all that interesting. Yet, the parts that are relevant are brilliant. For those interested in political philosophy and the role of government - this is a must read.
More...