Amna Nawaz:
As we mark Presidents’ Day, our podcast “Settle In” asks a simple question: What would Abraham Lincoln do?
A Substack by historian Matthew Pinsker uses that question as a framework to explore modern politics.
He spoke recently with Geoff Bennett about that and his new book, “Boss Lincoln: The Partisan Life of Abraham Lincoln,” which examines how Lincoln still shapes our country today.
Geoff Bennett:
If he were watching politics today, what do you think would surprise him most about our political parties, and what do you think wouldn’t surprise him at all?
Matthew Pinsker, Author, “Boss Lincoln: The Partisan Life of Abraham Lincoln”: I don’t know if he would be surprised, but I think he would be depressed that people seem to be losing faith in democracy.
After 250 years, after just — after recovering from the trauma of the Civil War, I think he would expect people to have more faith in their creed. That’s part of the reason why I think, in my Substack, I focus on, what would Lincoln do?
In my classroom, in my public speeches, in the book, in everything I’m doing, I’m trying to remind people the reason why Lincoln called this the last best hope of Earth. Democracy is not the Greek word for perfect, OK, but it might as well be the Greek word for disagreement.
And people should not be demoralized by disagreements, even ones that have high stakes, even ones that feel angry. People in America have always been angry. And that doesn’t have to mean the end of the republic. And if everyone would just kind of remember that, we would all be in a better place.
Geoff Bennett:
That’s good advice.
The idea…
Matthew Pinsker:
That’s straight from Lincoln.
Geoff Bennett:
Yes. Well, that was my next question. I was going to ask, this idea of what would Lincoln do, what’s the framework you use to determine what in fact he would do?
Matthew Pinsker:
Well, when he became president, of course, seven states seceded from the Union, in opposition, in protest against his election as an anti-slavery president. So these are seven states in the Deep South that have slavery, and they put slavery above country.
But there are 15 slave states in the union in 1861, and Lincoln uses his inaugural to speak to the eight that are still within the union. The majority of slave states are still there. And he tells them, essentially, he says, secession is the essence of anarchy.
And then, in the next sentence, he basically defines union. He says, a majority held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations is the only true sovereign of a free people. Anything else, you fly to anarchy or despotism.
And so what he’s telling people is that the union that he’s trying to save, it’s not the compact of states, like the Confederates are saying. And it’s not just the platitude for we the people. It’s the union between the winners and losers in the election. And he’s trying to reassure those eight slave states that, even though he’s anti-slavery, he will respect the constitutional limitations that protect their rights as slaveholders.
And it wasn’t enough to win over those eight states, but it split them. Four stayed within the union and four joined the Confederacy. If he had lost all eight, the Confederacy would have won that war. And so it was a great accomplishment, even though it wasn’t enough to prevent bloodshed.
Geoff Bennett:
Yes.
As you said, your Substack invites these historical comparisons. What would Lincoln do? How would he look upon January 6, as an insurrection, a political failure, or something else?
Matthew Pinsker:
I mean, there’s no doubt that he would have looked on it as an insurrection because he dealt with it in his own time.
They didn’t have the count for the electoral vote on January 6. Their count was on February 13. The inaugural was in March. And Lincoln wrote letters to subordinates warning them that it was a dangerous moment, that the forces for secession might try to disrupt the count. And he was planning for it.
He also worried about the possibility of disruption during the inaugural. He understood how grave those kind of disruptions could be. He took nothing for granted.
But when I show my students the picture of the man from Delaware who was carrying the Confederate Flag through the Capitol on January 6, I ask them what they think Lincoln would see, what they see. And I get a variety of answers.
But I end that discussion by saying, what Lincoln would see is Americans. Even though he thought they would be misguided, even though he clearly would have thought January 6 was an insurrection, or an attempted insurrection, he would still think of them with malice toward none, and try to find a way to reconnect, to persuade, to re-bind that union that was shattered on January 6.
And I know people have tried, and yet we still need to keep trying, because that bond is still frayed.
Geoff Bennett:
The symbolic weight of that man with the Confederate Flag in the Capitol, given that that was the very thing that Lincoln fought against, he tried to guard against, you think he would see that man as an American?
Matthew Pinsker:
I do, absolutely.
Look, he was the one who offered amnesty to the Confederates. Now, the difference between his amnesty and Trump’s pardon of the January 6 rioters is that Lincoln made it conditional. This is boss Lincoln at his best. They not only had to pledge future loyalty to the Constitution. They also had to pledge loyalty to all the anti-slavery proclamations and statutes that had been adopted during the war.
He understood that he had to leverage his offer of forgiveness for their recognition that slavery was dead. And that’s how amnesty proceeded during the Civil War. That’s why he was able to say with malice toward none, we can provide charity for all if you acknowledge the wrongheadedness of your views.
And that’s not easy for people. Kevin Seefried was the name of the man who carried that Confederate Flag on January 6. When he was sentenced, he expressed remorse. He brought with him his son, who was the age of my students, on that day. He also expressed remorse.
Now that they have been pardoned, I hope they still feel that remorse. But I’m not sure they do, because the pardon that President Trump offered was just a blanket, sweeping pardon. He calls them victims.
Now, I don’t think Lincoln would see them as victims, but he would still see them as Americans.
Amna Nawaz:
And you can find that full episode of “Settle In” and more on our PBS News YouTube page or wherever you get your podcast.
