The Real Lincoln Thomas Delorenzo Summary

In The Real Lincoln by Thomas DiLorenzo he writes that Lincoln was a dictator who flagrantly violated constitutional freedoms, and violated civil liberties. Lincoln justified his actions by claiming their necessity because of the war, and permitted because of war powers. What those powers were was never clearly defined except in putting down a rebellion. His real motive was to centralize power under his tyrannical government. Lincoln's violations of civil liberties included the suspending habeas corpus, instituting martial law, using military tribunals for civilian trials, suppressing free elections, interfering with state legislatures, engaging in a war without the consent of congress, blockading southern ports, censoring telegraphs and newspapers, and authorizing a mass execution of natives in a Sioux uprising in Minnesota.
In Lincoln’s Constitution, Daniel Farber disagrees with DiLorenzo. Farber defends Lincoln's record on civil liberties, including the imprisonment without trial, military tribunals for civilians, emancipation, and his infringement on freedom of speech. He claims that Lincoln was not powerful enough to be a dictator and the violations he did commit were justified by the president’s war powers in the constitution.
Ex …show more content…
He justified the military tribunal because of the military tribunals capacity to act quickly, gather intelligence through interrogation, and to prevent confidential and potentially life-saving information from becoming public in civil courts. Additionally, with the numbers of people he allowed to be arrested the civilian courts may not have been able to keep up. All of the defendants in the military tribunals were American citizens, and while those from the south being tried in the military courts could be considered enemy combatants, those from the Northern or Border States were