In a New York Times review, renowned Lincoln historian James McPherson noted Forced into Glory's tendency to distort sources or misleadingly omit essential parts of them.
Other top Lincoln historians have warned about similar problems. Eric Foner called the book a "one-dimensional" portrayal. Allen Guelzo called it an "infamous screed." George Fredrickson said the book was extreme and driven by ideology.
I had to write a critique of Bennett's book as a key part of a master's thesis. I spent a good deal of time going back to the sources Bennett cites and reading those sources in the originals, and I found that McPherson, if anything, understated the case about Bennett's misrepresentation of sources. I could cite many examples of such distortions. Here is one:
Bennett makes it appear that at one point Lincoln supported forcible deportation of the African American population to Texas. Bennett tells his readers that according to L.E. Chittenden, who was Register of the Treasury during the Lincoln administration, the president came to Chittenden’s office and asked if Chittenden knew anyone with the competence to move the whole black population of the slave States into Texas. (Forced into Glory, pp. 512-513) What Bennett does NOT mention to his readers is that Chittenden’s own account states
1) that the Texas plan was not Lincoln’s, but Senator Pomeroy’s;
2) that the contractor who discussed it with Lincoln, though afterwards hopeful the president might take it up, believed it doubtful the president approved of the plan;
3) that Chittenden himself said the plan was soon abandoned; and
4) that Chittenden expressed doubt Lincoln was ever seriously interested in it!
(for the above four points in Chittenden's book, Recollections of President Lincoln and His Administration (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1891), see pp. 338–340.
Another example of a grotesque distortion by Bennett: He repeatedly gives his readers the impression that Lincoln was planning the forced deportation of blacks out of the U.S. What Bennett does not tell his readers is
1) every plan and piece of legislation Lincoln supported made very clear that any colonization of blacks had to be VOLUNTARY;
2) this was verified not only by the clear language of all relevant legislation, but also, for example, by Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles’ diary entry for September 26, 1862. That entry notes that Attorney General Edward Bates at a cabinet meeting (which took place a day after the issuance of the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation) supported compulsory deportation of blacks, but “the President," Welles wrote, "objected unequivocally to compulsion. Their emigration must be voluntary and without expense to themselves”;
3) Bennett quotes Lincoln's rare use of the word "deportation" a great deal, but Bennett never informs his readers that in the few cases where Lincoln used the word, the immediate context of the use made it clear that only VOLUNTARY colonization was intended; and
4) A look at dictionaries from 1850, 1860, and 1870, shows that "deportation" in those decades had not yet developed the exclusively involuntary and compulsory associations it came to have in the twentieth century after two horrific and barbaric world wars. In the middle of the 1800s, "deportation" could refer to a voluntary departure. Bennett does not tell his readers that, and probably did not know it himself. In this context, one should also note something about Welles' reference to Lincoln's rejection of "compulsory deportation." If "deportation" at that time always meant something compulsory, then Welles' expression "compulsory deportation" would have been redundant. But Welles' expression was not redundant, because at that time "deportation" was not necessarily compulsory.
My point in noting the above examples of Bennett's grotesquely misleading distortions of the record -- and the book is really full of them -- is not to say that Lincoln was perfect or that Bennett's attacks on Lincoln have absolutely NO merit. That's why I gave this book three stars instead of one. Three stars is really too generous. In any case, while top historians have criticized Bennett's work as misleading, unbalanced, etc., they have also credited it with forcing historians to pay more attention to questions about Lincoln and race. That said, it remains the case that most of the claims in Bennett's book are disinformation dependent on quotations out of context and sometimes quotations altered from the originals. Even his strongest claims are, say, 10% correct and 90% exaggeration and propaganda, not history.
If you want a broad range of honest perspectives on Lincoln, I suggest the following three brilliant books by top-ranked, scholarly historians, though there are many other excellent books that could be suggested:
1) George Fredrickson: Big Enough to Be Inconsistent: Abraham Lincoln Confronts Slavery and Race (Of the three books, this one puts Lincoln's views and actions on race and emancipation in the least complimentary light.)
2) Eric Foner: The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery (This one might be considered a "centrist" scholarly perspective: Lincoln is seen as having been to some partial degree a racist to begin with but as having grown out of it to become a genuinely great emancipator.)
3) Richard Striner: Father Abraham: Lincoln's Relentless Struggle to End Slavery (Compared to the two books just named, this one puts Lincoln in a more unequivocally positive light and is not without brilliance in analyzing the apparently racist or supremacist statements of Lincoln as spoken not because he was racist but for admirable strategic political reasons. Specifically, Striner argues that Lincoln sometimes spoke in a way that could be interpreted as racist but that Lincoln did so only because he needed the support of racist whites if he was to have any chance of destroying slavery.)
As someone who has looked very closely at Bennett's frequent misrepresentation of his sources, I advise against taking Forced into Glory except with a grain, no, an ocean's worth of salt.
Add to book club
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club?
Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Flip to back
Flip to front
Follow the Author
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
OK
Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln's White Dream Paperback – October 1, 2007
by
Lerone Bennett Jr.
(Author)
-
Print length688 pages
-
LanguageEnglish
-
PublisherJohnson Publishing Company, Inc.
-
Publication dateOctober 1, 2007
-
Dimensions6 x 1.45 x 9 inches
-
ISBN-100874850029
-
ISBN-13978-0874850024
New releases
Explore popular titles in every genre and find something you love. See more
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
-
Apple
-
Android
-
Windows Phone
-
Android
|
Download to your computer
|
Kindle Cloud Reader
|
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Before the Mayflower - a History of the Negro in America 1619-1964 Revised EditionMass Market Paperback$579.95$579.95+ $3.99 shipping
Before the Mayflower: A History of the Negro in America, 1619-1962Paperback$15.36$15.36FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Thursday, Sep 16
The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L'Ouverture and the San Domingo RevolutionPaperback$15.44$15.44FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Thursday, Sep 16
The Mis-Education of the NegroPaperback$4.99$4.99FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Thursday, Sep 16
The Problem with LincolnHardcover$18.69$18.69FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Thursday, Sep 16
What other items do customers buy after viewing this item?
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Before the Mayflower: A History of the Negro in America, 1619-1962Paperback$13.50$13.50FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Friday, Sep 17
Before the Mayflower: A History of the Negro in America, 1619-1962Paperback$15.36$15.36FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Thursday, Sep 16
The Mis-Education of the NegroPaperback$4.99$4.99FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Thursday, Sep 16
Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest AbeThomas J. DilorenzoPaperback$15.00$15.00FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Thursday, Sep 16
They Came Before Columbus: The African Presence in Ancient America (Journal of African Civilizations)Paperback$17.99$17.99FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Thursday, Sep 16
Deals related to this item
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
Editorial Reviews
Review
"The most systematic, best-researched, and compelling critique of Lincoln's [beliefs about race] that I know of." Journal of Blacks in Higher Education
About the Author
Lerone Bennett Jr. is the executive editor emeritus of Ebony magazine and the author of 10 books, including Before the Mayflower, Great Moments in Black History, Pioneers in Protest, The Shaping of Black America, and What Manner of Man, a biography of Martin Luther King. He lives in Chicago.
Tell the Publisher!
I'd like to read this book on Kindle
Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.
I'd like to read this book on Kindle
Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.
Product details
- Publisher : Johnson Publishing Company, Inc.; 1st edition (October 1, 2007)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 688 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0874850029
- ISBN-13 : 978-0874850024
- Item Weight : 2 pounds
- Dimensions : 6 x 1.45 x 9 inches
-
Best Sellers Rank:
#2,363,289 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #1,094 in U.S. Abolition of Slavery History
- #10,952 in Discrimination & Racism (Books)
- #12,131 in African American Demographic Studies (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
Customer reviews
4.4 out of 5 stars
4.4 out of 5
136 global ratings
How are ratings calculated?
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzes reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
3.0 out of 5 stars
I did a master's thesis which focused on this book and closely examined Bennett's use of sources.
Reviewed in the United States on July 31, 2018Verified Purchase
34 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Reviewed in the United States on June 19, 2018
Verified Purchase
Bennett has written a groundbreaking book that will turn upside down your understanding of Lincoln. Contrary to popular history, Abe was a visceral racist who resonated with white superiority throughout his life; never had a change-of-heart epiphany; was pushed to do the right thing only by others--the abolitionists and a radical anti-slavery Republican Congress; and to the end of his life sympathized not with blacks but with the tragedy of the white slave-owners stripped of their property and burdened with a harder life. Lincoln's solution to it all was very gradual emancipation, with compensation to the slave-owners and expatriation of the freed blacks to their homeland--Africa. Bennett proves his case from original contemporaneous sources.
The book's one flaw, but a major one, is that Bennett cannot resist beating a dead horse yet again--it provides him too much personal satisfaction. Thus, instead of looking forward to the next new chapter, one starts to cringe at having to suffer through the same narrative once again with a few more new details and so many of those already given. An editor with courage should have forced the author to tell the magnificent true tale that he has to tell in 350 pages instead of the 650+ he was provided to ramble and indulge himself. Even one of the great authors who wrote a promotional blurb for the cover said that after reading 5 chapters, he could highly recommend the book. One suspects that he stopped reading it there because, alas, after 5 chapters one starts to hear the looping.
The book's one flaw, but a major one, is that Bennett cannot resist beating a dead horse yet again--it provides him too much personal satisfaction. Thus, instead of looking forward to the next new chapter, one starts to cringe at having to suffer through the same narrative once again with a few more new details and so many of those already given. An editor with courage should have forced the author to tell the magnificent true tale that he has to tell in 350 pages instead of the 650+ he was provided to ramble and indulge himself. Even one of the great authors who wrote a promotional blurb for the cover said that after reading 5 chapters, he could highly recommend the book. One suspects that he stopped reading it there because, alas, after 5 chapters one starts to hear the looping.
13 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Reviewed in the United States on July 15, 2018
Verified Purchase
Lerone Bennett, Jr., a Black historian, discusses Lincoln's racial prejudice, the Emancipation 'smokescreen' and his deportation agenda. From the time Lincoln settled in New Salem in 1831, until he left Illinois in 1861 for the White House, slaves and quasi-slaves were held, whipped, hunted, litigated and terrorized in that state.
Although there were few Blacks in state of Illinois...747 slaves and 1,637 free Blacks in 1830, Illinois Whites seemed to be obsessed by the subject of race. They adopted a comprehensive Black Code in 1819; and the Illinois legislature returned to the subject in 1825, 1831, 1833, 1841, and 1845.
These Black Codes or Laws would not be repealed until 1865. Blacks had no legal rights; it was a crime for them to settle in Illinois unless they could prove their freedom and post a $1,000 bond. Blacks found without a certificate of freedom was considered a runaway slave and could be apprehended by any White and auctioned off by the sheriff to pay the cost of his confinement. If a Black had a certificate, he and his family were required to meet reporting and registration procedures. The head of household had to register all family members and provide detailed descriptions to the supervisor of the poor, who could expel the whole family at any moment.
By the 1850s, especially after passage of the Compromise of 1850, which Lincoln voted for, kidnapping of Negroes with the aid and support of the state and White population, had become a profitable business.
Most trades and occupations were closed to Blacks. Real Estate was difficult to obtain. A law on the apprenticeship of children said "that the master or mistress to whom such child shall be bound as aforesaid shall cause such child to be taught to read and write and the ground rules of arithmetic...except when such apprentice is a negro or mulatto."
The state also taxed Blacks to support public schools that were closed by law, and by the vote of Lincoln, to Black children.
They could not play percussion instruments, could be apprehended for "riots, routs, unlawful assemblies, trespasses and seditious speeches." It was a crime for any person to permit "any slave or slaves, servant or servants of color, to the number of three or more, to assemble in his, her or their house, out house, yard or shed for the purpose of dancing or revelling, either by night or by day..."
A revised Illinois constitution in 1848, denied Blacks the right to vote and to serve in the state militia. The Negro Exclusion Law forbid slaves and free Negroes from settling in the state.
And where was Lincoln in all this? Silent. Lincoln was no emancipationist; he was scared to death of emancipation. He was scared of Black economic competition, Black and White voters and officeholders, and Black and White sex....I'm quoting Abraham Lincoln, and if you don't believe me, read pages 405, 407-409, and 541 of Volume 2; and pages 146, 234-5 of "The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln."
The Emancipation Proclamation, if you have never read the document, along with the other proposed Congressional acts, including the Confiscation Act, you will find that it did not do what everyone thinks it did. They were not freed until the 13th Amendment. Lerone Bennett, Jr.'s book, "Forced into Glory" outlines precisely what it was and was not.
Lincoln didn't free the slaves. If it had been left up to him, Blacks would have remained in slavery to 1900 or longer. If he had had his way, millions of 20th Century Whites would have been in "Gone With the Wind," instead of watching it.
It was a limited document with devious aims. The men around Lincoln who knew him best, tell us, almost without exception, that the document was the incidental, accidental effort of a man who did everything he possibly could to avoid it.
As Professors Richard Current and Ralph Korngold have discovered, the Proclamation had as it's purpose and effect the checking of the Radical congressional program; that is to say, the program of immediate emancipation. Lincoln wanted to gain time to work on his own plan to free Blacks gradually, and to ship them out of the country in a colonization program. Part of his program included the payment of funds to slaveholders in exchange for their slaves, who would be shipped off to colonies away from the United States. He even proposed a Constitutional Amendment that would provide for the funding!
Put another way, on January 1, 1863, Lincoln re-enslaved and/or condemned to extended slavery more Blacks than he ever freed.
Consider Lincoln's "slow-walking" emancipation in the District of Columbia. (In 1863, there was still a slave market within 1 block of the White House).
In the Spring of 1862, he sat on the bill for 2 nights. Why? Believe it or not, it is because he had promised an old Kentucky friend that he wouldn't sign the bill until the friend could leave town with two of his slaves. In a startling and revealing statement, Lincoln said he regretted that District of Columbia slaves had been freed at once, "that it should have been for gradual emancipation," and "that now families would at once be deprived of cooks, stable boys etc. and they of their protectors without any provision for them."
Bennett presents Lincoln 'warts and all' holding nothing back. He tells us in explicit and documented detail Lincoln's own proposed Amendments to the Constitution. Lincoln's official plan for a new, all-White America, unfolded in his State of the Union message, on Monday, December 1, 1862. It included 3 Constitutional Amendments, which he asked the Congress to pass "as permanent constitutional law" one month before he signed the Emancipation Proclamation. In brief these are they:
The first amendment, Lincoln's proposed 13th Amendment, called for the ending of slavery, not on January 1, 1863, but by January 1, 1900.
"Every State, wherein slavery now exists, which shall abolish the same therein, at any time, or times, before the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand and nine hundred, shall receive compensation from the United States..."
The Second Amendment, Lincoln's proposed 14th Amendment, discussed actual freedom and the compensation to loyal slaveowners.
"All slaves who shall have enjoyed actual freedom by the chances of war, at any time before the end of the rebellion, shall be forever free; but all owners of such who shall not have been disloyal, shall be compensated for them..."
The 3rd Amendment, Lincoln's proposed 15th Amendment, called for the ethnic cleansing of the United States of America.
"Congress may appropriate money, and otherwise provide, for colonizing free colored persons, with their own consent, at any place or places without the United States."
And what would happen if Congress refused to accept Lincoln's God-ordained way, "peaceful, generous, just," of buying slaves over a 37 year period and deporting them to a place "without the United States" in "congenial climes, and with people of their own blood and race?"
We shall lose, Lincoln said, "the last best, hope of earth." What did Lincoln mean by that phrase that everybody praises and nobody questions? The "last best hope of earth" was a Union of White people purified and brought together by the deportation of Blacks.
This book ought to be required reading by every University course on the Civil War. It is well-written and researched. My highest recommendation.
Although there were few Blacks in state of Illinois...747 slaves and 1,637 free Blacks in 1830, Illinois Whites seemed to be obsessed by the subject of race. They adopted a comprehensive Black Code in 1819; and the Illinois legislature returned to the subject in 1825, 1831, 1833, 1841, and 1845.
These Black Codes or Laws would not be repealed until 1865. Blacks had no legal rights; it was a crime for them to settle in Illinois unless they could prove their freedom and post a $1,000 bond. Blacks found without a certificate of freedom was considered a runaway slave and could be apprehended by any White and auctioned off by the sheriff to pay the cost of his confinement. If a Black had a certificate, he and his family were required to meet reporting and registration procedures. The head of household had to register all family members and provide detailed descriptions to the supervisor of the poor, who could expel the whole family at any moment.
By the 1850s, especially after passage of the Compromise of 1850, which Lincoln voted for, kidnapping of Negroes with the aid and support of the state and White population, had become a profitable business.
Most trades and occupations were closed to Blacks. Real Estate was difficult to obtain. A law on the apprenticeship of children said "that the master or mistress to whom such child shall be bound as aforesaid shall cause such child to be taught to read and write and the ground rules of arithmetic...except when such apprentice is a negro or mulatto."
The state also taxed Blacks to support public schools that were closed by law, and by the vote of Lincoln, to Black children.
They could not play percussion instruments, could be apprehended for "riots, routs, unlawful assemblies, trespasses and seditious speeches." It was a crime for any person to permit "any slave or slaves, servant or servants of color, to the number of three or more, to assemble in his, her or their house, out house, yard or shed for the purpose of dancing or revelling, either by night or by day..."
A revised Illinois constitution in 1848, denied Blacks the right to vote and to serve in the state militia. The Negro Exclusion Law forbid slaves and free Negroes from settling in the state.
And where was Lincoln in all this? Silent. Lincoln was no emancipationist; he was scared to death of emancipation. He was scared of Black economic competition, Black and White voters and officeholders, and Black and White sex....I'm quoting Abraham Lincoln, and if you don't believe me, read pages 405, 407-409, and 541 of Volume 2; and pages 146, 234-5 of "The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln."
The Emancipation Proclamation, if you have never read the document, along with the other proposed Congressional acts, including the Confiscation Act, you will find that it did not do what everyone thinks it did. They were not freed until the 13th Amendment. Lerone Bennett, Jr.'s book, "Forced into Glory" outlines precisely what it was and was not.
Lincoln didn't free the slaves. If it had been left up to him, Blacks would have remained in slavery to 1900 or longer. If he had had his way, millions of 20th Century Whites would have been in "Gone With the Wind," instead of watching it.
It was a limited document with devious aims. The men around Lincoln who knew him best, tell us, almost without exception, that the document was the incidental, accidental effort of a man who did everything he possibly could to avoid it.
As Professors Richard Current and Ralph Korngold have discovered, the Proclamation had as it's purpose and effect the checking of the Radical congressional program; that is to say, the program of immediate emancipation. Lincoln wanted to gain time to work on his own plan to free Blacks gradually, and to ship them out of the country in a colonization program. Part of his program included the payment of funds to slaveholders in exchange for their slaves, who would be shipped off to colonies away from the United States. He even proposed a Constitutional Amendment that would provide for the funding!
Put another way, on January 1, 1863, Lincoln re-enslaved and/or condemned to extended slavery more Blacks than he ever freed.
Consider Lincoln's "slow-walking" emancipation in the District of Columbia. (In 1863, there was still a slave market within 1 block of the White House).
In the Spring of 1862, he sat on the bill for 2 nights. Why? Believe it or not, it is because he had promised an old Kentucky friend that he wouldn't sign the bill until the friend could leave town with two of his slaves. In a startling and revealing statement, Lincoln said he regretted that District of Columbia slaves had been freed at once, "that it should have been for gradual emancipation," and "that now families would at once be deprived of cooks, stable boys etc. and they of their protectors without any provision for them."
Bennett presents Lincoln 'warts and all' holding nothing back. He tells us in explicit and documented detail Lincoln's own proposed Amendments to the Constitution. Lincoln's official plan for a new, all-White America, unfolded in his State of the Union message, on Monday, December 1, 1862. It included 3 Constitutional Amendments, which he asked the Congress to pass "as permanent constitutional law" one month before he signed the Emancipation Proclamation. In brief these are they:
The first amendment, Lincoln's proposed 13th Amendment, called for the ending of slavery, not on January 1, 1863, but by January 1, 1900.
"Every State, wherein slavery now exists, which shall abolish the same therein, at any time, or times, before the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand and nine hundred, shall receive compensation from the United States..."
The Second Amendment, Lincoln's proposed 14th Amendment, discussed actual freedom and the compensation to loyal slaveowners.
"All slaves who shall have enjoyed actual freedom by the chances of war, at any time before the end of the rebellion, shall be forever free; but all owners of such who shall not have been disloyal, shall be compensated for them..."
The 3rd Amendment, Lincoln's proposed 15th Amendment, called for the ethnic cleansing of the United States of America.
"Congress may appropriate money, and otherwise provide, for colonizing free colored persons, with their own consent, at any place or places without the United States."
And what would happen if Congress refused to accept Lincoln's God-ordained way, "peaceful, generous, just," of buying slaves over a 37 year period and deporting them to a place "without the United States" in "congenial climes, and with people of their own blood and race?"
We shall lose, Lincoln said, "the last best, hope of earth." What did Lincoln mean by that phrase that everybody praises and nobody questions? The "last best hope of earth" was a Union of White people purified and brought together by the deportation of Blacks.
This book ought to be required reading by every University course on the Civil War. It is well-written and researched. My highest recommendation.
10 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Top reviews from other countries
smokingbrush
5.0 out of 5 stars
Essential addition to the Lincoln canon
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on June 12, 2015Verified Purchase
In the 600+ pages which are scrupulously footnoted with
references from Lincoln’s speeches and contemporary
sources, Bennett lays out four major themes.
1] the Emancipation Proclamation did not free black people.
And it’s doubtful, because of the exclusion causes
contained therein relating to territories actually under
Union control, if it ever freed anybody anywhere, and that
“Abraham Lincoln was not the Great Emancipator or the
small emancipator or even the medium-sized emancipator. ”
2] Lincoln was a racist. he was opposed to black
people voting, sitting on juries, intermarrying with white
people and holding office.
3] Lincoln’s deepest desire was to deport all black people
and create an all-white nation by instigating a programme of
colonisation.
4]Lincoln was an equivocating, vacillating leader who
prolonged the war, delayed emancipation and increased the
number of casualties. If Lincoln had not spent two years
appeasing Kentucky [a border slave state teetering on the
verge of seccession], if he had had the moral courage to
mobilize 400,000 black soldiers by issuing an emancipation
order giving the soldiers freedom,” I think the Civil War
would have been over two years, three years at most"
…These are the historical arguments of the book. Evidence
from the contemporary sources provides a sturdy
superstructure to support these theses. If history was
simply the weighing of evidence, perhaps this book would be
merely commendable. However,across the work looms the shadow
of what Bennett calls “the Lincoln Industry”; eager to
feed a population with a positive image of America through
the image of a “Great Emancipator”. On page 114, Bennett
writes, “Lincoln transcends the rules of logic and
evidence." Take the example of the [in]famous “Charleston speech”. These
views expressed publicly are always seen as a stumbling
block for Lincoln apologists.They argue that it was simply a
political gambit to secure purchase from a racist audience
in a border state. They thereby sidestep the obvious because it is too painful
and damaging to contemplate; that the words uttered at
Charleston are only a stumbling block if one is arguing that
Lincoln had an enlightened attitude to the black race. The
speech is utterly logical if supremacist views are ascribed
to his character.
Does any of this matter? If Lincoln has been distorted by
history for the higher purposes of symbolism for a great
cause, is that not for a greater social good? “The truth
is its own defense and is absolutely necessary.” This is
the creed of the historian.
This is not a work skewed to express ‘Black Power’
objectives. The consensus view is that Lincoln expressed racist views
because all white people in the 19th century were racist.
“I disagree with that and I defend white people in 19th
century. I think it’s absurd to say that everybody white
in the 19th century was a racist.” He recommends that
schools and colleges place Lincoln in the actual context of
his more enlightened contemporaries and that it is they
whose lives should be studied: Phillips, Thaddeus Stephens,
Charles Sumner, Lyman Trumbull.
The establishment’s reaction to ‘Forced into Glory’
indicates just how significant this book may be. The
Washington Post or The New York Times or The Wall Street
Journal all failed to review the book. Apparently it was
unavailable for sale in certain bookstores and copies could
not even be obtained through direct contact with
distributors. Neither the Abraham Lincoln Association, which
meets in Springfield, or the Lincoln Forum, which meets up
in Gettysburg every year, have ever invited Bennett to
speak. “There ought to be a dialogue between academic
people, the Lincoln establishment, as I say, and other
people who have a different vision of Lincoln.”
If you are even remotely interested in obtaining ‘a
different vision’ of the Civil War president, “Forced
into Glory” is the book to read. It is a significant
achievement against which all future monographs on Lincoln,
written by both white and black historians will be measured.
I urge anyone with even a passing interest in American
history to seek out a copy of this book.
references from Lincoln’s speeches and contemporary
sources, Bennett lays out four major themes.
1] the Emancipation Proclamation did not free black people.
And it’s doubtful, because of the exclusion causes
contained therein relating to territories actually under
Union control, if it ever freed anybody anywhere, and that
“Abraham Lincoln was not the Great Emancipator or the
small emancipator or even the medium-sized emancipator. ”
2] Lincoln was a racist. he was opposed to black
people voting, sitting on juries, intermarrying with white
people and holding office.
3] Lincoln’s deepest desire was to deport all black people
and create an all-white nation by instigating a programme of
colonisation.
4]Lincoln was an equivocating, vacillating leader who
prolonged the war, delayed emancipation and increased the
number of casualties. If Lincoln had not spent two years
appeasing Kentucky [a border slave state teetering on the
verge of seccession], if he had had the moral courage to
mobilize 400,000 black soldiers by issuing an emancipation
order giving the soldiers freedom,” I think the Civil War
would have been over two years, three years at most"
…These are the historical arguments of the book. Evidence
from the contemporary sources provides a sturdy
superstructure to support these theses. If history was
simply the weighing of evidence, perhaps this book would be
merely commendable. However,across the work looms the shadow
of what Bennett calls “the Lincoln Industry”; eager to
feed a population with a positive image of America through
the image of a “Great Emancipator”. On page 114, Bennett
writes, “Lincoln transcends the rules of logic and
evidence." Take the example of the [in]famous “Charleston speech”. These
views expressed publicly are always seen as a stumbling
block for Lincoln apologists.They argue that it was simply a
political gambit to secure purchase from a racist audience
in a border state. They thereby sidestep the obvious because it is too painful
and damaging to contemplate; that the words uttered at
Charleston are only a stumbling block if one is arguing that
Lincoln had an enlightened attitude to the black race. The
speech is utterly logical if supremacist views are ascribed
to his character.
Does any of this matter? If Lincoln has been distorted by
history for the higher purposes of symbolism for a great
cause, is that not for a greater social good? “The truth
is its own defense and is absolutely necessary.” This is
the creed of the historian.
This is not a work skewed to express ‘Black Power’
objectives. The consensus view is that Lincoln expressed racist views
because all white people in the 19th century were racist.
“I disagree with that and I defend white people in 19th
century. I think it’s absurd to say that everybody white
in the 19th century was a racist.” He recommends that
schools and colleges place Lincoln in the actual context of
his more enlightened contemporaries and that it is they
whose lives should be studied: Phillips, Thaddeus Stephens,
Charles Sumner, Lyman Trumbull.
The establishment’s reaction to ‘Forced into Glory’
indicates just how significant this book may be. The
Washington Post or The New York Times or The Wall Street
Journal all failed to review the book. Apparently it was
unavailable for sale in certain bookstores and copies could
not even be obtained through direct contact with
distributors. Neither the Abraham Lincoln Association, which
meets in Springfield, or the Lincoln Forum, which meets up
in Gettysburg every year, have ever invited Bennett to
speak. “There ought to be a dialogue between academic
people, the Lincoln establishment, as I say, and other
people who have a different vision of Lincoln.”
If you are even remotely interested in obtaining ‘a
different vision’ of the Civil War president, “Forced
into Glory” is the book to read. It is a significant
achievement against which all future monographs on Lincoln,
written by both white and black historians will be measured.
I urge anyone with even a passing interest in American
history to seek out a copy of this book.
Ms Jacqueline
5.0 out of 5 stars
A book well worth having
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 3, 2016Verified Purchase
This book is a dissenting analytical 'essay' of the Abraham Lincoln era. Bennett articulately challenges historians views, concepts and opinions about Lincoln emancipation of the the black American slaves in the 1800; he is certainly not afraid to dispel the myth that Lincoln's genuine aim was to have a 'free' and democratic America - Bennett has made a convincing attempt at doing so! It took me a few months to read this book as there are foot notes on each page and references to other essays and writings. A good reference book on the Abraham Lincoln subject.


