Content area
Full Text
The recent spate of secessionist conflicts has inspired many of us to return to the classics of political theory for moral guidance on state-- breaking. Because Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, et al. are virtually silent on this topic, however, we look in this paper at the writing of Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln is not typically heralded for his political theory, but his arguments on secession deserve our careful attention not only because he was an exceptionally reflective principal in what was arguably history's most spectacular, protracted secessionist conflict, but also because (descendents of) his arguments continue to be influential.1
In this essay we critically review Abraham Lincoln's arguments against the South's bid for independence. In doing so, we divide the article into three sections. First we review Lincoln's ten arguments against secession. Next we explain why none of these arguments is adequate. Finally, we offer an alternative argument that we believe better justifies Lincoln's Unionist stance.
Lincoln's Case Against State-Breaking
History records Lincoln as one of America's great political figures. He is commonly not, however, listed among the pantheon of leading philosophical lights-a contrast that presents certain problems in the search for Lincoln's "theory of secession." Perhaps, as Plato suggests, this contrast reflects the necessities of both endeavors. Political greatness, after all, is apparent in the ability to know what sorts of arguments appeal to what sorts of audiences.2 Yet to have a theory, in the philosophical sense, suggests that one hold a set of ideas offering at least a good faith effort at internal consistency.
The ideas that Lincoln voiced and penned on secession make no strong case for altering history's assessment of him. What, for instance, are we to make of the claim that "[p]erpetuity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all national governments" (IV, 252)? Were this true, it would foreclose any and all secessionist claims, irrespective of any substantive merit. Yet there is reason to doubt that Lincoln really wished to defend such an absolutist position. (Would he really want to suggest that the American Colonies were unjustified in seceding from the British, for instance?) His more common tactic was to raise arguments that could be made for secession and then demonstrate how in each instance they did not...