The Radical and the Republican

In the book; The Radical and the Republican by James Oakes, a stage is set for two prominent persons, namely Abraham Lincoln as the Republican and Frederick Douglass as the Radical. What these persons have in common is that they are both politically involved in the previous US government. Abraham Lincoln is president of the united states in the year 1861- 1865; he is the 16^th president of the state. In contrast, Frederick Douglass is an activist an author and public speaker who significantly campaigned against slavery prior to civil war and during the process of revolution. A republican is defined as a representative of the republic, an advocate who is courageous enough to point out adverse conditions presented to the majority, which is the republic. A radical in the definition is an advocate who accomplishes acts employing a complete social diversity or political gratification.

On the issue of slavery which is the major connecting bridge between the personalities mentioned, both of the two believed that it is not morally correct. However, they use different routes in managing and finally eradicate the problem. Both persons campaigned on freedom for the slaves despite being opposed by powers invested in the Federal Government.        Once there was an affirmation that Lincoln is an opportunist, radicals and blacks also term him as a racist however most historians of today understand and emphasize his commitment to egalitarian principles in the abolition of slavery first by issuing Emancipation Proclamation that eases the process of eliminating slavery. The book also shows how Lincoln’s radical stance regarding slavery during the civil resistance converged with abolitionism of Frederick Douglass; who tempers his moral absolutism with his brand of pragmatic realism. A blend of Lincoln’s idealism and Douglass pragmatism ultimately destroys slavery.

From the ideas presented, I strongly disagree with the author in the brand names he uses to labels these persons. Based on the thesis provided in the book, I firmly believe that Lincoln is more of a radical than a republican, whereas Douglass is the republican to this nonfictional book. However, I do agree that the tactful blend of the two personas helps in completely eradicating slavery and promoting freedom rights to all and sundry.

From the previous paragraphs, it is deduced that the book offers a platform that relays ideas presented by two politically involves personality who stands for the abolition of slavery despite having very few actual connections. The author acts as a mediator between the two persons whilst they explain themselves. He claims that the tact alliance formed by the two despite the impression that Douglass earlier had of Lincoln being an opportunistic brought forth a revolution against the Federal government and hasten the process of ending slavery in America.

Oakes paints a picture of the very different two men who connect and are impelled by the motive of ending slavery from an entity of being human, and one is overly cautious as the other tends to righteous intransigence. The two eventual friendship is ennobling as per Oakes observation. Ironically one who contributes to the connection of the two men is Stephen A. Douglas, who aims at discrediting his rival by connecting him to a hated abolitionist and encouraging fear of race-mixing. By contrast, Lincoln uncommon view on race seem neutral not as Senator Douglas thought. This is noted during the debate of 1858, where Lincoln affirms his opposition to social equality for the black Americans. Oaked, in his argument the manner at which Lincoln comments on race carefully. Whilst avoiding bias and outright claims of whites being superior to other races. He makes his case and stand on race equality open, and there’s no doubt whatsoever that Lincoln recoils from Douglas’s pandering to prejudices of his audience.

The author shows that Douglass fails to notice Lincoln’s hints at in his famous letter to the New York Tribune editor on the 22^nd of August. Lincoln rebukes editor for demanding to free slaves, further advocating that this is to save the union. From Lincoln’s sentiments he slyly prepares the public for his emancipation policy Not only did Douglass miss the hint but also everybody else. Oakes lauds tactical brilliance of Sir Lincoln in casting radical policy I bid of saving the union.

In summary, the two thought slavery is wrong, but the disparity is that Lincoln has other factors put in place like saving the union. He is therefore for slavery but not willing to demolish the already profound union as the Head of the state; meanwhile, Douglass the activist is totally for the eradication of slavery disregarding the union.

The primary issue following the civil war during these medieval periods is partiality of persons as per their race. White, for instance, are considered superior and not capable of doing the ‘dirty work’ while other races are the minority and suffer prejudices by being impeached as slaves.

Works Cited

Oakes, James. The radical and the republican: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the triumph of antislavery politics. WW Norton & Company, 2011.

Brest, Paul. “Further Beyond the Republican Revival: Toward Radical Republicanism.” Yale LJ 97 (1987): 1623.

Matthews, Richard K., and Richard K. Matthews. The radical politics of Thomas Jefferson: A revisionist view. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1984.

Les Benedict, Michael. “Preserving the Constitution: The Conservative Basis of Radical Reconstruction.” The Journal of American History (1974): 65-90.