Discussion Questions for Boccardi's Section
For this week’s post, I would like you to think about the concept of father and patriarchy, connecting the role of Abraham Lincoln to that a king. What similarities are there between the two? How can we see nation as a family? What role does religion play in enforcing the position of the patriarch? What is the importance of education? Where does ultimate authority lie?
You can address any or all of these questions in your post. Please remember to answer with specific examples. Also, please bring the readings to section on Thursday.
See you all in class!
As promised, a picture of John Brown with his beard.
posted by Megan Boccardi at 10:24 PM
52 Comments:
I believe that religion played a very key role in enforcing the role of the patriach in the family, especially during the time periods that we are reading about. Based on the christian ideals in the bible, the man was the responsible one and the head of the household, and recieved instruction/ etc most of all from God. The wife subdued to her husband, as a direct order from God, and the children were under the control of both their parents. If a household was based on biblical christianity, most likely they would follow this patriarchal ideology as outlined in the bible. It is apparent how important religion was in a household where the patriarch was in charge.
- Alana Young
The concept of father and patriarchy are very closely related. Patriarchy is commonly associated with men and the power men have over women. However, in this case, patriarchy is more a social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the family (or in the United States). In my opinion, Lincoln was definately the father of America during his time. In comparision, he was the "king" of America. The idea of patriarchy and a king go together. A king is a male who rules over everyone in his kingdom. He creates a social oraganization and everyone considers him the father. Lincoln did so much for this country before and during the civil war such and he was a well respected man. They didn't call him "Father Abraham" for nothing.
In its time of turmoil, Lincoln stepping in to become father of the nation did not work out as planned. Lincoln tried to come in and fix everything while playing with two terribly different extremes. On the one hand, he had to say that he thought slavery was bad for his morals, but to appeal to anyone at all in the North who didnt mind slavery, he had to say that it would not be him to change slavery, but it would happen. The civil war split Lincoln's family, the United States, into the two extreme sides and Lincoln could not satisfy both, so essentially Lincoln sided with his morals, the older child with the logical thinking. He knew this would tear the "family" apart, but still turned and faced the problem, and eventually solved it.
-Michael Gremaud
Since everyone has talked about Lincoln being like a father figure and the nation being like the family he held together then I will talk about importance of education and where ultimate authority lies. In my opinion yes, Lincoln was like the father but he didn't have ultimate authority, the people did. This is why he never came right out and said whether he was for or against slavery, becasue he didn't want anyone to be offended or upset. The people held all control, he just guided them. Which is why education is so important. If the people dont understand their control, how to use it, or what to do with it then its useless. If no one understood the voting process or which candidates were good or bad then the whole process would be useless. Our entire country and way of voting/living rests on the fact that the voters, us, are educated.
-Brianna Beccue
Abraham Lincoln a king? The north at the time would have strongly agreed with this idea. They saw basically everything he said as gold and as "the law of the land". Lincoln most definitely stepped up and tried to do everything he could for our nation. Although, he was not successful in everything he did he did his best. He tried to make our nation like a family. Where everyone was equal and received the same rights as everyone else. And John Brown was not an attractive man at all!
I think that Lincoln can be compared to a king, in the way of father and patriarchy, because the people of the north saw him as our leader and someone they could look up to like that of a father. An example being when Lincoln called for the northerners to volunteer to the federal service, they responded with “wild enthusiasm” Patriarchy is the man figure that runs the family in this instance the United States being ran by Lincoln like kings ruled society. Religion comes into the play of a patriarch, because of the Christian church teaching, stating that the woman is weak and needs the manly father figure there to run the family and control the kids.
I believe the concept of father and patriarchy link the role of Lincoln to that of a king because both accomdated & over saw a divided group of people. While Lincoln dealt with the division of north and south and those for and against slavery, kings typically dealt with the division of people due to class differences. Both had to satisfy and unite the people the best they could in hopes that a war or rebellion would not break out.
I think we can see nation as a family because we rejoice together and fall together. We unify when we know our values and ideals are being challenged and suffer and come together when our country experiences a devastating event (ex. 9/11 and hurricane Katrina). Not to mention, we all share a common leader, the president, who could be seen as the father of the nation.
Ultimate authority lies in the people. Some people think that it lies in the leaders, but without support from the people a leader has nothing. If a group of people don't like a leader it would be a lot easier for them to overthrow the leader than it would be for a leader to change the minds of all the people.
-Ataley Boulicault
During the civil war everyone was looking to someone to emerge as the leader, much like children who look to their father when they are in need. The most obvious person for northerner's to turn to was the president. In this sense I feel like Lincoln got forced into the role of a patriarch. With all eyes focused on him he was forced to try and balance his personal religious and moral beliefs with what he felt would help hold the nation together. In this sense Lincoln shows us that he is not like a king who would simply put his views into action, but is much more democratic and at least attempts to incorporate the views of the people. At this point in History the north seems to portray a family in need with all eyes looking to it's leader. They must all work together and take orders from one place to try and save the country.
I beleive that a nation can be viewed as a family in the way that each and every state is like a child and the U.S. senate, Congress, and the president act as the parents making the rules and decisions to guide the states in the right direction. But durring the mid 1800's the southern states were rebelious in the fact that they didn't wan't to end slavery even though the government though it would be the best thing for our nation's future.
Abraham Lincoln’s role during the feud between the Union and the south is similar to a king’s role because he saw it as his personal responsibility to keep his country together, by any means possible. He was a very strong head of government. Everything that was going to happen in his country was going to happen his way. While the Crittenden Compromise was being debated, he had Congressional Republicans reject it for him. He ordered that Fort Sumter, in the seceded South Carolina, would “hold, occupy, and possess” its southern land. When the South attacked Fort Sumter, he retaliated to the Confederate forces, ending all peace talks.
-Ben Ratliff
By definition, patriarchy is a form of social organization in which the father is the supreme authority in the family, clan, or tribe (www.infoplease.com). We can look at our nation as one big family. The nation is a family, because everyone, north and south, must work together as a whole to enhance the nation’s economy. We also share the same father figure, which is the president. At this time in our readings, Abraham Lincoln, (a.k.a. Father Abraham) is the head male leader of the nation. He is the one who is trying to unite the north and south as one. To answer the question, what role does religion play in enforcing the position of the patriarch, I agree with Alana Young. In the bible it states that the man was responsible for his family and received his orders from God. In the same time period, many people were religious; therefore they referred to the bible for assistance, in which they patriarch was enforced.
I believe the nation can easily be compared to a family. Their is also a sense of pride in ones family, a similar pride should be felt for one's nation. If someone in my family was hurt badly by another person, my initial reaction would be to get justice. This was the reaction of many people after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Many people felt as if it was a direct attack on them. I learned that Abraham Lincoln was a firm believer that the nation should be viewed as a family. At the time he took office he was one of the few people that felt the nation should be viewed as a family. This is why when the south seceded he felt that it wasn't possible because he knew it's not what the forefathers wanted.
A patriarchy is a society controlled by men in which men use their power to their own advantage.Abraham Lincoln used his power to do what he thought was necessary for the country to survive the best it can. A father makes sure the family survives the best they can.He basically at this time did what he thought was necessary so that makes him like a king.The nation or family has to come together to be unified or it is not as strong or well when divided.Men were looked at as a higher level so everyone did what the men said.The ultimate authority lies in whoever you believe it lies in it is your decision to decide, you have the choice.
-Ryan Gartland
Father Abraham was the head of the whole United States just like the father of a family, but I don’t think that he ruled like a king. A king can rule however he wants; Lincoln had to be supported by the people and Congress. While he was president, at least half of the nation hated him and didn’t want him in power. Since the president has to do what the people want, I think that the ultimate authority lies with the people.
-Dan Orf
Patriachy played the part in the fact that a man is to rule the country..to be the "father". In this sense, the contry is very much like a family. A family is ruled often times by the father, who is named head of household. Then under the father are the sons who will inherit his "power" upon his death. The mother tends to the children, and does not have much power much like state governments. The people are to take what is handed to them like a mother giving chores to her children to please the father, without question. This creates an efficent household. The children never knowing anything different never wish to amend their ways, and teach the same principles to their own children. If they were educated about different ways of running a household, then they possibly would change how they in turn would run their own house. If Americans are not educated, then they do not know what they want, nor that they can change it. Even if they wanted to change it, the ultimate power lies mostly in the father, but also in the mother. The mother can help the children with their problem and help them out, but if the mother is unable to help the child, she will point them in the direction of the father for help. Much like the government.
Education was important for many reasons; one because you haveto know things in order to inform others of what is going on. Being educated is being informed. Abraham Lincoln was the educator to his society at the time. The ultimate authority lies with those who are educated, because they persuaded and inform those with less knowledge because of their higher educational status. The ultimate authority lies with those whom people look to for guidance. This figure is also known as a father figure, the person who leads. Abraham Lincoln was this for his time, the outlooks he had and the positions he took showed that he was a leader and should be trusted. Lincoln also showed his leadership and authority by winning the presidential election in 1858. He showed how he cared for the country and how he was going to change. He didn’t just think things, he acted upon his thoughts.
I believe that the Christian church played a very strong role in how the country was governed. The teachings of the Christian church justified the man as being the head of the household, just like the man is the head of the country. So just like men ran their families they also ran the country. In the days where men ran the European countries the Europeans had very strong opinons on established institutions which guieded their whole lifes.
I believe that the concept of patriarchy and father are closely related, patriarchy is a community that uses a father figure to be its leader. Which goes along with the role of a father of a family, they are expected to provide their followers / families with the necessities to survive and do other things. This role fits Abraham Lincoln, due to him having to deal with the North and South. He had to persuade the North that he wasnt the one who would bring slavery down, but it was going to happen eventually. When dealing with the majority of the South, Lincoln had to let the people know that he thought that slavery was wrong and not ethical. The family that Lincoln was in charge of (U.S.) was eventually split in two, due to the civil war. This forced Lincoln to make a decision that was right, even though it wouldnt satisfy all the people. Lincoln played the Father figure role well and helped lead our country in a time of disaster.
- Matt Moorman
whoops just tried to post and I hit the anonymous button and thats me Lori Page I start off with the family thing...sorry
Being predominately a christian country, I believe Abraham Licoln's name was a critcical part to his role as the Patriarch to the nation. In the bible, Abraham is seen as the father of the Hebrew nation, a story very familiar to many people in this time period. By connected so closely to a key "father" figure in the religion of the people, Abraham Lincoln was definately able to attain, a "father role" with many northern citizens at the time of civil war.
Religion plays a very crucial role in enforcing the position of the patriarch. Many religions throughout history have placed men in a higher or more powerful position than women. From the ancient Greeks who had Zeus (a male) as their most powerful god, to Christianity believing in SON of God, men have always been placed in positions of power. With religion being a big part of people's lives, especially during the time period we are looking at, it is no surprise that men were the heads of the household and that a man would end up being viewed as one of the fathers of a nation.
If you read into the civil war a little bit, you find that Lincoln was very concerned with controling the border states. Namely Maryland. If Maryland fell into Confederate control, or seceded from the Union, the United States capitol in D.C. would be surrounded in enemy territory. The fact of the matter is though, that Maryland was largely a slave state, containing a large amount of fertile farmland. When the Maryland State Congress decided to leave the Union, President Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus in Maryland and sent a contingent of troops into Maryland to round up any and all Confederate sympathizers. Anyone known to be in league with the Rebels, was thrown into prison. But it doesnt stop here yet. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger B. Taney looked at what Lincoln did, and decided that it was unconstitutional. Wikipedia says that Lincoln just ignores Taney, but I think Lincoln told Taney to shut his mouth, or he would be thrown in jail, too.
Now if this isn't the prime example of an act of kingship, then I don't know what is.
I believe that in this context fathers and patriarchs are basically the same thing except for the fact that they are on different levels. A father is the patriarch of a household while another patriarch the president is father to an entire nation. Thomas Hobbes talks about a patriarch of a family being the first person to have started a certain family giving him or her the supreme power, and all the other members must answer to them until they die, and someone else inherits that power. This can be applied to Lincoln in that he is viewed as the father of the country in his day but he must also be stern and lead just as much as he is admired.
What role does religion play in enforcing the position of the patriarch?
Religion, in this case Christianity, aids the patriarch. People were not open to new ideas and the idea of the patriarchy is as old as the Bible. The Bible includes one example after another of the patriarch. Since most of the people during this time period were Christians it makes sense that they would follow the ideas in their Holy Text.
Throughout history, the king has been considered a father figure. He is the father of the people, the masses are his children and in theory, he does what’s best for them. In European countries the king has always been closely intertwined with the Church, for a king is ordained to rule by God. The succession passes on from father to son and this blessed royal family rules the people with their divine wisdom and power. It was always considered that this king had a natural right to rule. As Filmer states in Patriarcha, “There is, and always will be continued to the end of the world, a natural right of a supreme father over every multitude…” Just as children born into this world are not allowed the privilege of choosing their father, or parents, the multitudes in Europe were not given a say in their governing body. They were merely children, peasants of the land; what right did they have? This meant that no one had any control over their ruler. They could have dictators who taxed everything, but there was nothing they could do about it, because God had said this man should rule. They had no power, which is why Europe fell into such an extreme class system.
The founding of our country completely went against this deeply engraved principal. The Founding Fathers organized the United States in such a way that a supreme being did not exist. They believed in the equality of the people and defended the statement that Filmer makes, “That God hath given or ordained power is evident by Scripture; but God hath given it to no particular man, because by nature all me are equal.” For the first time in European history, power is placed in the hands of the people. The president has no more authority over the government, than the Senate or the House. Everything must be passed through the three of them.
In theory, this system is genius. It ensures that the country is governed by the people. However, the entire federal government was tested during the civil war. For this reason, Abraham Lincoln is the only president in history considered the father of our country. At a time when the federal government was essentially failing (the south was going to secede from the union) Lincoln was able to take a stand and prevent this from happening. In this time of crisis, he was given many privileges that other presidents didn’t have. He was calling the shots, much as a king would have done in Europe. The very fact that he was not willing to allow the south to secede without a fight is king-like. The south believed that they were exercising their power as American citizens, but Lincoln didn’t want to give them that power; he wanted to do what was best for the multitude, the country as a whole. (“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”) Even though Lincoln takes on the role of a king, he is idealized and becomes America’s father figure, doing what is truly best for his children.
-Kelly Herring
Abraham Lincoln's actions and policies at the outbreak of the Civil War mirrored the sternness and apparent assuredness of the leader of a household, the patriarch; being debated by his subordinates but accepted for their wisdom and insight. It is easy to correlate this side of Lincoln to a king, for at few times in American history has the word of a president been so swiftly enacted, and at few times in American history has ultimate authority lain so firmly in the hand of the president.
I believe the idea of America being looked at like a family originated from the preamble. Lincoln describes that our nation was a fatherland (also expressing ideas of patriarchy) and that it was created by and for the people of America. In Lincoln’s years, with the fighting in the North and South, I can understand how they could be looked at like a family. In most families, some fights do occur but most can be solved. Even though the North and South were fighting, and had their differences, they were bound to get through it. Luckily, Lincoln came into the picture and helped move things right along!
I feel that the two concepts of patriarchy and fatherhood are very closely related. I think that as a president, Abraham Lincoln had the responsibility to watch over and protect the country of the United States, much like a father does with his children. This concept of fatherhood is colesly related to patriarchy as well. Patriarchy is defined as an authoritative figure having the responsibility to watch over, guide, and take responsibility for a group's actions. While he was a very authoritative figure in our nation's history, he was not the deciding factor. I agree with brianna, in that the people are the ultimate deciding factor. If a father only told his kids what to do, when they are thrown out into the real world without daddy there to tell them what to do in every situation, they would be in a whole lot of trouble. Lincoln was smart and he guided the people's decisions...he didnt try to tell them what to do or how to vote on particular issues. In my opinion, he tried to sway them to his views, but all in all, the people of the country decided what would happen and they are the force that drove the North and South over the edge to the Civil War.
When looking at Lincoln during the time of his presidency, many could say that his position was way more important that just being a leader. He was an icon and the “father of our nation” at that time. Lincoln tried to serve as a mediator and leader over everyone, but it did not work. Lincoln’s major problem was that he needed to realize that he could not make everyone happy, and that he has the final say so in federal decisions. In the Crittenden Compromise, Crittenden proposed two parts to his plan and expected Lincoln to approve both. Here, it is apparent that Lincoln’s is trying to please opposing audiences and his decision about the compromise in split. This happens a lot throughout Lincoln’s presidency, and this is how a lot of the amendments were passed, not necessarily intentional. Thought the South had its objections, the North and the South looked for Lincoln’s expertise to resolved most issues or rise conflict. Lincoln’s time of leadership was very important at the time and can be compared to that of a father because he tried to take every aspect into consideration in order to preserve the Union.
Although the authority of our nation lies with the president, the final word is really by the people. After all thats what our forefathers really wanted. There isn't a whole lot of distinction between the two anymore, or for that time period even. As the people were divided so was the president. No one wanted a war, but things progessed to far away from one another that it was the last option. Just because the president is given that authority over the people and the country does not mean that it can't be taken away, or refused. In my eyes thats what almost happened with this war. No one wanted to fight it, but people saw eventually that it needed to take place and a side had to win in order for things to be resolved. So ultimatly, authority doesn't just lie with one person or a group of people, but the whole of America.
I feel that Lincoln acted as a father figure while in charge of the United States. The way households and all walks of life worked were with a father figure in charge, leading the family. His job was to make the decisions, help fix quarrels, and keep the household working smoothly. Lincoln's family, the United States, split on him, causing him to have to do his best to mend the situation with whatever means possible. He called the shots, and when part of the family tried to split, he had to make duel promises in order to sway the members. This promise was based on slavery, and keeping both sides happy. Although this method didn't work, it was a suitable plan. Fighting the Civil War to bring both sides back together was his only option
a father is in charge of his family. when something happens between his ofspring he must resole the conflict, and sometimes the only way to get the point across is with a smack on the but. i believe thats how lincon was acting, as the father of many who suddenly took sides against eachother so he could let his family fall apart or give them a smack on the but.
Religion was a key role in enforcing the patriarch in the family. The bible influenced the way the household was ran. The man (patriarch) was the provider and the one in charge. He was also the educated one. The woman was raised to stay at home and raise the children. The woman also was in charge of cleaning, cooking, laundry, etc. She honored her husband like it says in the Bible. Most of these families went by the way the Bible preached you should live your life. Most people can see how religon played the important role in the families where the patriarch was in charge
Almost every person has said something about President Lincoln being a father to his country. It is said sort of like he could "save the country" from certain destruction; this is crap. I don't care what time period in history or which person is governing America; in a time of trouble no one citizen would say "its ok, the president will save me!" People watch out for themselves.
Secondly, it wasn't Lincoln who was guiding the people towards a decision about slavery, it was the people who were doing the guiding. "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it." Lincoln didn't care either way what the outcome was, as long as the Union was preserved.
-Josh Gambrell
Abraham Lincoln could well be called the father of our nation. When our nation became divided into two during one of our darkest times in history, Lincoln tried his best to become the leader and make this country into one and hoping the people would follow him into the same path. In my opinion, I believe that Lincoln did all he could do. He was the president and had to do what made everyone happy, so if he did abolish slavery, the South would hate him, if he did abolish slavery, the North would hate him. Lincoln did his best and it was more up to the people to solve this conflict. Lincoln just gave them a huge push towards the right direction.
I wolud say that Lincoln was compared to a king because when he was in office he made changes to suit his needs during the war, such as his suspension of habeus corpus and other civil rights. So some compared him to a king because in a monarchy the king can make any decisions he deems necessary in a time of need ( or any other)
Personally, I believe that patriarchy is the expectation that the men take the responsibilty over the welfare of a community and make sure everything runs smoothly. Going by that definition clearly Lincoln could be seen as a patriarch/king.
In my opinion the nation at this time could be compared to a family for a couple reasons. First it was almost as if the north and the south were two brothers arguing, on one hand the north wanted to abolish slavery while the south wanted it to spread it. Lincoln was the "father" of the nation because just like a father of a family, he tried to resolve the conflict while making it fair for both sides. Lincoln didnt want to necessarily abolish slavery but he knew that either the nation had to be all pro-slavery or have no slavery at all.
I think people, especially in the South, thought that Abraham Lincoln stepped in and made himself a king. Which in a way is true by our standards. He suspended habeas corpus and arrested more than 15000 without trial. He also instated firm laws for those resisting military service without resistance from Congress. Lincoln basically did what ever he wanted during the Civil War which is why the South felt this way about him. But in a time of great turmoil, such as the Civil War, I would hope that the appointed leader of the country would stand up and make quick decisions that would help preserve the Union.
If you look closely, there are many similarities between the role of Abraham Lincoln and that of a patriarch/king. For instance, Lincoln took it upon himself to do what he deemed best for the country (much like a father/king does for his family/people). In this case, Lincoln is the father/king and the people of the United States are the family or the people he ruled over.
Some of the acts Lincoln carried out may be perceived today as acts of a king. Lincoln arrested thousands of people without giving them a fair trial, which is in direct violation of habeas corpus. However, it is well known that he suspended habeas corpus during the time of the civil war, which was used to protect against unlawful imprisonment.
As in much, if not all of history, religion plays a key role in how people acted during this time. For example, kings were thought to be close to God, and since many people lived their lives in fear of God’s wrath, they willingly followed the king.
Education of the people as a whole is very important because it protects them from being ruled out of ignorance by someone who is not always doing what is best for them. If the population is unaware of the wrongs being done to them by their ruler, they have no desire to stop him.
I think we can see the nation as an extensive family. Washington being the head of the family. The 50 States being sons and daughters of washington, and the counties being the sons and daughters of their respective states, and cities being sons and daughters of their respective counties. Since we are "One nation under God" then we are in ways like a patriach. God being the ruler of Washington...etc.
I see the nation as an extensive family, with Washington being the head of the family. The 50 states are like the sons and daughters of Washington. Counties resemble the sons and daughters of the states and cities resemble the sons and daughters of the counites. Since we are "One Nation Under God" there is the role of the patriach. Washington answers to god and so on and so forth.
The Patriarch (or King) of a Nation was most commonly interpreted as a man in power. Abraham Lincoln was very similar to a King because of the power he held within the nation he governed. This kind of power may not always be a good thing. As mentioned in lecture today, Lincoln was accused of being a "tyrant king" after suspending the Habeaus Corpus during the Civil War. By using his power to do this, he was defying the constiution and suspending citizen's civil rights!
The excerpt from "Patriarcha" helped to outline the ideas that the nation is a family and touched a bit on the role of religion in enforcing a patriarch. For example, Lincoln is the "Father" of the nation. We can make this conclusion because he is a man in power watching over his children (the citizens of the nation), and helping to care for them and keep them together as a family. (Which would mean keeping the South from seceding the union.)
Though this post may have showed Lincoln as a powerful man controlling his nation, the ultimate authority did not lie with him. The only way Lincoln reached his level of authority was by being elected by the peoples of the nation. The people are the ones who ultimately have the power or authority. If Lincoln would have taken a more radical stance on issues he was faced with, he may never have been elected at all.
Power to the people!
I believe that there are several simalarities between Aberham Lincoln and a king. One of those is that Lincoln took the entire situation into his own hands and decided did what he had to do to keep the union together. Another similarity is that when the south attacked Ft Sumnter and Harpers Ferry, Lincoln did not lay down but yet he acted as a king and retaliated against the south and brought the rebellion under control.
I believe the roles of the father and patriarchy and a king are very similar. "As the father over one family, so the king, as father over many families extends his care to preserve, feed, clothe, instruct and defend the whole commonwealth"(Patriarcha). Just as a father would raise, discipline, and treat their children , a king is seen as a "supreme" father to the people his kingdom. Also, as explained that Adam was "lord" of his children, and even though his children had command over their children he still had full command over all, just as a king. Both give "laws" by their own will. People of the north saw Lincoln as a king. They took and view what he said to heart. He thought of the nation, not divided whether it was all free from slavery or not, which was shown in the House divided speech. I believe religion plays a big role in enforcing the role as a patriarch. The ideas have always been that there was a "king or law", and whoever under must obey, just as a father in a household. "..and this subordination of children is the fountain of all regal authority by the ordination of God himself"(Patriarcha). I feel I do agree with Brianna when she said that the people have total authority. No one person can solely rule a nation, but they can help lead. It is the people who choose and vote for what they want for themselves and for their nation.
The founding fathers used the phrase "Nation as a Family." Because this was an easy way for people to understand the government. The citizens played an crucial, but less important role, than the "patriarchs" (the leaders.) In a family the strongest and smartest male leads the family, the patriarch, it was to be the same in the government. Each individual viewed family life differently, so creating the difference in the government of liberals and conservatives. Religion played a vital role in enforcing the position of the patriarch. The early Americans were very religious, they intensely studied the Bible. The most important components of the Bible are Jesus and God. Both seen to be strong males. If a whole lifetime of religion was led by these men, the government would be led by strong men as well. The church had also put women down to men for centuries. The leaders of the home and government were seen no other was, but to be men. The importance of education was beginning. The government was thinking about it's future; which was held in the young. The New England Primer was written to teach children prayers, but also the letters of the alphabet, and how to read. At this point in time ultimate authority lies with in the strong men of the government; the patriarchs of the "family".
The division of the nation during this time period accounted for basically two different views of Lincoln as a king and "father" of the nation: the North with its view of him as a patriarch, doing what is necessary for the prosperity of his subjects (ex. the suspension of habeas corpus and the extension of martial law), and the South with its view of him as a "tyrant" stealing property and oppressing his people (ex. the Emancipation Proclamation and use of "coercion"). Despite the differences, though, he was still seen as a father and the nation his family. As head of his family, he did not enjoy, or even acknowledge, the fact that his family could be split up, and in response did everything he could to keep it together. If it meant sacraficing a few needs of one "child" then so be it.
The nation can be seen as a family in the fact that unity holds both together. Without unity and trust they can split apart. However, with this unity, it can form almost an unbreakable bond. A family and a nation can both stick together through the tough times and remain strong. The success of both depends on unity through the disasters they face such as how the country banded together during 9-11 or as when families connect after a tragic death.
The ultimate authority lies with the people. They choose their representatives and make their own decisions. Even though the president and the government make the laws, they would not have this power if it wasn’t for the people. In the United States democracy rules and democracy gives people the opportunity to make their own choices as long as they are within the boundaries of the laws they helped create.
I think Lincoln was at times a king, for example the times during the war when he quit using some of the laws like habeus corpus and many other unconstitutional acts. And as for the nation feeling like a family I feel this is true. For instance we are in the middle east at war and some may agree and some disagree but no matter what they think everyone wants them home safe kinda like they were their own. And on the topic of fathers I feel like you have a certain respect like if you were given their land you would continue to farm it and no days this still occurs somewhat when fathers give their kids names like the II, III, and IV. Even though no one makes you cary the family name you still feel obligated.
Patriarchy, broadly defined as the control by men of a disproportionately large amount of power, has reigned over both structured and unstructured societies since the beginning of time. While a patriarch is generally thought of as an elder male presiding over his family, such organizations run parallel to this belief as a king or president ruling his subjects, citizens or nation and God being the ultimate authority of the church. Flashing back from the Civil War era further into history exemplifies just how static the concept of patriarchy has remained throughout time.
However ages old, the basis of Christianity is rooted deeply in a patriarchy similar to the more modern practices of it. The clearest example of this is of the traditional ways of the Roman Catholic Church. In this religion, not only is God the ultimate authority, but the male priest or the “father” of a church is also the ultimate authority over his congregation. All members of the church must look to him, because, as Martin Luther so steadfastly disagreed with, only the priest of a church knows how to best interpret the Bible and God’s word for his people.
The concept of the United States of America, though based on individual rights and freedoms, is essentially a model of patriarchy. When the Europeans first came over to the New World, they brought not only their already patriarchal religions, but their patriarchal past as well. For instance, not three hundred years before their arrival, Europeans suffering from the devastation of the Black Death were known to help their baby daughters die so that they didn’t take all of the food that their superior brothers needed to survive. In the unpredictable world of the early European society, patriarchy in institutions such as the family, church and village remained a constant and gave the people a sense of security.
It is perhaps for these reasons that new Americans were so ready to accept “Father Abraham” as their new guide and source for inspiration in the family that was our young nation. Many Unionists were so eager to accept the patriarchy of his rule because they looked to him as the person who alone would reunite the nation after the Civil War. According to a popular recruiting song for the Union Army called We Are Coming Father Abra’am, citizens really did see Abraham Lincoln as a father. The song, which states, “We are coming, we are coming, our Union to restore; We are coming, Father Abra’am with three hundred thousand more. . . You have called us, and we’re coming, by Richmond’s bloody tide, To lay us down for freedom’s sake, our brother’s bones beside;” shows how the Northern citizens truly adored Abraham Lincoln and were ready to lay their life down before his cause.
Abraham Lincoln was the ultimate patriot of the United States. He was a new father to a nation full of children states who wanted it their way, but he was willing to do anything and everything to keep this family together. In many ways Lincoln tried his best to compromise between the north and the south by letting the people live how they were used to living. At the same time half of the nation still despised him. Although he was the father of this country, I don’t think that he is comparable to a king. A king can rule however he sees fit. Lincoln had the task of keeping the United States afloat while trying to keep his family content.
Abraham Lincoln definitely had a huge impact on the United States. He was a father figure to all that looked up to him and to both races. He wanted peace between the states at all times which I think is what a king wants of his kingdom. A king will protect his land and stand up for his people, which is exactly what Abraham Lincoln fought for on this ground. We can view this nation as a family because at all times we must stick together and fight for what we believe in as a whole.
It was relatively easy for Lincoln to assume the role of "king" during the war. Usually the citizens within a nation who are not as supportive of the president limit his power. However, since the Civil War was an internal struggle, those citizens who did not support Lincoln were his opposition in the war. Thus the Union almost entirely favored Lincoln, strengthening his grip on his "throne".
Also, I think there is a very direct link between nation and family. If you look at culture through the years, clear up until today you will see the reflection of citizen' relations to government upon household members' relations to the head of house. Back in the times when Europe was mainly a patriarch society (where kings ruled firmly), the household was strict. The roles of women and children were controlled the head of house. Today it is all too common to see forms of rebellion against the government, as well as stronger independence among women and children within the American household.
Post a Comment
<< Home