“He who molds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions.”
Did you say Abraham Lincoln??
Hey, you’re right– what tipped you off? 😊
The review was written by Harvey Mansfield, a professor of government at Harvard.
The premise of the book: Lincoln chose his words carefully. He wanted to convey the truth, but he also wanted people to take action. Which, in the words of Mr. Mansfield, required “the right amount of truth to inspire the correct action.”
In his famous Gettysburg Address, delivered on November 19, 1863, while the American Civil War was raging, Lincoln refers to “we” throughout:
“… we are engaged in a great civil war…”
“We have come to dedicate a portion of (this) field as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that (the) nation might live.”
“… we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom…”
The outcome of the war still hung in the balance. When Lincoln said we, he was speaking of the North, the Union.
He knew there could be no reconciliation without a military victory. That freeing the slaves would come to naught if the Union lost.
March 4, 1865 (just 41 days before his assassination), the North was closing in on victory: Robert E. Lee would surrender the last major Confederate army to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Courthouse on April 9, 1865.
Lincoln’s focus now shifted from winning the war to reunifying the country (“With malice toward none with
charity for all…”).
Here’s an excerpt from that speech:
not distributed generally over the union but localized in the southern part of it.
These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war.
“To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it.”
Lincoln does something brilliant here: he comes right out and says slavery was the cause of the war, but he doesn’t blame the South unilaterally. He says both sides are to blame: the South for its willingness to destroy the country over slavery, and the North for tolerating slavery even as it opposed it (only being willing to restrict slavery in new territories as the country expanded westward).
He chooses his words carefully. He doesn’t use the terms “South” and North.” Instead, he says slavery was localized in the “southern part,” and that the “government” tolerated slavery and was only willing to restrict its expansion. He keeps the focus on the country as a whole.
Lincoln aimed at what is today called “inclusivity.” He avoided any good guy-bad guy absolutism, and appealed to both sides to help rebuild the country.
Marketers could rethink trying to win certain customers by deliberately ostracizing others. (“Our product is for cool people like you, not losers like them.”)
