Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    College Advising
    Serving Higher Ed
    Chronicle Festival 2025
Sign In
The Review

Lincoln the Political Operator

By John Herron December 6, 2015
Lincoln the Political Operator 1
Wikimedia

American patriots aren’t what they used to be. Thomas Jefferson’s position on slavery was as complicated as it was unfortunate. George Washington, too, was tainted by slavery, but revelations about his unrepentant elitism have done little to enhance his reputation. For all of Benjamin Franklin’s contributions to the republic, he was also flawed. He loved his wife, but had you been his neighbor in Philadelphia he probably would have loved your wife as well. Only Abraham Lincoln remains.

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

Lincoln the Political Operator 1
Wikimedia

American patriots aren’t what they used to be. Thomas Jefferson’s position on slavery was as complicated as it was unfortunate. George Washington, too, was tainted by slavery, but revelations about his unrepentant elitism have done little to enhance his reputation. For all of Benjamin Franklin’s contributions to the republic, he was also flawed. He loved his wife, but had you been his neighbor in Philadelphia he probably would have loved your wife as well. Only Abraham Lincoln remains.

American schoolchildren grow up well versed in the Lincoln mythology of the honest storekeeper walking miles to return a few overcharged pennies, the country lawyer working long hours for humble clients. The entire weight of the Lincoln folklore rests on the singular, if simple, premise that he was a good person. But as Thomas L. Carson, a philosopher at Loyola University Chicago, asks in Lincoln’s Ethics, is any of this true?

REVIEW

Lincoln’s Ethics By Thomas L. Carson

(Cambridge University Press)

Finding an answer is more than an academic exercise. In our modern political environment, in which candidates’ moral codes are as important as their policy positions, exploring the place of ethics in politics, even in a 19th-century context, is crucial. Politicians on both the right and left continue to lay claim to Lincoln and his legacy. Their ideal, however, is no more nuanced than the stick figure portrayed in grade-school pageants.

Carson comes to Lincoln from a more complex, and certainly more interesting, perspective. His Lincoln was never naturally virtuous. Indeed, there was much to criticize about the fierce, even cruel, young candidate who openly mocked his political opponents. His cold demeanor strained his most intimate personal relationships. Most damning, he was steadfast in his defense of white privilege. From this beginning, however, came a gracious statesman and committed abolitionist.

Carson follows this evolution in a two-part work he describes as applied moral philosophy. He opens with an investigation of Lincoln’s long list of potential moral sins. His slow embrace of abolition, support of the Fugitive Slave Law, and interest in resettling American blacks in Africa — led critics to question Lincoln’s ethical foundation. In the book’s second half, Carson turns to Lincoln’s character. He judges the rail-splitter’s admirable qualities — kindness, humor, generosity, and, most notably, mercy — against his personal failings as husband, father, and son. The most important work in this section, if not in the entire book, is Carson’s examination of Lincoln’s views on slavery and race.

The author emerges from this analysis convinced that, if anything, the Lincoln mythology understates his goodness. Against each line of potential criticism, Carson offers a spirited defense. The president’s political style led many Lincoln scholars to label him a pragmatist, but Carson’s Lincoln was a utilitarian. The two philosophies share some common ground, but where pragmatism is concerned with the practical significance of action, utilitarianism is a moral calculus. The moral rightness of any individual action depends on the probable consequences of that action. For Carson, then, some of Lincoln’s most questionable policies — his early concessions to slaveholders, suspension of habeas corpus, limited emancipation of slaves — were morally justifiable because of the eventual positive results of the Civil War.

Many of Lincoln’s decisions had negative consequences, to be sure, but his greatest ethical achievement was his occasional consent to a limited evil to prevent the greater horror of a Confederate victory. It was Lincoln’s utilitarianism, Carson insists, that gave him the tools needed to balance the changing objectives and mounting casualties of the conflict with the competing theories of justified war and the political realities of life in a divided America. To examine his moral world is to expose the murky terrain of war, the demands of political expediency, and the ethical compromises that are seldom anticipated but always required.

In the preface, Carson admits to great admiration for Lincoln. No fault there; Lincoln is as close to a patron saint as this nation can claim. Recent discussions about his sexuality, personal relationships, and mental health have only increased our fascination.

ADVERTISEMENT

Let’s look at this admiration more closely. Much Lincoln scholarship rests on what the historian Sean Wilentz labeled the “two Lincolns” mythology. The legend takes a frontier figure, who reflects the attitudes and prejudices of his day, and sets him in motion on a spiritual journey. A growing sectional crisis prompts him to enter the political arena, where, moved by the dignity of ordinary black Americans, he becomes an abolitionist. His assassination completes the transformation as Lincoln transcends everyday politics on his way to a more virtuous world.

Carson’s ethical Lincoln occupies a special position outside the messy world of traditional politics. But reinterpreting ordinary political operations as idealism not only skews our understanding of history but also distorts our view of workable party politics. Lincoln the legend hovers above the civic realm because he appears as a political man for all seasons. He was a “Black Republican” committed to ending slavery, a representative of oppressed peoples everywhere, and most powerfully, a martyr. His critics used much less flattering labels, of course — bumbler, racist, tyrant. And those descriptions were at times also true, or at least true enough. As Wilentz points out, however, terms not often associated with Lincoln are “politician” and “opportunist.”

Why not? For much of his career in politics, Lincoln was a partisan player for the Whig Party. When the Whigs dissolved, he joined cause with the Republicans but also a loose confederation of pro-Union Democrats. He did so because they shared not his ethics but his understanding of politics. In contemporary parlance, ethics and politics are closely linked, but this was not always so. In his classic work on Lincoln’s statesmanship, the historian David Herbert Donald argued that Lincoln navigated the sectional crisis because he out-politicked his opponents.

Lincoln did not court favor with the press, have many friends on Capitol Hill, or, despite his public pronouncements, have wide appeal among the general public. He succeeded because he was a political operator. He was a realist who knew when, where, and how to spend his political capital, and he proved adept at working the levers of the patronage system to silence political foes and encourage compliant allies. To color Lincoln as a politician seems almost vulgar, but only if we subscribe to the Lincoln mythology.

ADVERTISEMENT

Our myth-making tendencies toward Lincoln have contemporary significance. As America enters another election cycle, we want to hear candidates confirm national greatness while offering a counternarrative to politics as usual. Further, we demand that our politicians hit the stage ready-made. Looking at Lincoln’s ethics challenges both expectations. He didn’t care about the doctrinal purity of his supporters or his detractors. As he searched for a way out of the Civil War, expediency trumped dogma. Today, any evolution in political thought is taken as evidence of weakness. Holding fast to one’s ethical positions, even if creative political gymnastics are required to do so, stands as proof of ideological commitment. Lincoln would surely be puzzled by those priorities.

Just as significant, however, is how we see the process. Utilitarianism gave Lincoln a framework to judge competing moral claims, but the philosophy was his guide, not his method. It was not powerful rhetoric or strong ethics that ended the sectional crisis. It was politics well played.

A version of this article appeared in the December 11, 2015, issue.
We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

More News

WASHINGTON, DISTICT OF COLUMBIA, UNITED STATES - 2025/04/14: A Pro-Palestinian demonstrator holding a sign with Release Mahmud Khalil written on it, stands in front of the ICE building while joining in a protest. Pro-Palestinian demonstrators rally in front of the ICE building, demanding freedom for Mahmoud Khalil and all those targeted for speaking out against genocide in Palestine. Protesters demand an end to U.S. complicity and solidarity with the resistance in Gaza. (Photo by Probal Rashid/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Campus Activism
An Anonymous Group’s List of Purported Critics of Israel Helped Steer a U.S. Crackdown on Student Activists
ManganGMU-0708 B.jpg
Leadership
The Trump Administration Appears to Have Another College President in Its Crosshairs
Joan Wong for The Chronicle
Productivity Measures
A 4/4 Teaching Load Becomes Law at Most of Wisconsin’s Public Universities
Illustration showing a letter from the South Carolina Secretary of State over a photo of the Bob Jones University campus.
Missing Files
Apparent Paperwork Error Threatened Bob Jones U.'s Legal Standing in South Carolina

From The Review

John T. Scopes as he stood before the judges stand and was sentenced, July 2025.
The Review | Essay
100 Years Ago, the Scopes Monkey Trial Discovered Academic Freedom
By John K. Wilson
Vector illustration of a suited man with a pair of scissors for a tie and an American flag button on his lapel.
The Review | Opinion
A Damaging Endowment Tax Crosses the Finish Line
By Phillip Levine
University of Virginia President Jim Ryan keeps his emotions in check during a news conference, Monday, Nov. 14, 2022 in Charlottesville. Va. Authorities say three people have been killed and two others were wounded in a shooting at the University of Virginia and a student is in custody. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)
The Review | Opinion
Jim Ryan’s Resignation Is a Warning
By Robert Zaretsky

Upcoming Events

07-31-Turbulent-Workday_assets v2_Plain.png
Keeping Your Institution Moving Forward in Turbulent Times
Ascendium_Housing_Plain.png
What It Really Takes to Serve Students’ Basic Needs: Housing
Lead With Insight
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin