BOOK REVIEW: THE RADICAL AND THE REPUBLICAN BY JAMES OAKES
The Radical and the Republican is one of the books that I would love to read again and again. This book discussed the type of politics as well as the attitudes of the American Presidents Abraham Lincoln and the Black American Reformer Frederick Douglas about the issue of freeing the slaves and slavery itself. Accordingly, the author of the book, James Oakes, went into a great detail of discussing the reasons as well as the politics on the two aforementioned personalities' stand on slavery. He also focused on the difference between the perspectives of the two personalities. Oakes noted that he had extremely different perspective, yet he can view both minds on a positive light. He further explained that the two personalities hated slavery but they had different reasons for having such views. Oakes then focused on how this difference in perspectives resulted in the changes in their relationship as they worked towards the slaves' emancipation. The book only shows how two great men with different views could work on different route to accomplish the same goal – it shows that there is more than one way to solve a certain problem, in this case, slavery.
Oakes noted in the said book that what connect these two great men is their experiences – they both came from poor families; hence, they understood the pain of living in poverty and persecution. Due to their poverty, they had the great part of their education through self-teaching. Oakes explains, “in a generation of great orators they were two of the greatest; in a century of the self-made man both came to see their own lives as exemplary” (90). It is also because of their poverty that they had strong views and appreciation for work ethics. They understood that man should reap the fruits of his hard labour – labourers need to be protected and appreciated. Man cannot leave sitting idly upon the backs of other people – the real Americans are those whose success do not rely on this own hands and not from those of the slaves. Using this perspective on labour and success, they eventually hated slavery and worked to abolish it.
Frederick Douglas was born a slave; hence, it is not hard to imagine why he hated slavery. Abraham Lincoln, on the other hand, was a fairly religious person and believed deeply on the teachings of his pastor, who repeatedly emphasized during their church services that slavery is wrong. Hatred towards slavery is the end of similarities between the two as they came from different family backgrounds.
Oakes emphasized that one of the great differences between the two is that Douglas believed in ending of slavery with the additional idea that the blacks and the whites are equal – meaning he saw slavery as a form of racism. Lincoln, on the other hand, believed that slavery is bad because he thought that everyone must live in accordance to works of his own hands – he did not believe in the equality of race. He saw the white race to be superior that the black race, but did not push slavery. Despite this difference in perspective, Oakes explains that, “" Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass were saying the same thing, preaching the same antislavery politics. Liberty or Slavery must become law of the land” (5). Another difference between the two is with regards to colonization. Douglas did not agree with colonization, while Lincoln believed in its cause. The latter thought that the newly born nation – the United States – needs to colonize in order to secure its power and lead its colonies to progress. The colonies would have emancipated slaves of other races. The people of other races would live as second class citizens on the said colonies, to which Douglas strongly objects stating that the Blacks are Americans and they would rise and fall with rest of other Americans in the continental America not on colonies.
Oakes also emphasized the difference in the personalities between the two. Accordingly, Douglas was described as outspoken and reactive, while Lincoln was described as “blustery” and an “oversized” personality in the 1800s Romantics (90). Lincoln was also described as being “calculating” in all his actions, even in the expression of his ideas. He would always wait for the “right time” (92). It is with this regards that Douglas expresses his disdain to Lincoln being sarcastic that Lincoln waited for too long. Douglas was noted for saying that, “Lincoln had often admitted that his concern to prevent a popular backlash sometimes caused him to move slowly” (216). Douglas even considered Lincoln stand against slavery as something of necessity and necessarily out of a good heart. This view became explicit when Lincoln did not exert any effort to give the emancipated slaves from Louisiana the right to vote. Voting is something they disagreed with, therefore. Douglas believed that since the Blacks have fought for America then they must have a voice in its government – they must have the right to vote. He further explained that without this right, the emancipated slaves will never be truly free as they will always be held in bounds of their white masters.
Oakes further explained in the book, that is was the war that really united the two personalities in their goal of emancipating the Black Americans. Accordingly, without the full participation of the Black races the Union's war against their adversary would be a futile effort. Lincoln would have to concede with Douglas' perspective in order to convince the rest of the Black race to push forward the Union's stand. Despite the difference between the two, Douglas and Lincoln, became friends.
What is remarkable about this book is that James Oakes treated and clearly showed the “human” side of the two personalities. It has a high level of honesty into it. It did not bother discussing the weaknesses of the two personalities. The book showcases reality, in other words. In a world were almost everything is crafted towards perfection, where skin blemishes, and other imperfections are constantly being hidden to look good, Oakes had the courage to write a book that portrays reality.
Bibliography
Okaes, James. The Radical and the Republican. W.W. Norton & Company, New
York, 2007.
