Abraham Lincoln and the Definition of “Liberty:” A Lesson for Our Time

Statue of Lincoln, Lincoln Memorial

In his April 18, 1864 “Address at a Sanitary Fair,” President Abraham Lincoln put his finger on the central difference between conservative and liberal rhetoric. That difference lies how we define “liberty.” Pretty much all Americans believe in liberty, but we don't all mean the same thing. 

The issue in 1864 was whether slave-masters should have the liberty to enslave people and deprive them of their own liberty. That question, as we shall see, resembles controversies that still trouble us today. With his usual lawyerly precision, Lincoln explained the definitional dispute like this:

“The world has never had a good definition of the word liberty, and the American people, just now, are much in want of one. We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the product of his labor; while with others the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men’s labor. Here are two, not only different, but things, called by the same name—liberty. And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatible names—liberty and tyranny.” [italics added] 

Yes, during the American Civil War, the Confederates talked endlessly about liberty, complaining bitterly that Lincoln’s policies threatened their liberty. The only liberty they talked about very much, however, was the liberty to enslave other people and commandeer the products of their labor for themselves. Indeed, in his inaugural address as President of the Confederate States of America, Jefferson Davis concluded:

“It is joyous in the midst of perilous times to look around upon a people united in heart, where one purpose of high resolve animates and actuates the whole; where the sacrifices to be made are not weighed in the balance against honor and right and liberty and equality.” [italics added]

The Confederate Constitution itself began by promising the “blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” [italics added] Yet, in an act of supreme irony, Article IV of the same constitution preserved the institution of slavery. So, remembering Lincoln, we must ask, “whose liberty?”

Lincoln correctly noted that these definitions of "liberty" utterly conflict with one another. The question is, whose liberty, and at what expense? At what point, Lincoln implied, does my right to have liberty conflict with your right to have liberty?

Lincoln illustrated this dilemma perfectly with one of the clever analogies that sprinkle through his lesser-known speeches. With that analogy, he showed that a liberator invariably interferes with the freedom of the oppressor:

“The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep’s throat, for which the sheep thanks the shepherd as a liberator, while the wolf denounces him for the same act as the destroyer of liberty, especially as the sheep was a black one. Plainly the sheep and the wolf are not agreed upon a definition of the word liberty; and precisely the same difference prevails to-day among us human creatures, even in the North, and all professing to love liberty.” [italics added] 

We encounter this issue repeatedly in the 21st century United States of America. Consider the gun rights issue, for example. Taking an uncompromising view of the Second Amendment, many state legislatures have adopted Stand Your Ground laws while authorizing the permitless concealed or open carry of firearms. These laws greatly protect the liberty of gun owners. At the same time, what about the rights of people who gun owners might wrongfully shoot? When people get shot, their own liberty is irretrievably destroyed, is it not?

A recent event illustrates this dilemma perfectly. An Instacart delivery team in conservative Florida was shot at by a homeowner when they accidentally pulled into the wrong driveway. Was the homeowner merely exercising his Second Amendment gun rights? But what about the liberty of the Instacart team to deliver their products without being shot at? Is the liberty of the homeowner to shoot at someone who made an innocent mistake more important than the liberty of law-abiding working people who are trying to scratch out a living? In any case, local law enforcement decided that the homeowner was within his rights and no charges were filed. 

The Second Amendment's Creative Ambiguity

Why Does the Second Amendment's Ambiguous Wording Cause So Much Confusion?

Abraham Lincoln, White Supremacist: The First Lincoln-Douglas Debate

So, delving into the definition of “liberty,” Lincoln pointed out, first, that we must ask: who is entitled to liberty? Second, however, we equally need to ask, what should we do if one person's liberty interferes with another's? When we use one word to describe two different things, we only confuse the issue and claim for ourselves virtues that we may or may not possess. Just as in 1864, the American people are, as Lincoln said, "much in want" of a definition of liberty. In particular, just as in 1864, conservatives love to talk about “liberty” and “freedom,” but they do not mean the same thing by those words that I do.

"Liberty and justice for all!"

_________________

Historical note: Despite its scary name, a “Sanitary Fair” was a fund-raising event to alleviate the suffering of wounded and disabled Union soldiers.

Citizenship note: If you ever have a chance to visit Washington DC, my natal city, a trip to the Lincoln Memorial is an inspiring life event, never to be forgotten. 

Image: National Park Service