Steven Spielberg's Lincoln (2012): A Review From a Fan of the Historic Lincoln

Patriotic feeling showered over me after leaving a showing of Lincoln at a local AMC theater last night. I was also filled with a heavy sorrow over the ghastly sacrifices our forefathers made to make this country great. Exiting the theater in my presence was a group of teenagers muttering amongst themselves, "That was a lame movie." Looking at them, my sorrow grew heavier as I realized those ghastly sacrifices made by our forefathers were made so that shallow creatures such as these may live for the great and noble purpose of killing zombies in computer games, impregnating young ladies before abandoning the responsibility following their actions, and generally taking up space in a number of other - useless - ways. Perhaps those numbskulls remembered watching Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter a year ago, mistook it for the real Abe Lincoln, and were expecting something similar from Spielberg. If you're looking for action and suspense, see the latest Bond movie instead. But if you're looking for a film to learn something from, do not miss Lincoln.


Exactly what do you learn from a film like this? As an avid reader of history, I can tell you with one hundred percent sincerity that I believe Spielberg represents Lincoln and the people of his times accurately and responsibly. Taking the battle for passage of the Thirteenth Amendment (which forever abolished the practice of slavery in the United States) as the focal point of the story's events, Spielberg slays the mythology that Lincoln freed slaves only to pack his armies with more soldiers to wage the Civil War. If that were true, Lincoln's efforts to free African Americans would have ended with the Emancipation Proclamation (January 1863), which was a temporary, wartime measure intended to undermine the capacity of the Confederacy to continue the war. On the contrary, Lincoln placed his own re-election and a speedy end of the war in jeopardy, to further the work of the Emancipation Proclamation by pushing for a constitutional amendment that would forever extinguish slavery.

Setting history straight is not the only virtue of this film. Superb, Oscar-worthy performances abound throughout Lincoln.  Daniel Day-Lewis looks exactly the way Lincoln is portrayed in photographs and behaves exactly the way Lincoln is described by contemporaries. The historic Lincoln's homey mannerisms and sometimes off-color jokes are on vibrant display in Lewis' rendering. The fiery, anguished, emotion-drenched Mary Todd Lincoln could not be more effectively brought to life by anyone other than by the magnificent Sally Field. The rugged, idealistic, Congressional abolitionist Thaddeus Stevens nearly steals the show in Tommy Lee Jones' masterful hands.

The sometimes tedious political discourse in the film is navigable if you understand a few concepts. In the context of the Civil War period, Democrats wanted to leave slavery alone and just end the war with or without victory. "Conservative Republicans" did not like slavery, but were unenthusiastic about freeing slaves as a necessary means of winning the war. "Radical Republicans" (like Thaddeus Stevens) were crusaders for social justice who cared more about destroying slavery and righting the social wrongs of American culture than about winning the war or preserving the Union. If anything, they wanted to wage the war to forge a new Union based on equality for all. Lincoln's success was based in no small measure on the ability to bring these two hostile wings of his party together to advance the twin goals of social justice and preservation of the Union. To achieve bipartisan support for his goals, Lincoln offered government jobs to lame-duck Democrats who had been turned out of office during the November 1864 election but were still voting in Congress until their term expired. Did this amount to bribery? Not in the way bribery was punishable in those days.

In sum, Spielberg's Lincoln is a badly needed correction to the mythology perpetrated by those scholars (Thomas Di Lorenzo, for one) who believe Lincoln was driven by cynical, political calculations rather than by moral values centered on social justice. It is also a refreshing example of what great acting looks and sounds like in an age when fast action and cutting-edge special affects drown-out characters and relationships in typical Hollywood films. Finally, Lincoln showcases the qualities of leadership most-needed and most sorely-lacking in our current political culture namely, the willingness to reach across the aisle, look for common ground, and accomplish something for the greater good of our society. In the current battle over the "fiscal cliff" House Speaker John Boehner and President Barack Obama ought to take notes from Steven Spielberg's Lincoln.

Jason A.

Price-Gouging: Is It Really Wrong?

Capitalism is a continuing education that steam-rolls everything I was taught by my liberal professors in college.  When gas prices rise, everyone screams for price controls. Sometimes state governments cave into the pressure and implement price controls. When they do, they make the problem worse them ever. The price stays exactly where the cap is placed (because demand is unchanged), the resource runs out (empty gas stations), and people suffer from lack of accessibility (think Soviet Union).

The laws of supply and demand are remarkably predictable. They are also incredibly resilient against government meddling. It's like trying to change a stone pillar by punching it with your fist. The stone pillar stays the same, your fist is the only thing changed. And the change is not what you wanted (think Barack Obama).

This goes against the grain of what we emotionally feel is right and wrong. But what we emotionally feel is right and wrong is not the same thing as what is factually right and wrong. Price-gouging is a case in point. Doesn't it just seem wrong for the price of gas to suddenly go up 300% in the middle of a storm, or perhaps in the anticipation of an approaching storm? How about when hotel prices go up 200% in the aftermath, or in the approach of, a hurricane? It seems sneaky, doesn't it? It seems greedy, doesn't it? Well, let's consider the options.

Scenario #1: The price of a hotel room at the Holiday Inn in Marietta, Georgia gets capped at the normal rate of (hypothetically) $100 per night. Suddenly, there is an influx of Floridians in the area, looking for shelter to escape the latest hurricane bearing down on their state. A car pulls-up with a family of four. The Dad or Mom asks the price of a room. At $100 for one night, they take two rooms, one for them, the other for the kids. More cars come. Within hours, all rooms are booked and everyone else who comes gets turned away. Shelter is no longer available for those who need it. The price has been capped. Shortage is the consequence.

Scenario #2: The price of a hotel room at the Holiday Inn in Marietta, Georgia rises to $300 per night in the anticipation of the approaching hurricane in Florida. The first car carrying the family of four pulls-up. The Mom or Dad asks the price of a room for one night. The clerk tells them it will be $300. They scratch their heads and decide they will take only one room instead of two. The family of four crowds into one room for one night. Four hours later, another car bearing a family of four pulls-up. The first question they ask the clerk is, "Do you have any available rooms?" With an ear-to-ear grin, the clerk responds, "We sure do. It will be $300 for one night." The car parks in the lot. The ignition turns off.

In the fall of 2008, there was a massive gasoline shortage in the metro-Atlanta area. There had been a hurricane in the Gulf, which disrupted some of the pipelines metro-Atlanta draws from. The price of regular gas rose dramatically to (if my memory serves me correctly) around $4.25 per gallon. (It seemed like a lot at the time). Unbeknownst to me, a Georgia law capping the price of gas kicked-in. Soon, rumors spread of shortage. Lines of cars piled up at gas stations and in the roads leading to them. Every station in Marietta was dry. My wife, Katie, and I would leave the house at midnight sometimes, when we learned of a shipment that had just arrived at one station or another. Literally, we left the house at midnight or even at 2 a.m. to put gas in our cars.

Now, let us imagine that the price of gas had been allowed to naturally rise to about $9 or $10 per gallon. Had that been the case, you could be sure people wouldn't have run to the gas station, all at once, with all four cars and extra gas cans, and filled everything up! It is also, a reasonable possibility that the stations may not have run out of gas, even with the disrupted pipelines from the Gulf. 

Prices rise and fall with the relationship between supply and demand. With an approaching hurricane, demand suddenly goes through the roof. To prevent supply from running out, prices must rise to match demand. Once demand is satisfied, prices fall just as quickly. These laws are cold, but they have a desirable logic of their own. We should keep these things in mind before we scream for price controls to combat price-gouging.

Jason A.