According to historian Richard Hofstadter, Abraham Lincoln was “the exemplar of the self-made man." Lincoln came from a humble background and had a rapid rise through the political ranks, gaining success and power but not forgetting humanity and moral responsibility. Hofstadter also contends that Lincoln was a very simple man and wished to keep it that way – “It was precisely in his attainments as a common man that Lincoln felt himself to be remarkable, and in this light that he interpreted to the world the significance of his career.” The conflict of Lincoln’s political career, states Hofstadter, is the incompatibility between his religious beliefs and his goal of becoming successful – “the motivating force in the mythology of success is ambition, which is closely akin to the cardinal Christian sin of pride. [H]ow can an earnest man, a public figure living in a time of crisis, gratify his aspirations and yet remain morally whole?” Hofstadter’s biggest criticism about Lincoln is that “he was a follower and not a leader of public opinion.” The clearest example was the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863, which “contained no indictment of slavery, expressly omitted the loyal slave states from its terms [and] did not in fact free any slaves.” Hofstadter also criticizes Lincoln’s “embarrassing contradictions” on the issue of slavery, as in a speech in Chicago Lincoln preached that “all men are created equal” while in Charleston he stated that “I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races”. Hofstadter conveys that Lincoln did not push his true feelings against slavery, and resorted to conservatism because the average sentiments of the time were not completely anti-slavery. This goes along with Hofstadter’s assertion that “as a politician Lincoln was no maverick,” as on issues like the bank, internal improvements