The Second American Civil War Is Underway

Modern Conservative ^ | Christopher Cook

[connell]

By Christopher Cook

Friends, conservatives, countrymen,

It's time to recognize a basic fact: We are in a civil war. It is obviously not the civil war of pitched battles and 600,000 dead. It is a low-grade—but omnipresent—political and social conflict, and though it is not an open war, it does involve violence.  

Of course, only one side is fighting it as a war. The left sees every area of society as a battleground, and they will use any and every tactic at their disposal—including violence—to achieve their aims.

This is, of course, nothing new, and before we can talk about recent violence and other criminal events—and the possibility of a dramatic escalation thereof—we have to take a quick look at history.

Using a bird's-eye view of American history, one sees a disturbing trend: The Democrats and the left (once different, now synonymous) have been waging a civil war against Republicans since the end of the last one in 1865.

• Granted, the violence was worse during Reconstruction.

• Granted, it had ebbed and flowed: it tends to calm down a bit when the Democrats/left have power. Thus, from 1932 until 1994, there was less of it.
  
  (Recall that in the 1960s, that violence was not directed at us so much as it was directed at society in general; it's effect was to finalize the conversion of the Democrats from a racist, proto-progressive party into a transnational neoliberal party. On either side of that long transformation, though, there was still a violent ethos.)

• Granted, since 1994 (when the left lost the near-hegemonic control of Congress they'd enjoyed in an almost unbroken streak since 1932), the violence has been sporadic, but it is on the increase.

By 2004, the trend was well-established. Shots were being fired into GOP headquarters. Thugs were breaking into offices and physically assaulting the workers therein. Vandalism was widespread, threats were common, and battery was on the rise.

Looking at this trend required this author to ask a question: Was there an equivalent coming from our side?

I did some research—admittedly cursory at first, and then more thoroughly. I will readily confess that I did not have the time to perform the kind of research that, say, someone like John Lott would perform to get a complete statistical picture in pursuit of a book on the subject (though this is something that Modern Conservative will be doing soon.) Nonetheless, I was unable to find any coherent trend of political violence directed from the right at the left. Plenty the other direction, though, which led to my first exploration of this subject, titled Democrats are more violent. In fact, there's no comparison.

Research continued, and it led to more discoveries. Among them was that this violence was nothing new; it has its roots in Reconstruction and the (first) Civil War.

Indeed, I learned that Democrat anger at the election of Republicans—and their willingness to use physical street violence and destruction of property to express that anger—goes all the way back to the election of Lincoln. The election of the very first Republican president was an occasion for street thuggery on the part of the Democrats, and little appears to have changed.

During Reconstruction, we saw the worst massacres in American history—perpetrated by Democrats against Republicans. Hundreds of Republicans, whites and blacks, were slaughtered by Democrats for the crime of being Republicans. Thus, it was greatly frustrating to hear the Virginia Tech massacre, horrific though it was, described as "the worst massacre in American history." It wasn't even close, and saying it was was either the result of laziness or revisionism—not surprising, given the fact that media, nearly all Democrats, certainly would not want to call attention to their bloodthirsty history.

More research led to shocking realizations about presidential assassinations and attempts, and about just how low some lefty thugs feel compelled to go.

Again, this research is less than 100% comprehensive. Nonetheless, the record is disturbing. The Democrats/left display an ongoing willngness to use violence against Republicans. No appreciable equivalent appears to come from Republicans.

Enter 2008.

Added to all this history is a new phenomenon: The left has a new quasi-messianic figure, around whom a crazed and cultish movement is growing. As a part of this developing cult of personality, several trends have arisen which, when added to the low-grade civil war we are discussing, offer disturbing possibilities for the future. There is even a vibe developing that is chillingly reminiscent of the rise of 20th century fascists like Mussolini and Hitler.

Added to that are other activities and trends that make for the possibility of a grim ride for America—and specifically for those who oppose Barack Obama—in the near future. Quoting from the afore-linked article:

• Barack Obama has terrorist friends (at home and abroad) and communist front groups working on his behalf. 
  
  
• He has allies at every layer of society who are willing to change rules, break laws, and flout procedures in order to bring him to power.
  
  
• He has a media that is working on his behalf every bit as reliably as "Pravda" reported the party line in the USSR.
  
  
• He is using state power to silence his critics.
  
  
• He has requested that his followers "get in the faces" of his detractors, and he is getting his wish.
  
  
• He has a vote fraud operation working on his behalf in states across America. This operation is aided by laws passed by his allies in Congress and supported by his allies in various states.

• And now, Obama Youth groups are being formed.

Recently, Republican rage at this trendline—and at the notion that a candidate who appears to be nothing more than a creation of the radical left is actually ahead in the polls—has boiled over into a few comments at a few McCain-Palin rallies. A few comments. A few times.

Of course, the media has seen this and decided to suggest that a rage-fueled right wing fascism is about to swamp the country. Meanwhile—and without any shame whatsoever—they ignore ACTUAL violence, threats, crime, and intimidation coming from the left. They ignore the fact that while John McCain is trying to decry what little is coming from his supporters, Barack Obama appears to be tacitly encouraging much worse behavior from his.

This situation is being discussed with great intensity right now in the dextrosphere. Rather than attempt to repeat what is already being said—and said brilliantly and with citation and sourcing—we will aggregate some of those discussions here. Read them. Familiarize yourself with what is really going on:

As always, Michelle Malkin is the cream of the crop:
Crush the Obamedia narrative: Look who’s “gripped by insane rage”

Vandals strike York County GOP headquarters

Libs Threaten to Beat & Kill Sarah Palin... Media Silent

"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to . . ."

You may know someone who doesn't think William Ayers matters.

NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE?

Hope, Change and Molotov Cocktails

How’s that reaching out working, John?

James Joyner: “McCain Supporters Angry! Mean! Scary!” Or Did He Mean Obama Supporters?

Obama supporters call Palin a "c*nt." Where is the media?

On the Ownership of Gored Oxen

Memo to Leftist Elitists: Look at Hatred Within

Which party is the party of rage?

Are the Angry GOP Protesters Just More of the Same-- Leftist Tools?

MORE ON THOSE “ANGRY, RACIST GOP MOBS”

Obama Rallies Turn Ugly

And a reminder from 2006 . . .
It's Time to Act

Look at the links above regarding recent trends. Read the analysis and historical information linked earlier. Put it all together with what you are seeing with your own eyes here in 2008. Is it a full-blown, hot war? No. But look at the trends. Look at who does what to whom. Look how it is reported, and look who is tacitly calling for more.

Now . . .

Imagine a scenario where Obama loses a close election. You think violence will end at that point, or increase?

Worse still, imagine a scenario where Obama wins, and the margin of his victory is ACORN's vote fraud. When we go into the street to protest this fraud—and we would—what do you think will happen to us? And who will the media portray as the perpetrators and the victims?

No matter what happens, we're looking at trouble with a capital T.

 

To all decent Americans (especially those in the "middle"):

Please recognize the truth of this. I know that the media, Hollywood, and academia have woven a fog so thick that the truth is barely discernible. But please, try to peer through the mist and see that this is not a two-sided situation. While there is the occasional incident from the right, all evidence is pointing to the idea that the ratio of the left as perpetrators of political violence to the right as perpetrators is 100 to 1. (The same appears to be the case for voter fraud, by the way, but that is another issue.)

Is this what you want in America? A political climate with one side using violence, crime, and threats against the other side? A media that works, shills, and lies for one side rather than just reporting the facts?

 

To the media, who aid and abet everything the left does—who covers for their every criminal, violent, and threatening act, while fibricating™ a reality where Republicans are the culprits:

What, you think they won't come for you eventually?

You think that just because you're on the left and you want the left to have more power, that you won't end up on their target list when that power has sufficiently expanded?

You think it was just an isolated anomaly that the Senate threatened ABC's broadcast license because it was about to air something they didn't like? Think again. Get them more power, and that'll be just the beginning.

 

To the left:

We're on to you. While we have no interest in being like you, we will not sit idly by any more while you use threats, vandalism, and assault and battery as a mode of political "speech."

 . . . while you fire shots into our campaign headquarters.

 . . . while you punch handicapped girls in wheelchairs because you disagree with her parents' politics.

 . . . while you throw molotov cocktails at our homes, cut our brake lines, and threaten our children.  

. . . and while your presidential candidate uses subtle code to endorse a climate where these attacks become a tool in his campaign and his vision for America.

 

To conservatives and Republicans:

Make no mistake, this is a war.

Since they're going to say we're the bad guys whether we fight back or not, we might as well fight back.

Since those who "buy ink by the barrel" have already picked a fight with us—and are waging that fight with extreme prejudice—we might as well fight the media too (are you listening, GOP candidates and elected officials?).

They'll punch you in the nose, huck a molotov cocktail on your lawn, and then call you a racist and a fascist for complaining about it. They'll perpetrate violence upon you and then say you're the violent one. Only one question remains:

Are you going to sit back and take it?

We are not like the left. We are not perfect, but we are not like them. This means that we do not behave like them, even in the face of this unremitting, low-level onslaught. Yes, we have the occasional miscreant, the occasional deviation from decency, and to those among our ranks who perpetrate such acts, we say please, check yourselves before you wreck yourselves. 

But for every one of ours like that, there are 100 or more of theirs. Their acts have tacit official endorsement and gain cover from the media. It's very likely to get worse, and if we don't start responding, it will serve as an invitation for more. Use every tool at your disposal—short of violence (unless your health and safety are directly threatened)—to respond. 

The Founders did not their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honors to create an America that looks like this.

Conservatives, this has to be a call to arms. You didn't start this fight, but by God, you can finish it.

[Jack Black]

Excellent article excpet for the finish. What’s the solution?

Speaking out forcfully? Huh?

We are in the cold-war phase of Civil War II. Organizing is probably worthwhile, but appealing to the conscience of the American public? Not usefeul. A full 50% of our country are suporting this beheavior, either tacitly or specifically.

What’s more, any communication of this appeal will by neccessity be through the same MSM that is a part of the problem.

[She hits a grand slam tonight]

that’s crap
i think texas can still secede & should
hell, we’ve been cerrying u libs for 172 years now supplying you with our beef & oil
do u know texans still buy american trucks & cars, we are not like those in the northeast who support foreign cars/trucks
we already are a different country from the rest of you

[Red Badger]

I am getting there right now. I will fight on, but I am beginning to think the growth of the permanent underclass, the ‘takers’, is getting very close to the majority. That is the tipping point.

Atlas is getting antsy..........

[Leisler]

Why does Bill 'Bomber' Ayers, and Obama, and Liberals reject the true and accurate description of Ayers as a 'Terrorist'? Because they consider themselves soldiers against an fake government. Oddly, the left, which holds that there are no truths, is very certain. How they establish truth, or certainly, when all their different beliefs are so certain, and so augmentative and so vocal, escapes me. Someday, I'm sure if you bring it up to them, the fatal contradictions, they'll have a nice, rural fresh air camp for you, or a short walk to a urban basement, complete with rats and pools of congealed blood and brain splattered and chipped concrete.

Anyways, this is why( to the lefties ) Obama, Ayers, Huey Newton, and a clown cast of thousands are not terrorist, they are the just soldiers against the society.

By the way, since real soldiers are part of the evil machinations of the white man and his Zionist puppet masters, they are not soldiers, but in fact terrorists. Anyone that opposes them, are thus freedom fighters. Anyone that they kill, are victims.

[connell]

Tragicomic. Very similar to the blackmail from the New York Times: “We’ll keep revealing national security secrets until you elect Democrats.”

[MrB]

Yeah, let’s give them power so that they can implement their hate on us. That’s the ticket.

[Osage Orange]

The Feds already owns the majority of the “educational” system........

[ctdonath2]

We are in a civil war.

No, we're not.

Certainly we are in a growing state of social tension, punctuated by occasional thuggery & vandalism from one side in particular, but it's not "war".

We may be well on our way to it. Should BHO lose in less than a month, his supporters may decide that their last chance at lawful & cooperative "change" has passed and that "diplomacy by other means" may be their only path to success in their functional lifetimes. While that may become "war", we're not there yet.

And don't try to compare this to the Cold War. Yes, little more than talk and minor incidents were as far as it got, yet we did call it a "war" - because thermonuclear he11 was ready to be unleashed on a moment's notice and only diplomacy prevented comprehensive pre-emptive assault. Talk up the Left's tendency for violence as you like, they do not have coordinated combat units ready to attack en masse at a moment's notice, held back only by diplomats.

And, to date, the situation in question comes nowhere near the first Civil War:

My greatest concern about the subject at this point is that too many on each side WANT a war, and are egging the other side on to start it. If we were in a war, we'd be trying to END it.

[Jack Black]

Not many mornings I open FR to find an article with my ping list in the title.

[MattinNJ]

It’s right in the Declaration of Independence. Keep going past “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. The Founding Fathers recognized the potential for a Leviathian draped around our neck and said it is our duty to cast it off.

[griswold3]

The end of our civil society came around 1999, when even Reason was replaced with moral relevance and moral equivolence.

[rdb3]

...but I am beginning to think the growth of the permanent underclass, the ‘takers’, is getting very close to the majority. That is the tipping point.

No need to think. They are already there.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Take careful note of who has Obama signs and bumper stickers. They will be the “minders” in your neighborhood and work place.

[JudgemAll]

It’s the old feminist prostitute sex and money premeditation game. They premeditate the strike, they provoke it first and accuse the defending party of premeditating/wanting and intending it all from the get go.

Obama is a homosexual muslim adept at these games of “keep down”.

[Lady Heron]

The violence of the left will be countered with violence from the right. I’m sad to say it but it maybe what is required

It has not as of yet been countered with violence from the right so the next civil war has not started.

The left has not thought this through because when the right becomes violent it will not look like the violence of the left in the least little bit. They will not be using cars to run down politicians....

The left and the MSM has been very, very stupid to take this to this level of anger.

[Leisler]

The left and moderate Republicans have built a huge government. So far it's been a fairly clumsy beast, but in the right hands, and with about 20,000 appointed true believers as a special corps, it could be whipped into an efficient machine against its domestic enemies.

99% of government employees will go along with giving up names, processing legal papers, driving trucks, in the war against evil, raciest, right wing gun nuts and freeko nuts babbling about private property. These kinds of people all hold slave master, non women voting, land raping, Indian killing dead white guys as heroes.

[Dallas59]

If it comes down to it....I can shoot a gun...or...well....I don’t want to be accused of sedition....not yet..

[CapnJack]

Folks, here is one thing that will happen after Osama takes office.

In order to make it “palatable” for the gov’t and the majority of the idiots (ie. citizens) to ban most if not all arms from the public, here is a scenario i envision.

Some time after he takes office there will be an attempt on his life by some hired stooge of the left and Obama, with a gun. Of course Obama will not be in any harm since it will not be a real firearm, but immediately afterwords there will be calls for gun bans across the country and legislation will be passed at a blinding speed before the NRA or GOA can do anything about it. Any repubs left in congress will go along with any gun ban legislation for fear of being painted as racists.

This will be the way left will finally paint all gun owners as “domestic terrorists” and racists and the confiscations will begin slowly with FFL sheets from dealers.

This will be the way Obama will quell any attempt of violence from Americans who will vehemently oppose his Marxist legislation.

Just you wait and see ... I am right on this.

[Natchez Hawk]

Paranoid rants.

[mek1959]

ping