Posted on 10/13/2003 9:41:44 PM PDT by kattracks
Whatever your politics, you have to be oblivious to reality to deny that America today is torn by ideological divisions as deep as those of the Civil War era. We are, in fact, in the midst of the Second American Civil War.
Of course, one obvious difference between the two is that this Second Civil War is (thus far) non-violent. On the other hand, there is probably more hatred between the opposing sides today than there was during the First Civil War. And I am not talking about extremists. A senior editor of the respected center-left New Republic just wrote an article titled, "The Case for Bush Hatred," an article that could have been written by writers at most major American newspapers, by most Hollywood celebrities, and almost anyone else left of center. And the conservative hatred of former President Bill Clinton was equally deep.
In general, however, the similarities are greater than the differences. Once again the North and the South are at odds (though many individuals on each side identify with the other). And once again, the fate of the nation hangs in the balance. The two sides' values and visions of America are as incompatible as they were in the 1860s.
For those Americans who do not know what side they are on or who are not certain about what the Second American Civil War is being fought over, I offer a list of the most important areas of conflict.
While the views of many, probably even most, Americans do not fall entirely on either side, the two competing camps are quite distinguishable. On one side are those on the Left -- liberals, leftists and Greens -- who tend to agree with one another on almost all major issues. On the other side are those on the Right -- conservatives, rightists and libertarians -- who agree on stopping the Left, but differ with one another more often than those on the Left do.
Here, then, is Part One of the list of the major differences that are tearing America apart:
The Left believes in removing America's Judeo-Christian identity, e.g., removing "under God" from the Pledge, "In God we trust" from the currency, the oath to God and country from the Boy Scouts Pledge, etc. The Right believes that destroying these symbols and this identity is tantamount to destroying America.
The Left regards America as morally inferior to many European societies with their abolition of the death penalty, cradle-to-grave welfare and religion-free life; and it does not believe that there are distinctive American values worth preserving. The Right regards America as the last best hope for humanity and believes that there are distinctive American values -- the unique combination of a religious (Judeo-Christian) society, a secular government, personal liberty and capitalism -- worth fighting and dying for.
The Left believes that impersonal companies, multinational and otherwise, with their insatiable drive for profits, have a profoundly destructive effect on the country. The Right believes that the legal system, particularly trial lawyers, lawsuits and judges who make laws, is the greater threat to American society.
The Left believes multiculturalism should be the ideal for American schools and for government policy. The Right believes that the Americanization of all its citizens is indispensable to the survival of the United States.
The Left believes that the Boy Scouts as currently constituted pose a moral threat to society. The Right believes the Boy Scouts continue to be one of the greatest moral institutions in the country.
The Left believes in equality more than in liberty. The Right believes more in liberty. For example, the Left believes that for the equality's sake, men's clubs must accept women. The Right believes that for liberty's sake, associations must be free to choose their own members.
The Left believes that when schools give out condoms to teenagers, they are promoting safe sex. The Right believes that when schools give out condoms, they are promoting more sex.
The Left believes that poverty, racism and psychopathology cause violent crime. The Right believes a lack of self-control, lack of religious practice and lack of good values are the primary causes of violent crime.
The Left believes that "war is not the answer." The Right believes that war is often the only answer to governmental evil.
Any one of these differences is enough to create an entirely different America. Added together, the differences suggest people who live in different worlds that are on a collision course.
And I have only listed some of the conflicting views.
Next week, in Part Two, I will discuss the other major conflicts making for the Second American Civil War.
©2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
It's not a good comparison. A firefight among whom? I can't change the channel from a gunfight, but it's easy to ignore a politician.
The danger to the partisans is that people will simply ignore them -- which is already much in evidence among the majority of people who have already removed themselves from the political process, and among those who vote, but are cynical.
I think the real outcome will be a split on the left -- hysterical leftists will be cast adrift, and a reasonable facsimile of the old Democrat Party, though probably a bit more conservative, will replace the current party.
Republican moderates will probably move to that party, and the Republicans will probably find themselves once again in the minority.
Decades of the Left's cultural warfare have left us with a approximately a third of the population begging for a socialist savior such as Hillary Clinton, a third of the population too frickin' dumb to tie their shoes (or even care that they don't know how - some one else'll do it for 'em), and the remaining third unalterably opposed to the collectivist party line (endorsed by both mainstream political parties these days. Their legislation and policies speak for themselves). The fault lines within these categories run across race, gender and class - here, the 'long march' through all of our institutions by Gramsci-inspired Left has succeeded admirably.
The principal reason that these divides have become so intractable is that the Left has in Orwellian fashion hijacked and corrupted very language that we have used to frame the our debates.
Consider this: When your opponents lack the price of admission to civilized debate: a respect for reason, belief in objective truth, and a willingness to admit they're wrong when the facts prove it so; when your opponents' goals are to destroy the very foundation of your culture and your society - and to offer nothing in return but the howling nightmare of a society of cannibals and looters; when your opponents seize and indoctrinate your children's' minds in the politics of victimization and the nobility of human servitude and sacrifice - what then? When the institutions of higher learning are occupied by Marxist multiculturalists who despise the very philosophical foundation upon which the architecture of liberty and human dignity can be constructed - what then? Well, we know the answer - as Samuel Huntington has said, "History shows that no country so constituted can long endure as a coherent society."
Outstanding! It's precisely the consequences of of the Left's upending of reason, truth and logic that most everyone refuses to consider. It's the 'elephant in the living room' that no one wants to see, it's the crazy old uncle in the attic that no one talks about. A good portion of America's become a surly sullen drunk soused on the collectivist 'promise' - and it's in dire need of a family intervention.
That's how the South saw it in 1861.
And the cultural war isn't North vs. South, though it's tempting to frame it that way based on history. It's really a combination of urban vs. rural (with the suburbs more or less caught in the middle), and the east/west coastal areas vs. the mass of middle America.
The looming and inevitable firefight between the disaffected, the angry, the ones who see arson and destruction as a legitimate expression of dissent, allied with the illegals, who demand "rights" they have no hope of ever comprehending, and those of us who, unlike you, are less and less inclined to ignore the elephant in the living room, and "go about our lives."
I'm inclined to believe that the more likely result will be a political realignment that disregards strident politics on both sides. I think the politics will be much more respectful of common sense than is currently seen (especially in Democrat-controlled areas), which means that your difficulties with illegal immigrants will probably be dealt with.
Just wait for a REALLY big case of election fraud...
I'm just waiting for 'em to get caught. Are our media watchdogs up to the challenge? Har! Seems our(?) Pubbies aren't. The plot thickens ;^)
Great piece of writing in post #41; wouldn't you agree? BTW, how's the book selling? Hope you sell a million!
FGS
It's normal for there to be a great deal of political hatred and conflict; cooperation and consensus is ABNORMAL in US history.
Really sort of odd in the last 10 years or so that people are suddenly getting their panties in a bunch over any sort of political conflict or disagreement at all.
Very true. The country was quite divided during the 60's and 70's on into the 80's. During the 90's it became clear that those divisions weren't going to tear the country apart. The Cold War ended. Markets had by and large vanquished socialism. And as the sixties generation grew older we became aware that the alternatives in the culture war weren't as stark as people thought in those days.
The "two cultures" of traditionalists and modernists were more mixed. Communities, families, and individuals were rarely all one or all the other. The poles of continuity and change and the tensions between them are found in all of us, and the resolution of such conflicts has to be worked out with intelligence, resourcefulness and resolution, not taken from some ideological recipe.
But we are an affluent society that uses all manner of media and supports all manner of activists. So it was almost inevitable that people would come to obsess about our divisions at a time when they were milder and more modest than they were in the past. Seen from one extreme or the other, it may look like we are on the verge of civil war, but seen from the middle it looks like we are muddling along as usual.
In ordinary times, our political system rewards politicians for appealing across social fault lines, and controversies in various areas -- social and cultural affairs, foreign policy, the economy -- don't all run in the same direction. As disputes in one of these areas become more venomous, those in the other areas are allowed to rest, if not to heal completely.
A democratic political order will always have political conflicts. Today, in contrast to the past, those conflicts are based more on religion, morality and social roles than on economics. There are dangers associated with such conflicts, but conflict won't go away. Our country has survived disagreements in the past and it's not likely to be ruined by them any time soon.
One of the glories of our country has been that we've avoided the "all or nothing" of European politics: either "throne and altar" absolute despotism or revolutionary dictatorship. Our politics have generally been mixed and moderate. We've always had room for faith and freedom, for a bedrock of principle and openness to changing popular sentiments.
It would be a mistake to lose that now and embrace the doctrine of irreconcilable and "irrepressible conflict." Those who do so have generally been losers if not dangers. Those who prevail have been those who were able to make their opinions look reasonable and natural to the broad spectrum of society, not those who wrang everything they could get out of stark polarities and bitter enmities.
Well, I may be off a little, but aren't roughly 40% - 45% on either side essentially yellow dogs; straight party voters? That doesn't leave many in the middle. I think as the parties become more polarized, even this middle will shrink; they will have to choose sides.
But what of the fully half the country doesn't even vote in any given election. I wonder where these people would stand when/if the shooting starts? Go with the likely winner?
I think that, instead, most normal folks will just take themselves out of the fight and go on about living their lives.
The problem I see with that is the liberals/socialists will not allow yer average workin' stiff to go on about his life. They are the ultimate control freaks, and as such will want to tell everyone else how to run their lives. Joe Six Pack will have enough at some point and will push back. Inevitable, IMO.
FGS
You've ruled out political realignment, which I think becomes more likely the farther apart the current parties become. As I said above, I think the split, when it comes, will be among the Democrats.
I would argue that the divions today are in fact the deepest that they've been since the height of the Vietnam War in the late 60s, early 70s. The signs are there if you pay close enough attention; they manifest themselves in things like radical, underground organizations engaging in violent criminal activity (Earth Liberaltion Front, etc). This stuff is going on in increasing levels today, it just isn't getting a whole lot of coverage from the "mainstream press".
It's true that most of us are muddling along in our more or less happy lives, but I wouldn't take that as evidence that everything is fine.
I must have missed it. All I saw was a bunch of hippies and academics who started out protesting a dubious war, then decided protesting, generally, was kinda cool. After all, they were able to get on the tube 24/7 and be somebody. Other than that I disagree with just about everything else you posted :^)
Regards,
FGS
FWIW, I see the Dims skipping gleefully into their utopian paradise while the Pubbies have been drawn(by the media?), kicking and screaming, at a slower pace, in the same direction. I think Pubbies have had enough, and with the apparent awakening of many Americans to the manipulation of the media; the Pubbies are trying to reverse course, or at least maintain position. The shrill cries from the utopian dreamers in the media are, more and more, falling on deaf ears. The Dims/utopians can't stand it. They lost their cheerleaders; not from lack of trying, but because people have started paying more attention to the game.
Ahem, in any case, I think you're right about the Dims. As the party more voters especially are seeing as the future of socialism in America, a rift is likely.
FGS
This is why they've become more and more extreme over time. They've pretty much exhausted the store of "reasonable sympathy," and have had to start yelling in favor of things that are obviously wrong -- partial birth abortions being one good example.
They lost their cheerleaders; not from lack of trying, but because people have started paying more attention to the game.
True, in part. Plus which, I think a lot of folks simply tune out 90% of the "news" reported by the mainstream media, because they don't believe it.
And also, I think there are a lot of folks who -- even if they don't like/agree with the Republicans -- are becoming more and more unnerved by the bizarre agendas of the left. I find that most people are still possessed of a fair amount of common sense -- and it tends to become more obvious the more they ignore the media.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.