Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 08/28/2026 9:37:26 AM PDT by Heartlander
The assassination of Charlie Kirk was a devastating blow to conservatives, but almost as shocking was the response from parts of the left. Major figures issued the expected denunciations, yet plenty of ordinary progressives celebrated the violent death of a father and husband or mocked his memory online. Conservatives learned that some of their neighbors were perfectly willing to cheer the murder of a political opponent.
Since then, trade wars, foreign wars, and the usual daily controversies have offered convenient distractions from a much darker realization: Something about American politics has changed. The old assumption that nearly everyone still accepts the same basic rules can no longer be taken for granted.
Denial is a common response when a problem is too large to contemplate. The possibility that a substantial number of Americans now see political violence as acceptable has implications the conservative movement would rather avoid. Yet reminders keep appearing.
Recent videos again showed people mocking Kirk’s death, including a drag performance and comments from streamer and democratic socialist Hasan Piker. It is much easier to argue about tactics, personalities, or the latest outrage than to ask what kind of political order produces people willing to celebrate an assassination.
Piker’s case is especially egregious because he met Kirk and debated him in person. He has built a career around revolutionary rhetoric and violent political fantasies, including lurid comments about landlords and capitalists, and “soak[ing] in the blood” of his capitalist enemies. That he remains a major online personality illustrates the asymmetry conservatives have noticed for years: Rhetoric that would end a career on the right is often treated as edgy entertainment when it comes from the left.
America has received an almost embarrassing number of blessings from God Almighty, which makes it easy to forget that our political experience is historically unusual. The United States occupies a vast, resource-rich territory protected by oceans and has fought remarkably few wars on its own soil. We have not faced sustained internal danger in generations. That security has encouraged an ahistorical view of politics as a permanently orderly process.
Modern Americans expect Mr. Smith to go to Washington, make a speech, win an argument, and then shake hands with the opposition. Every election is called the most important of our lives, but the ritual remains the same because the underlying disputes are assumed to be manageable. If the argument is over marginal tax rates, retirement ages, or entitlement formulas, that expectation makes sense. Those are technocratic disagreements inside a shared political order.
But some disputes are not like that. Consider the fight over the euphemistic “gender affirming care” for minors. One side believes the state must protect children from genital mutilation. The other believes the state has a right to seize children if parents refuse to go along. There is no clever tax-credit compromise that resolves the underlying question. One side’s victory necessarily means the other side’s destruction. That is what existential politics looks like.
This is why Carl Schmitt has re-entered conversations on the right. Certain conservatives often reduce his friend-enemy distinction to a license for treating anyone who disagrees with you as a mortal foe. That isn’t the useful part of Schmitt. His point is that politics becomes political in the fullest sense when groups understand that a conflict touches the survival of their way of life. His framework is gaining salience because Americans increasingly encounter disputes that feel exactly like that.
The left supports policies many conservatives believe would permanently transform the country: open borders, abortion on demand, racial preferences in hiring and admissions, aggressive secularization, and aggressive state intervention in disputes between parents and children over gender. Some activists openly discuss prosecuting former Trump officials, restructuring the Supreme Court, and changing the composition of the Senate through statehood. Antifa militants have attacked federal facilities and officers. None of this requires believing every Democrat is a revolutionary. It requires noticing that the revolutionary faction has real power.
Progressives understand something conservatives still resist: America increasingly contains rival moral communities sharing the same geographic space.
Mass immigration, ideological sorting, institutional polarization, and the radicalization of political factions have eroded the common assumptions that once made bipartisan compromise possible. Our deepest disagreements are no longer simply about the size of government or the proper tariff. They concern rival definitions of family, justice, citizenship, equality, religion, and even human nature.
This is not without precedent. Shays’ Rebellion was put down by force. The Civil War settled secession through force on a catastrophic scale. Federal troops enforced school integration in Little Rock when state resistance defied constitutional authority. These cases are radically different in scale and moral content, but they share one uncomfortable fact: Political orders eventually enforce some answers and reject others. Two incompatible legal regimes cannot govern the same question in the same place forever.
We are far closer to Little Rock than to Gettysburg, and conservatives should resist fantasies of civil war. But they should also stop pretending every conflict can be reduced to a policy seminar. About a decade ago, people on the right began asking whether conservatives “know what time it is.” Most still do not. People like Piker serve as reminders that the other side may understand the stakes more clearly.
The left, in its current radical form, cannot be treated as just another coalition with which conservatives alternate power while everything important remains intact. Elections will decide who controls institutions capable of reshaping the country for generations. Someone will win these fights. Someone will lose. The victor will alter the political order.
Conservatives did not choose existential politics by themselves, and they cannot end it simply by wishing for a return to normal. Ignoring that reality only guarantees that their children inherit a country they no longer recognize. Conservatives are not required to become nihilists, but they are required to understand the stakes before deciding how to fight. The hour is already late.
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
I am afraid nothing short of an actual beat-down will dissuade the left now.
The Muslims have convinced the idiot democrat socialists that their way is better. ANYTHING to get rid of Trump. They don’t know why, but they know they must. Ignore them at your own risk.
This is the truth, whether we like it or not.
Politics is their religion.
What we are closer to is Tulsas. I don't want it, I'm not cheering for it, but the more the left and the Muslims keep sticking their fingers in our eyes, the more likely Tulsas are going to happen, and once they start it will be hell to stop. (also known as the Bubba effect)
a beat down is not sufficient.
Elimination of one side is the name of the game at this point.
Only peaceful action is split the country.
Two halves of this country will scream “the other side cheated in the last election” “They are going to keep power next election” and other antics.
One side always claims its Armageddon when the likes of Biden or Trump are in.
The hysteria is mind boggling at this point.
Say what you will, but this is my honest observation.
Imagine crowds of Conservatives dressed in black, with masks to prevent identification, going out and causing civil unrest and arson — not burning down whole cities, but just targeting Democrat headquarters and mosques. We could be the new ANTIFA.
But we all know the government would stomp on us good and hard in two seconds.
**Only peaceful action is split the country.**
they did that in India when Pakistan was formed. What’s left is an India with the 3rd highest muslim population in the world. Their problems didn’t go away.
We need our own Pinochet.
L
This brinkmanship of both sides is exacerbated by the wholly-owned Leftist media.
conservatives should resist fantasies of civil war
Unless they start it.
conservatives should resist fantasies of civil war
Unless they start it.
conservatives should resist fantasies of civil war
Unless they start it.
Existential threat yet dont fantasize about secession and civil war.
Well alrighty then.
Unless they start it.
Unless they finish it.
After what’s happened over the last 10 years, and particularly the last 6 years, anybody who votes democrat is a verifiable anti-American POS.
Racist, ignorant, lazy, treasonous and smug, wrong about everything, cheating at every possible opportunity, and completely convinced, without evidence, of their moral superiority. Every single one of them is guilty of “… aiding and abetting …” America’s enemies, and they’re still doing it right now.
I blame previous generations of Republicans for not standing firm and fighting for America’s best interests back in the day.
The entire hippy generation should have been either re-educated or deported to the nearest communist country since that’s what they’ve been trying to bring to America.
I think a couple of years of living under communist rule would have cured them of their delusions of paradise long, long ago.
Why hasn’t any democrat from the Biden administration been charged with treason for facilitating a foreign invasion?
That’s what the ‘Open Borders’ policy was, and there’s no way to spin it otherwise.
Everyone involved should be behind bars right now, yet nobody does anything, they don’t even talk about that any more.
Hardly
“Only peaceful action is split the country.”
Split the country and they win the battle but the war will continue. They and their allies will continue their effort to eliminate what’s on our side of the split.
Not if we shore up the current holes in the USC.
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.