“Civil War Has Already Begun In America”

Authored by Glenn Harlan Reynolds, op-ed via USA Today,

Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Kirstjen Nielsen experiences at restaurants suggest a ‘soft’ civil war is well underway. It will get worse unless we learn to stop hating each other.

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/636654482153788122-AFP-AFP-1672YA-100751253.JPG?itok=BuZo6pVr

(Photo: Brendan Smialowski, AFP/Getty Images)

The other day, author Tom Ricks asked whether we’re heading toward a civil war. “I don’t believe we’re to Kansas of the 1850s yet. But we seem to be lurching … in that direction,” he wrote.

Ricks was commenting on “What Democratic rage would look like,” a Bloomberg opinion column that quotes political scientist Thomas Schaller as saying, “I think we’re at the beginning of a soft civil war. … I don’t know if the country gets out of it whole.”

That sounds pretty serious. The column by Francis Wilkinson presents a catalog of things Democrats are mad about — from the existence of the electoral college to Trump’s “propaganda apparatus” — and predicts that if Democrats lose the midterm elections, there will be hell to pay. (And Republicans, you know, could make a similar list of their own complaints.)

“I don’t know exactly what that would look like,” Wilkinson writes. “But liberals have a great deal of cultural, academic and economic heft, stretching from Hollywood to Harvard. Just this week, some Hollywood powerhouses flirted with leveraging their cloutagainst the Trumpist Fox News. There are endless variations on such a power play. If Democrats opt to use their power more aggressively — breaking rules – Schaller’s soft civil war hardly seems unlikely.”

The civil war is already starting

Well, actually this sort of thing seems to be well underway. Hollywood has basically turned its products, and its award shows, into showcases for “the resistance.” Americans are already sorting themselves into communities that are predominantly red or blue. And in heavily blue Washington, D.C., Trump staffers find that a lot of people don’t want to date them because of their politics.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was even kicked out of the Red Hen restaurant in Lexington, Virginia, because the owner and employees disliked her politics. This seems like a small thing, but it would have been largely unthinkable a generation ago.

And, in a somewhat less “soft” manifestation, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen was bullied out of a restaurant by an angry anti-Trump mob, and a similar mob also showed up outside of her home.

Will it get worse? Probably. To have a civil war, soft or otherwise, takes two sides. But as pseudonymous tweeter Thomas H. Crown notes, it’s childishly easy in these days to identify people in mobs, and then to dispatch similar mobs to their homes and workplaces. Eventually, he notes, it becomes “protesters all the way down, and if we haven’t yet figured out that can lead to political violence, we’re dumb.”

Apparently, some of us are dumb or else want violence. As Crown warns, “We carefully erected civil peace to avoid this sort of devolution-to-a-mob. It is a great civilizational achievement and it is intensely fragile.” Yes, it is indeed fragile, and many people will miss it when it’s entirely gone.

Political contempt is the problem

Marriage counselors say that when a couple view one another with contempt, it’s a top indicator that the relationship is likely to fail. Americans, who used to know how to disagree with one another without being mutually contemptuous, seem to be forgetting this. And the news media, which promote shrieking outrage in pursuit of ratings and page views, are making the problem worse.

What would make things better? It would be nice if people felt social ties that transcend politics. Americans’ lives used to involve a lot more intermediating institutions — churches, fraternal organizations, neighborhoods — that crossed political lines. Those have shrunk and decayed, and in fact, for many people politics seems to have become a substitute for religion or fraternal organizations. If you find your identity in your politics, you’re not going to identify with people who don’t share them.

The rules of bourgeois civility also helped keep things in check, but of course those rules have been shredded for years. We may come to miss them.

America had one disastrous civil war, and those who fought it did a surprisingly good job of coming together afterward, realizing how awful it was to have a political divide that set brother against brother. Let us hope that we will not have to learn that lesson again in a similar fashion.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
16 Comments
Bilco
Bilco
June 26, 2018 12:56 pm

Unfortunately the time for the two sides to find any peaceful resolution to what separates them has passed. The liberals want what they want,and are not going to stop. The normal’s are waking up and becoming sick of it. It just may come down to. One side has to go. Will America end up a Marxist/ Socialist paradise. Or will we go back to what was once the greatest gift God ever gave humanity. Either peacefully or violently one side is ultimately going to prevail.

MarshRabbit
MarshRabbit
  Bilco
June 26, 2018 10:24 pm

“the time for the two sides”

interesting that you see only two sides.

pyrrhus
pyrrhus
June 26, 2018 1:10 pm

Liberals are driven by their emotions, and are generally incapable of logical thought or foreseeing the consequences of their actions….Conservatives want to be left alone, liberals want to control everyone….So peace is impossible at this point, and if there is war, the number of liberals will have to be drastically reduced to regain a sane country.

Mark
Mark
  pyrrhus
June 26, 2018 3:01 pm

pyrrhus

+1,000

That’s it with an economy of words…in a nutshell…a paragraph…the truth.

Ouirphuqd
Ouirphuqd
  pyrrhus
June 26, 2018 6:27 pm

Unfortunately I agree with you, they need to be reduced. My relatives have informed me of my status on their social justice scale. They live urban, I live rural. I forgive, I do not forget. I will assess in real time! Cities have always spooked me!

Anonymous
Anonymous
June 26, 2018 1:22 pm

We passed the point of no return back under Obama.

This is just the continuing development of it.

This is not going to end well for the US, not well at all.

DR. BARB WHITE
DR. BARB WHITE
June 26, 2018 2:04 pm

MY BROTHER TELLS ME THAT THE RED NECKS SAY ITS GOING TO BE AN ALL OUT CIVIL WAR
THEY ARE GOING TO SEND A BUNCH BACK TO THE PLANTATION WHERE THEY CAME FROM
AND SEND THE MUSLIMS TO VISIT ALLAH, JUST HOPE THERE ARE ENOUGH GOATS AROUND SO EACH WILL GET THEIR 72 VIRGINS, GANG BANGGER’S WILL DISAPPEAR. MOST OF THE LATINO’S WILL GET TO STAY TO FILL THE LOST WORKERS SPACE, AND MONUMENTS OF DEMOCRATS WILL BE LIKE CONFEDERATE MONUMENTS A THING OF THE PAST.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  DR. BARB WHITE
June 26, 2018 4:20 pm

Is your brother a PhD also?
Why all caps?

MrLiberty
MrLiberty
June 26, 2018 2:22 pm

Everyone wants to pretend that up until now it has been “peaceful coexistence.” Nothing could be further from the truth. If, in any interaction with another, you choose to work things out through voluntary cooperation and to come to a voluntary agreement, then you have chosen the peaceful and moral path. If you wish to fund a project and you get voluntarily-derived capital, operate a business through purely voluntary exchange of monies for services or products, or engage in transactions with others that are purely voluntary, and without force or coercion, then you have chosen the peaceful and moral path.

But if you demand that the government steal from everyone to fund your child’s school, fund your local park, fund the police, the fire department, etc. then you are engaging in or supporting the violence and coercive actions of the state in opposition to peaceful coexistence. If you demand that a business not be allowed to operate without a permit, a professional not be allowed to work without a license, a business not be allowed to serve or not serve whomever THEY wish, then you are supporting and condoning the violence and immorality of the coercive state apparatus and its violence. If you demand that a property owner pay taxes based on the value of the property they own, force them to accept and pay for services they may not want or may wish to purchase elsewhere, refuse to accept the alternative option of a free, open, and competitive marketplace that provides needed services, or demand that a portion of everyone’s income be sent to the government to fund what YOU think is a needed function of government, then you too have rejected peaceful coexistence.

Everyone wants to justify this or that based on the “Constitution” or “because it won’t get done otherwise,” or whatever, but the reality is that everything in our society is done by people, and the only difference between regular folks and those that operate under the banner of government, is that regular folks aren’t legally allowed to stick a gun in your face and take your money, write the rules, or throw you in jail or kill you if you don’t cooperate.

We can’t truly have peace in our society until EVERYONE who shows up to the discussion table with the guns and violence of government on their side, relinquishes this violence and is willing to look to voluntary and peaceful alternatives.

At the root of ALL of our societal conflict is the fact that one side or multiple sides, possess the power, violence, and guns to LEGALLY (meaning via government) destroy those who simply wish to peacefully go about their lives with their freedoms and liberties intact. Until that power is gone (along with the mentality that freely supports it), we will never know peace.

MarshRabbit
MarshRabbit
June 26, 2018 2:52 pm

Umberto Eco: “Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration. That is why one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups….To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. This is the origin of nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside…Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.”.

Ur-Fascism

Hardscrabble Farmer
Hardscrabble Farmer
  MarshRabbit
June 26, 2018 4:08 pm

Umberto Ecco engages in solipsistic poopy-talk

Bot
Bot
June 26, 2018 10:17 pm

Couldn’t have explained it any better, Mr. Liberty.
Well done. I just don’t understand how Collectivists just don’t get it.

Mike Clare
Mike Clare
June 26, 2018 10:25 pm

Oh no, liberals won’t get what they want! Cue gnashing of collective teeth…frankly, better libtards should start this “civil war”, so we can be done with them. The world will be better for it. And yes, I will help.

ZombieDawg
ZombieDawg
June 29, 2018 7:27 am

[imgcomment image[/img]