Saturday Snippet: Eerily prescient

 

In my comments about the raid on President Trump earlier this week, I said:

I believe we have never been closer to the outbreak of Civil War 2.0 than we are right now.  May God prevent it, if that’s still possible.

I’ve seen nothing since writing those words to make me change my mind.  Indeed, the constant dribble of excuses, obfuscations and quasi-justifications coming out of Washington D.C. make me even more certain of that.

An author using the name John Ross (which I’m told was a pseudonym, although I don’t know for sure) wrote a novel back in the 1990’s called “Unintended Consequences“.  It dealt with the increasing overreach of the Federal government, particularly concerning firearms and gun rights, and described a citizen’s revolt against them.  It was fiction, of course, but very heavily based on historical fact.  It sold tens of thousands of copies in paper editions, but has been long out of print.

It’s been vilified by the liberal wing of US politics and social culture, and the progressive left has described it as “subversive” and “pro-terrorism”.  It certainly is subversive to a statist culture, and it certainly does describe terrorism – but only as a response to overbearing statism directed against constitutionalists and free citizens.  Having had all too much up-close-and-personal experience with terrorism in my own life, I don’t support its perspective on that:  but I do accept that there are times and places and countries where those subjected to such pressures have no other choice but to hit back in any way still open to them.  That applies to left- and right-wing causes across the board.  Push too hard, and you get push-back.  Push violently, and you get violent push-back.  As Newton’s Third Law of Motion tells us, “To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction”.  He meant that in terms of physics.  It holds true in politics as well.

John Ross died earlier this year.  He had apparently just finished a sequel to ‘Unintended Consequences’;  I’ve seen a working title of ‘Cold Resolve’ mentioned on an Internet forum.  His publisher is said to intend to bring it out within a year.  Meanwhile, in 2009 Mr. Ross lifted copyright protection from his first book, so you can now download a free e-copy of ‘Unintended Consequences’ from several sources, including the Internet Archive in various formats.  If you haven’t yet read it, I highly recommend doing so.  It’s not comfortable or easy to read, but looking at the situation in the United States today, I fear – I greatly fear – that it may be prescient.

To give you a foretaste of the book, here’s the author’s foreword.  It illustrates the reasons he wrote it, and the mindset from which he approached it.  I thought of publishing an actual excerpt from the book, but its length (well over 700 pages) and complexity almost defy one to choose any particular piece of it for isolated reading.  I hope the foreword will suffice to whet your appetite.

Author’s Note—A Warning and Disclaimer

A friend in law enforcement told me that because of this book’s content, I should not let it be published under my own name. Violent events happen in this story, and our country’s current situation is such that these events could indeed come to pass. My friend’s fear was that this book might precipitate such violence. He told me to expect to have drugs planted in my car during routine traffic stops, or have other similar miseries befall me and my family. He advised that if I did have this work published, I should use a pseudonym, employ an intermediary for all publisher contact, and in general prevent myself from being linked to the finished work, to avoid reprisals.

I didn’t do that, not only because of free speech considerations, but because I disagree with my friend’s hypothesis. I believe that if the instigators glimpse what may lie ahead, they will alter their behavior before wholesale violence becomes unavoidable. It is my hope that this book will reduce the likelihood of armed conflict in this country.

History has shown us that government leaders often ignore the fundamental fact that people demand both dignity and freedom. Because of this disregard, these decision-makers then initiate acts that are ultimately self-destructive. To illustrate this point I will remind the reader of the origin of two of modern history’s most destructive events, and of all the warning flags that were frantically waving while the instigators rushed headlong towards the abyss.

In the late 19th and very early 20th centuries, European leaders formed two major alliances. Germany, Austria, and Italy comprised one coalition, and Britain, France, and Russia the other. Belgium remained neutral per an 1839 treaty signed by all of these nations except Italy. The smaller European countries became indirectly involved in the two aforementioned alliances. One such example was Serbia, a country Russia had pledged to aid in the event of war between Serbia and Austria. Despite Russia’s presence, Austria annexed a large part of Serbia, a province called Bosnia, in 1908.

Few people remain emotionally indifferent when their culture and country are taken over by an aggressor, and the Bosnian Serbs were no exception. Many Bosnians despised the government that had chilled their independence. In spite of this obvious fact, the Austrian leaders sent an archduke to the capital of Bosnia to survey the people Austria now ruled. This archduke was resplendent in full military ceremonial dress, festooned with medals and other military decorations, and accompanied by his elegantly-dressed wife. An objective observer might at this point have said, “Stripping motivated people of their dignity and rubbing their noses in it is a very bad idea.”

Archduke Ferdinand and his wife arrived in Sarajevo in an open vehicle, and the only protection either of them had was their chauffeur. This man was expected to drive the car and at the same time protect the Archduke and his wife with only a six-shot revolver he carried in an enclosed holster, and no spare ammunition. Our theoretical observer might here have said, “This is a recipe for disaster.”

Almost as soon as the Archduke and his wife arrived in Sarajevo, a Serbian National tossed a bomb under their car. Its fuse was defective and the bomb did not explode. Here, our observer might have advised, “A miracle happened. Go home. Now. Immediately.”

Despite this obvious wake-up call, the Royal Couple shrugged off the assassination attempt and continued their tour of the Bosnian capital. Later that same day, a second Serbian National shot them with his .32, killing them both. The Austrian leaders blamed the Serbian government for the assassination and demanded a virtual protectorate over Serbia, issuing Serbia a list of demands. Serbia acceded to all but one of Austria’s stipulations. Here, our observer might have said to Austria’s leaders, “Russia has pledged to aid Serbia in any war with you, and Russia has both powerful allies and powerful adversaries. Serbia has agreed to almost everything you demanded. Settle, and avoid a world war.” Instead, Austria shelled Serbia’s capital with artillery fire.

Our observer might here have told Russia’s leaders, “Serbia is not worth starting a world war over,” but Russia honored its commitment to Serbia and mobilized its army, sending troops to the Russian-Austrian border. Since this left Russia vulnerable to attack from Austria’s ally Germany, the Russian Army mobilized against Germany as well.

This forced the German Army to mobilize. Since France was allied with Russia, the Germans feared an attack by France in the west while German troops went east. So Germany decided to invade France immediately, VIA Belgium. Here, our observer might have said, “Saying this is your ‘destiny’ is not going to be good enough, Germany. When you invade a neutral country and rape their women and slaughter their livestock and bum their houses, Britain is not going to just look the other way.”

When the Germans invaded Belgium, Britain honored its commitment to defend Belgian neutrality, and declared war on Germany. Every major country in Europe was now at war.

Four years later, over thirty million people were dead, half of them killed directly in the war itself, and the rest so weakened through shortage of food and medicines that they succumbed to the influenza epidemic. In addition to the lives lost, the war’s monetary cost in 1918 was almost three hundred billion dollars.

No sooner had the war ended than the victors demanded their pound of flesh at the Treaty of Versailles. The treaty required Germany to accept sole responsibility for causing the war. It dictated that German military leaders were to be tried as war criminals. It prohibited the German army from possessing heavy artillery. It abolished the General Staff and the German air force, and prohibited Germany from producing military aircraft. As in 1914, our observer might have said, “Stripping motivated people of their dignity and rubbing their noses in it is a very bad idea.” But if such words were in fact uttered, they fell on deaf ears. A humiliated Germany was ripe for the nationalist message of Adolf Hitler, and in this fertile soil were planted the seeds of the Second World War.

Today in America, honest, successful, talented, productive, motivated people are once again being stripped of their freedom and dignity and having their noses rubbed in it. The conflict has been building for over half a century, and once again warning flags are frantically waving while the instigators rush headlong towards the abyss, and their doom.

It is my hope that these people will stop and reverse their course before they reach the point where such reversal is no longer possible.

John Ross

September 1995

I believe the (fictional) internal conflict that John Ross foresaw for the USA back in 1995 is perilously close to becoming a reality in 2022.  The reasons are more varied and complex than he predicted almost thirty years ago, but the outcome is likely to be very similar.  I hope and pray that doesn’t happen, because I’ve seen civil war and internal conflict in several nations and know how absolutely, genuinely horrific it can be for those caught up in it.  However, those pushing to impose their views and policies on the rest of the country appear blind to that reality.  They simply won’t leave people alone.  They’re imposing their views and insisting that the people of this country “get with the program” – or else.  (To cite just one current example, adding 87,000 people to the IRS is not about more efficient functioning of that agency.  It’s about picking on dissenters and making their lives unbearable, just as the IRS did when it was “weaponized” under the Obama administration.  Expect the same thing today as then, only on steroids.)

I hope John Ross’s vision of what might happen in the USA may never come to pass . . . but I fear that may be a pipe dream.  Read his novel for yourself.  It seems eerily prescient in many ways.

Peter