I’m sure many readers have seen the alarm expressed by commentators on both sides of the political divide about our present political situation. Both the far left and the far right of US politics appear to have been seized by extremists, who are promoting views that can only lead to a headlong clash with each other. Those in the center, wishing to keep America united and work out our differences in a rational, reasonable, civilized manner, are increasingly being either radicalized or marginalized.
What’s worse, many of the screeds offered by both sides are so partisan, so biased, that even when they refer to facts, they are no longer accurate. To cite just one example, Dana Millbank wrote an article in the Washington Post late last month that is mendacious in its duplicity. You can read the whole thing at the link. I’d merely like to look at a few citations from it.
- “The Affordable Care Act [Obamacare] … had the support of a plurality of the public” – like hell it did! Investigators have consistently confirmed that Obamacare never had the support of the majority of Americans.
- “Republicans … lost the popular vote in six of the last seven presidential elections. Electoral college models show Republicans could plausibly continue to win the White House without popular majorities.” – So what? America is not a “pure” democracy. It’s a constitutional republic. There is a difference. The winner of any US presidential election must do so in terms of those constitutional requirements. Winning the “popular vote” is not one of them.
- “The Supreme Court’s conservative majority … gave the presidency to George W. Bush.” – No, it didn’t. It merely called a halt to endless attempts to recount the votes in Florida, again and again, until such time as the result there could be reversed. Subsequent investigations by news organizations proved that Florida voters did, indeed, elect George W. Bush to the presidency. That is no longer in dispute.
- “Control of the judiciary, and the resulting protection of minority rule, has been the prize for Republicans” – This is nonsense! No party “controls” the judiciary, as both sides have found out to their cost when judges they nominated and/or approved have failed to support their partisan positions in their rulings. Furthermore, the judiciary does not protect minority rule. To suggest that it does is to say that the US judiciary is not impartial. What about all the rulings overturning aspects of the current Administration’s policies? Are those judges “supporting minority rule”? President Trump’s anger about them suggests precisely the opposite.
Nevertheless, there is at least some truth in Mr. Millbank’s conclusion:
The backlash is coming … It will explode, God willing, at the ballot box and not in the streets.
You can only ignore the will of the people for so long and get away with it.
I agree with him that the backlash is coming – but it’s not only from aggrieved liberals or progressives. Elements on the right have seen the falsehoods endemic in Mr. Millbank’s article, and know that they’re lies. They’re responding to left-wing violence from groups such as Antifa, Black Lives Matter and others by gearing up for their own counter-violence. The “will of the people” as cited by Mr. Millbank is the will of the left; and the will of the right is contrary to it. If that clash of interests can’t be settled at the ballot box, it will very likely be settled in the streets, as we saw most recently in Portland last weekend.
Rasmussen Reports recently reported:
31% of Likely U.S. Voters say it’s likely that the United States will experience a second civil war sometime in the next five years, with 11% who say it’s Very Likely. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 59% consider a second civil war unlikely, but that includes only 29% who say it’s Not At All Likely.
Democrats (37%) are more fearful than Republicans (32%) and voters not affiliated with either major party (26%) that a second civil war is at hand.
But 59% of all voters are concerned that those opposed to President Trump’s policies will resort to violence, with 33% who are Very Concerned.
There’s more at the link.
After the Paris terror attacks in November 2015, I wrote:
When one simply can’t tell whether or not an individual Muslim is also a terrorist fundamentalist, the only safety lies in treating all of them as if they presented that danger. That’s what the French people are going to do now. That’s what ordinary people all across Europe are going to do now, irrespective of whatever their politicians tell them. Their politicians are protected in secure premises by armed guards. They aren’t. Their survival is of more immediate concern; so they’re doing to do whatever they have to do to improve the odds in their favor. If that means ostracizing Muslims, ghettoizing them, even using preemptive violence against them to force them off the streets . . . they’re going to do it.
I’ve written before about how blaming all Muslims for the actions of a few is disingenuous and inexcusable. I still believe that . . . but events have overtaken rationality. People are going to start relating to ‘Muslims’ rather than to ‘human beings’, just as the extremists label all non-Muslims as ‘kaffirs’ or ‘kufars’ – unbelievers – rather than as human beings. For the average man in a European street, a Muslim will no longer be a ‘person’. He’s simply a Muslim, a label, a ‘thing’. He’s no longer French, or American, or British, no matter what his passport says. He’s an ‘other’. He’s ‘one of them’ . . . and because of that, he’s no longer ‘one of us’. He’s automatically defined – no, let’s rather say (because it’s easier to blame him) that he’s defined himself – as a potential threat, merely by the religion he espouses. He may have been born into it, and raised in a family and society and culture so saturated with it as to make it literally impossible, inconceivable, for him to be anything else . . . but that doesn’t matter. It’s his choice to be Muslim, therefore he must take the consequences. We’re going to treat him with the same suspicion and exaggerated caution that we would a live, possibly armed hand-grenade. He’s asked for it, so we’re going to give it to him.
That’s the bitter fruit that extremism always produces. It’s done so throughout history. There are innumerable examples of how enemies have become ‘things’. It’s Crusaders versus Saracens, Cavaliers versus Roundheads, Yankees versus Rebels, doughboys versus Krauts . . . us versus them, for varying values of ‘us’ and ‘them’.
. . .
And in the end, the bodies lying in the ruins, and the blood dripping onto our streets, and the weeping of those who’ve lost loved ones . . . they’ll all be the same. History is full of them. When it comes to the crunch, there are no labels that can disguise human anguish. People will suffer in every land, in every community, in every faith . . . and they’ll turn to what they believe in to make sense of their suffering . . . and most of them will raise up the next generation to hate those whom they identify as the cause of their suffering . . . and the cycle will go on, for ever and ever, until the world ends.
Again, more at the link.
If you replace the word “Muslims” in the above excerpt with your epithet of choice – “reactionaries”, “racists”, “Nazis”, “fascists”, “liberals”, “progressives”, “left-wing”, “radicals”, whatever – the effect, and the result, are precisely the same. As soon as we start seeing, and relating to, those of different political persuasions as “the other”, rather than our fellow citizens with whom we have a greater or lesser disagreement, then we’re setting the stage for violence and potential revolution. In our history, that has already led to one catastrophic conflagration, from 1861-1865. I hope and pray we don’t have another one . . . but it’s not impossible.
May calmer heads prevail; but, in case they don’t, keep your eyes open for that sort of trouble in your community, and be prepared to defend your loved ones against it if necessary, because mob violence does not discriminate between the guilty and the innocent.
Peter
great article. can not argue the conclusions.
to be remembered though, you can not vote the bastards out if you are dead.
unless you are a democrat….
You're right. And it will be UGLY, and potentially long running… Dammit, I've already DONE one round of 'interesting times', I don't want another!
Most everything I see looks to be propaganda these days, one side or the other.
I never hear about or notice us middle of the road folks anymore.
These are bad times….
A plurality is not a majority, it is merely the largest minority vote getter in a poll. So Milbank was right about that.
Then again, Michael Vlahoss says the Cold Civil War is the Red States vs. A few hundred thousand and their millions of retainers and dependents in the Blue States. He had some interesting conversations with John Bachelor. (John Bachelor Show 10 p.m. EST most Fridays)
There was a great talk by Daniel Greenfield, AKA "Sultan Knish" back in January positing that we're already in a civil war. It has been widely quoted – and even misattributed to some professor named Jack Minzey.
(edit – found a video)
His point is that civil wars don't start with guns, they end with guns. Civil wars start when one side no longer agrees that elections matter and that debate is worthwhile. This goes exactly with the points you quote from Dana Millbank that George W Bush was "selected not elected" and that Trump "didn't win the popular vote". Do you think for nanosecond that if the situation were reversed and Hillary had won the electoral vote while Trump won the popular vote that anyone would talking about it?
If one side only thinks an election is valid when their candidate wins, or that anything is acceptable when their guy is in power (Obama's famous "I have a pen and a phone") but the exact same thing is a crime against the republic when the other guys are in charge, the logical conclusion is blood in the streets.
Tell Richard Scalise and the republican baseball team it's not real.
After he was elected, and before he took office, President Trump clearly stated he, "didn't want to hurt the Clintons".
Had the Clintons, Obama, and the Democrats along with the media and "Deep State" accepted the lawful wishes of the citizens exercising their franchise, we wouldn't have all this turmoil.
President Trump swore an oath, he is proving faithful to his oath, and is the first President in my lifetime to keep the majority of his campaign promises.
I too swore an oath, many years ago, and I will be faithful to that oath.
I refer to those who are neither to the right or the left as the "mindless middle." Sadly, they are the ones who determine elections. They're why we had Obama for eight years and why we'll have Trump for eight. Lord only knows who will be next.
My old anthropology teacher pointed out that one of the universal traits of all primitive people is that they are real people and every one else is not really human. I think this may be one of the problems with dealing with the current migrants. Unlike other waves of migration in this country whose people chose assimilation many of these migrants especially the Muslims want to form enclaves of their culture or force America to change to Sharia law. When you read in the papers about Christians not being able to celebrate Christmas in school but the Muslim children allowed to pray , I can see why some people are annoyed. Add to this all the extreme socialist politics I can see where there is danger of violent confrontation.
When I first saw this video, I could not help but think these play-pretend
Walter Mitty "revolutionaries" are about to learn a very important lesson.
The moment they realize the men on the other side of the lines are combat
veterans and bikers with biceps larger than their thighs, they are going
to have a collective Emilly Latella moment. Live free ride hard is not
a trite slogan, it is a way of life!
This "army" of David Hoggs are going to get their asses stomped like a Narc
at a biker rally. I have no fears whatsoever that we are headed to a
second civil war. Right after a midterm election where the Democrats
were beaten like a bongo drum, I experienced a startling revelation.
I was reading a comprehensive survey of voters in a news magazine. The
only two I remember were on the issues of war and abortion; Unlimited
abortion at taxpayers expense 6-1/2 percent. Opposition to war under
any circumstances 6-1/2 percent.
There were 3 or 4 more issues that reflected the same 6-1/2 percent.
These were multi-choice questions and there were about 3-4 more issues
with the exact same 6-1/2 percent. As a former leftie in my Yoot, I
realized that the radical left lacks the numbers to win their long
sought after communist revolution.
If these idiots attempt a revolution on a Friday night, it will be over
in time for most American's to return to work by Monday morning! The
fear of a leftist civil war is irrational because there would be a rifle
behind every blade of grass!
The Left has been working hard for 90 years to destroy this great nation. Now that the Right has finally started to awaken to the existential threat, calls of 'peace' ring out.
No.
Pot, kettle. Goose, gander. This great nation is worth fighting to preserve and protect.
Millbank's clock is about 19 months slow; that backlash at the polls happened in November of 2016.
That's why, praise a merciful heaven, that Shrillary is always going to be Not My President.
The problem with using moslems as an example is that their prophet was an extremist and his literal writings are followed explicitly.
Nothing has been changed in translation.
They are told directly and clearly that the goal of islam is world domination and elimination of every non believer.
Violence and lying are explicitly defined as tools to use in that effort.
Why would you believe a devout moslem if he says he does not want to force you to convert?
Mohammed gave them clear instructions to lie to us until they outnumber us and can convert us by force.
It is a political death cult, not a religion.
A few weeks ago, Jack Minzey sent what was to be the final chapter in the long line of books and treatises which he had written. Professionally, Jack was head of the Department of Education at Eastern Michigan University as well as a prolific author of numerous books, most of which were on the topic of Education and the Government role therein. His interest in Conservative Politics was exceeded only by his intellectual ability.
This is the last of his works. He passed away on April 8, 2018.
Civil War
How do civil wars happen?
Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can't settle the question through elections because they don't even agree that elections are how you decide who's in charge. That's the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.
The Mueller investigation is about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election. We all know that. But it's not the first time they've done this. The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn't really win. The Supreme Court gave him the election. There's a pattern here.
What do sure odds of the Democrats rejecting the next Republican president really mean? It means they don't accept the results of any election that they don't win. It means they don't believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections.
That's a civil war.
There's no shooting. At least not unless you count the attempt to kill a bunch of Republicans at a charity baseball game practice. But the Democrats have rejected our system of government.
This isn't dissent. It's not disagreement. You can hate the other party. You can think they're the worst thing that ever happened to the country. But then you work harder to win the next election. When you consistently reject the results of elections that you don't win, what you want is a dictatorship.
Your very own dictatorship.
(cont)
The only legitimate exercise of power in this country, according to Democrats, is its own. Whenever Republicans exercise power, it's inherently illegitimate. The Democrats lost Congress. They lost the White House. So what did they do? They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats. Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can't scratch his own back without his say so, that's the civil war.
Our system of government is based on the constitution, but that's not the system that runs this country. The Democrat's system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.
If the Democrats are in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance. His power is unlimited. He's a dictator.
But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can't do anything. He isn't even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented. A Democrat in the White House has 'discretion' to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy. A Republican doesn't even have the 'discretion' to reverse him. That's how the game is played That's how our country is run. Sad but true, although the left hasn't yet won that particular fight.
When a Democrat is in the White House, states aren't even allowed to enforce immigration law. But when a Republican is in the White House, states can create their own immigration laws. Under Obama, a state wasn't allowed to go to the bathroom without asking permission. But under Trump, Jerry Brown can go around saying that California is an independent republic and sign treaties with other countries.
The Constitution has something to say about that.
Whether it's Federal or State, Executive, Legislative or Judiciary, the left moves power around to run the country. If it controls an institution, then that institution is suddenly the supreme power in the land. This is what I call a moving dictatorship.
Donald Trump has caused the Shadow Government to come out of hiding: Professional government is a guild. Like medieval guilds. You can't serve in if you're not a member. If you haven't been indoctrinated into its arcane rituals. If you aren't in the club. And Trump isn't in the club. He brought in a bunch of people who aren't in the club with him.
Now we're seeing what the pros do when amateurs try to walk in on them. They spy on them, they investigate them and they send them to jail. They use the tools of power to bring them down.
That's not a free country.
It's not a free country when FBI agents who support Hillary take out an 'insurance policy' against Trump winning the election. It's not a free country when Obama officials engage in massive unmasking of the opposition. It's not a free country when the media responds to the other guy winning by trying to ban the conservative media that supported him from social media. It's not a free country when all of the above collude together to overturn an election because the guy who wasn't supposed to win did.
Have no doubt, we're in a civil war between conservative volunteer government and a leftist Democrat professional government.