The Social Civil War of America

Have you watched the cable news or Facebook postings lately? If you have, I am sure you have realized that something extraordinary is taking place. Folks are not in the mood for talking, they are not willing to listen, and their mind is made up.

One side accuses the other of all kinds of “crimes and misdemeanors”. There is no room for reconciliation, no space for rationality, and no willingness to give one another the benefit of the doubt.

The language used in the exchange is often crude and profanity-laden. Folks have reached their limit … no more nice guy! It is time to fight!

Reminiscing

About 157 years ago, the civil war began. The North States were against slavery, and the Southern States wanted to preserve it. This was the overarching reason. But, there were also other reasons behind the divide … economics, religious, political, and so forth.

It was a war about ideology and values. The temperature was so hot that folks decided to lay their lives on the line, in some cases, brother against brother. More than half a million Americans died as a result. The Northern States were victorious in imposing their will on the Southern States.

After all those years, some Southern folks still resent the imposition of rules by the North, and lament the loss of a cherished lifestyle, while African Americans celebrate their emancipation and journey toward freedom and increased equality.   

I recall asking a professor in Vladimir, Russia, some fifteen years ago whether the overthrow of communism had benefitted her people. She told me that yes, some people were better off as a result. I inquired if she was one of them. She shook her head. No, she was not. Her salary as a full professor had dwindled to $ 60 per month – hardly an adequate sum to make ends meet. She was not happy about the change.

Fast Forward

Not much has really changed since then. We don’t talk about the North versus the South. We now define the geography in terms of the Coastal States versus the Heartland States. We now don different uniforms: blue or red. We are dressed for full-scale combat. It is not the traditional hand-to-hand combat with rifles, bayonets, and other lethal armory. But it still is a mortal confrontation of historic proportions. The differences are irreconcilable, and the ideology diametrically opposite. There appears to be no middle ground. It is a fight to the end! An exaggeration? Perhaps! You will be the judge of that …

What is at stake?

The clash is between two very different ways of looking at the world. On one side, some folks want the country to edge more and more toward the social democratic model (contemporary), and on the other, some folks cling resolutely to the laisser-faire individualistic model (traditional). The two models are in full combat gear, ready to fight to the last person standing.

The contemporary model wants a world where everyone is taken care by the state, while the traditional model wants to preserve a cherished way of life. Each views the fight as right versus wrong; good versus evil; humane versus cruel.  Contemporaries see the world as the reference point while traditionalists see the nation as the reference point. Contemporaries want everyone treated the same, regardless of their economic and social status while traditionalists abide by the notion that equal access does not mean equal capabilities and results.

Traditionalists want a smaller government. Contemporaries, on the other hand, want a larger role for the government. They advocate income redistribution and do not object to taking from Peter and passing it on to Paul. There is disagreement on the border policy. Traditionalist want secure borders, while contemporaries are OK with open borders. Contemporaries lament the damage to the environment and are willing to reign-in industries and practices they perceive responsible for the decay. Traditionalists do not readily accept that climate change is primarily the result of human activity, and are loath to punish industries and throw people out of work in the name of a quixotic fight against what they consider “dirty” sources of energy.

To cling to power, one group relies on identity politics by slicing and dicing the voting population into segments and catering to each segment's wish list. The other relies on the preservation of the status quo and appeals to its glory days.

Emotions run high. One faction, for example, promotes the notion that you do not need to obey laws with which you do not agree. The rise of Sanctuary Cities to protect illegal aliens facing expulsion following the commission of a crime is a case in point. Furthermore, these cities believe that collaborating with ICE would jeopardize relations between the immigrant community and local enforcement agencies. On the opposite side, folks bemoan the lack of respect for the law, a cornerstone of American civil society.

Traditionalists cling to the constitutional provision protecting their right to bear arms. They see any attempt by contemporaries to outlaw weapons as a conspiracy to disarm them and take away their right to protect themselves.  Contemporaries claim that weapons endanger people’s lives and make neighborhoods unsafe. Traditionalists point out that crime is highest in states with the most restrictions on the purchase of weapons, and that the violence in the inner cities is due to criminals raking violence as they engage in illegal activities.

Battle Cries

The main battle cry from the left is the ominous By Any Means.  It seems to imply either by legal or illegal action – a battle cry that might encourage some deranged person to commit a capital crime. Another, perhaps less dangerous cry, is to question the legitimacy of the opponent, and to engage in a variety of actions ranging from obstruction to confrontation to lawsuits to ballot stuffing to demonstrations, and to even riots. All is rationalized that all is fair in war.

On the right, the response is also virulent. It is to engage in counter demonstrations, hurling of perhaps racists or xenophobic slurs, and in purchasing heavy weapons. Voter suppression tactics are employed to make it more difficult for poor folks to cast their vote. Chants of “go back to your country” and provocative slogans chill the air and prevent rational dialog from occurring. Racists, homophobic, and xenophobic insults can also empower a deranged person to engage in horrible acts of mayhem.

As was the case during the civil war, the battle rages on. Heartland States object to the permissive philosophy of Coastal States. Coastal States, on the other hand, ridicule the belief system of traditionalists as being archaic and anachronistic. Neither is willing, or perhaps capable, of listening to or empathizing with the other. Emotions run very high.

Friends stop talking to one another. Spouses engage in heated debates across the kitchen table. Positions are taken and people are unwilling to let go without a fight. The narratives are so polarizing that it is difficult to make sense of either position. Anger permeates the dialog, and shouting results. Much name calling follows.

Are We Doomed?

The schism between the far right and far left will not go away soon. Emotions are raw and will continue to smolder for decades. The divide will continue to grow and morph as demographics shift in one direction or the other.

They say that people don’t change until one of two things happens: (1) sheer survival is at stake, or (2) dissatisfaction with the status quo rises beyond what can be tolerated. These conditions do not bode well for our future.

What can help us in the near term is the removal of some obstacles. Here are some examples:

·      Streamline our immigration laws and process.

·      Agree on a healthcare law that straddles the middle.

·      Implement a tax code that ensures more equity across economic stations, and makes our business more competitive on the world stage.

·      Enact laws that protect our environment without imposing penalties on business that shave off their competitiveness.

·      Eliminate discriminatory practices in equal pay for equal work.

·      Grow the economy at a good clip (3% or more) so that abundant job opportunities make it possible for more people to achieve their aspirations.

I am sure that the reader can add to this list. We desperately need at minimum a truce. Unchecked, we will continue to lambast one another and keep the house divided to our common regret.