Posted on 12/14/2020 5:37:04 AM PST by Kaslin
Is America “trending towards secession”? Conservative radio legend Rush Limbaugh got into some hot water last week for daring to attempt to answer that question. Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you probably heard about it. From Media Matters to Geraldo Rivera to every left-of-center blue-check Twitter account, critics were basically accusing the legendary broadcaster of treason, even though he never explicitly endorsed the concept himself.
It’s a far cry from only four years ago, of course, when the “Calexit” movement made news as a novel concept put forth by lovable, if a bit rambunctious, leftists frustrated at the election of Donald Trump. Obviously, when a liberal wants to secede, it’s perhaps a bit misguided but understandable, but when a conservative even broaches the topic, it’s a treasonous reintroduction of slavery, or something.
The blatant media double-standard notwithstanding, what should we make of Limbaugh’s observations?
“I actually think that we’re trending toward secession,” Limbaugh said Wednesday, responding to a question from a listener about conservatives being able to win national elections after Trump. “I see more and more people asking what in the world do we have in common with the people who live in, say, New York? What is there that makes us believe that there is enough of us there to even have a chance at winning New York, especially if you’re talking about votes?”
“There cannot be a peaceful coexistence of two completely different theories of life, theories of government, theories of how we manage our affairs,” he continued. “We can’t be in this dire of a conflict without something giving somewhere along the way. I know that there’s a sizable and growing sentiment for people who believe that that is where we’re headed whether we want to or not.”
Limbaugh later in that particular monologue and also the next day made it abundantly clear that his preference is to “find a way to unite and win.” It’s certainly my preference too, but then again our generations and those before it grew up in an America where Manifest Destiny, the concept that the United States’ growth from the Atlantic to the Pacific was justified and inevitable, was praised in history class as a noble thing. I remember studying each acquisition, from the Louisiana Purchase to the Mexican Cession to the purchase of Alaska, as amazing, hard-fought, and even miraculous wins for the Good Guys. The left now views them as something else entirely, but I don’t care. The thought of ceding any of this land, won fair and square over many decades with the blood, sweat, and tears of our ancestors, to a bunch of godless communists hellbent on destroying everything they touch is anathema to every fiber of my being.
Even so, Limbaugh is obviously correct about the ongoing cultural divide. Many have argued that this country has been experiencing a bloodless “civil war” for years, one between producers and takers, between freedom-lovers and those who would invoke tyranny to accomplish their evil ends. The difference could not be more evidenced by the divide between the 75 million who voted for Trump versus the (allegedly) 80 million-plus who voted for Biden. On every major issue, from policing to tax policy to immigration to judicial activism to the Second Amendment to abortion to whether or not there are 16 genders, the difference is night and day. “How can these people be so ignorant?” each side asks while looking at the other side like they’ve got three eyes and two noses.
Several years ago, Dr. John Gottman proved unequivocally that one behavior had an astoundingly predictive effect on whether or not a marriage would last. That behavior is “contempt.”
“Contempt is fueled by long-simmering negative thoughts about one’s partner, and it arises in the form of an attack on someone’s sense of self,” Gottman writes. “Inevitably, contempt leads to more conflict—particularly dangerous and destructive forms of conflict—rather than to reconciliation. It’s virtually impossible to resolve a problem when your partner is getting the message that you’re disgusted with them and that you’re condescending and acting as their superior.”
Sound familiar? If "contempt" isn’t right smack dab in the middle of the ongoing political and cultural wars, I don’t know what is. All of which leaves two key questions: 1.) If America is already split apart ideologically, will geography eventually follow? And 2.) If a geographical split happens at some point, is it possible to do so peacefully?
In a section of his book titled, “American Secession: The Looming Threat of a National Breakup,” George Mason University School of Law professor F.H. Buckley argues that such a split could occur, constitutionally even, with no bloodshed at all.
“Instead of the Civil War, think of the ‘velvet divorce’ of the Czechs and Slovaks in 1993,” Buckley writes. “Distinct in religion, language and culture, they had been combined in a country created in 1918 after the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The Slovaks were conservative and agricultural while the Czechs liked avant-garde plays and rock music. Czechoslovakia suffered through Nazi and Soviet rule, and then split apart into Slovakia and the Czech Republic upon the fall of communism. The two new countries, both Western and liberal, solved questions about their border, the division of assets and assumption of public debt through negotiation, and they’ve since maintained the friendliest of relations.”
Buckley argues that since the stakes “have been lowered” significantly since the 1860s when secession meant the literal continued enslavement of millions, such a measure indeed could be a “reasonable way to resolve unbridgeable partisan differences.”
Expect more talk of secession coming from the right, especially if the radical socialists win those two Georgia Senate seats and go on to pack the courts, eliminate the filibuster, and jam through every leftist wet dream from defunding the police to the Green New Deal. Already, the chairman of the Texas Republican Party is on board, and a Twitter poll (real "science," I know) from conservative writer Matt Walsh with 52,000 respondents showed over 60 percent agreeing to “support a plan to break up the United States so that the Left and Right can live in separate countries.”
Now that they’ve won electorally, of course, the left stands firmly on the side of unity, at least for the time being. Such talk is “treason” now, don’t you know, not because they ever had any respect for America’s borders and the freedom residing therein, but because they need producers, taxpayers, serfs to work their newfound socialist utopia. You see, their vision of America is more Panem than City on a Hill, and it takes a whole lot of proletarians to keep the elites – of which they fully intend to be a part – fat, comfortable, and happy in their walled-off enclaves. No, it’s not like pre-1865 chattel slavery, but it’s servitude nonetheless, and it’s something the left is surely willing to go to war to keep. (And yes, I’m aware of all the levels of irony).
A national split in my lifetime would be an awful, painful thing to see, even if it happened without bloodshed. It would, however, be far preferable to living under a Democratic Socialist, one-party state. While most Americans right now truly aren’t wishing for any sort of hot OR cold civil war, national divorce, or even peaceful separation, it’s hard not to see something along those lines on the horizon if things keep going the way they’re going. Admitting this isn’t ‘treason,’ it’s reality.
It will be a few blue states, like California, who will be dumping the federal system.
Endure or emigrate.
Biden exuded anger even when he was way ahead in the polls.
Now just how would that happen given that China has wrapped its tentacles throughout our country's government, institutions, and businesses?
The only option that remains is counter-revolution.
It's like a cancer that has spread all over the body. It cannot be surgically removed.
Tax slaves will not be allowed freedom .
Never happen.
I could see more of a “financial protest” where entire states, led by their legislature, refuse to pay taxes or something silly like that.
An all out shooting war? Never.
It’s not the solution.
It is probably also important for states and counties to simply create sanctuaries for 2nd Amendment rights and also where immigration laws are to be enforced and other such initiatives. Places like Ogdensburg and the Central Leatherstocking area of NY are just as incompatible with NYC as many parts of Texas or Virginia are.
“It’s like a cancer that has spread all over the body. It cannot be surgically removed.”
And that is the answer. Even if a movement was put together, there would be so many double agents, a la Barr, Sessions, Matis, etc.
If you really want to turn things around, you fix the schools. If you don’t fix the schools, then watch as America slides and becomes a vassal state of China.
Geraldo has come so far since he was a male prostitute for a senator’s wife.
He’s the poster child of the DC-Media Excreta Fountain.
Brother fighting brother.
How in the heck would this happen? I have liberal neighbors. My state went for Trump but my county went for Biden. So just how do you divide up our state and neighborhoods?
I don’t get this thinking.
I would like to live in a country where there is true freedom of expression, fairness for both right and left, a press and electronic media that presents facts, and is not just a propaganda machine. A country where one keeps most of the fruits of one’s labor. A place where no politician deliberately keeps one class of people down and poor so as to blame the other party and get votes.
I don’t know where that place might be. Certainly not anyplace on earth.
CA is not viable on their own. They get their petrol, water and electricity piped in from other states.
If you have a government pension or depend on Social Security, I highly recommend you find a way not to be dependent.
What happens to a mortgage if the government collapse?
If the government collapse the courts are not legal?
It IS the solution.
I don’t have a crystal ball, but I think it could go either way. If Trump wins, it will be really interesting, pretty much immediately. And the left does not have the constitution on their side. If Biden is sworn in, there will be a growing festering that will probably reach its Zenith at the 2022 election. That will be the most closely watched election polling in US history. I expect the republicans would clean up. But that is assuming we survive to that point.
If biden is sworn in, the main difference this will have on my life, at first, is that I will carry the “bigger” pistol (Glock 19) with me in the car and the extra magazines, though I have to check the legality of the 33 shot magazines. I may have to leave them at home, depending on the laws of the states I’m driving through.
Other than that, what may impact me is any “new” laws. We live on a quiet 32 acres in rural KY and are really left alone by the government up here. I have not seen a cop anywhere near my house in the nine years we have lived here except when one came by because about $30,000 worth of my neigbor’s cattle broke through the fence and ended up next to my house.
And I burn my garbage.
I was really glad trump ended the mandate, but that is no longer relevant since I’m over 65 now. And my “retirement” is all about owning real estate free and clear and SS, so there are no tax increases for us in the near future. We can afford the $248 a year we currently pay.
If any of this changes significantly, I’ll take a “non-defensive” pose. But in Kentucky it’s too early for that. If I lived in Pennsylvania I might feel differently.
And then the next questions would be; who moves from what they consider foreign territory to more acceptable geography, who keeps the existing symbols like the flag, the country name, and the constitution?
Unlike the first Civil War, the next one would include major disruption or very complicated borders. I live about 6 miles from the commonly-defined :Chicago Metropolitan Area". Do I move, or do the liberals move? That is what decides if any split would be peaceful.
And then the next questions would be; who moves from what they consider foreign territory to more acceptable geography, who keeps the existing symbols like the flag, the country name, and the constitution?
Unlike the first Civil War, the next one would include major disruption or very complicated borders. I live about 6 miles from the commonly-defined :Chicago Metropolitan Area". Do I move, or do the liberals move? That is what decides if any split would be peaceful.
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.