Thoughts from Dennis Prager:
This Second Civil War, fortunately, differs in another critically important way: It has thus far been largely nonviolent. But given increasing left-wing violence, such as riots, the taking over of college presidents’ offices and the illegal occupation of state capitols, nonviolence is not guaranteed to be a permanent characteristic of the Second Civil War.
There are those on both the left and right who call for American unity. But these calls are either naive or disingenuous. Unity was possible between the right and liberals, but not between the right and the left.
Liberalism — which was anti-left, pro-American and deeply committed to the Judeo-Christian foundations of America; and which regarded the melting pot as the American ideal, fought for free speech for its opponents, regarded Western civilization as the greatest moral and artistic human achievement and viewed the celebration of racial identity as racism — is now affirmed almost exclusively on the right and among a handful of people who don’t call themselves conservative.
The left, however, is opposed to every one of those core principles of liberalism.
Which is why we should stop letting them purloin the word.
Another way of framing it is as another American Revolution (which the Civil War could be considered to be, but fortunately a failed one, at least in terms of the Democrats’ desire to preserve slavery). Calhoun called the War of 1812 a second revolution, in the sense that it wrung more recognition from the British of American sovereignty, and the Whiskey Rebellion could be considered one as well. I think that if Hillary had won, the pressure from the states for an Article V convention would have become overwhelming. It’s less clear what a Trump victory will mean, but there is no doubt that the current divisions and clashing visions of America are as great as any time since the War Between The States.
This is a war that has been fought by the Progressives since Woodrow Wilson (and even earlier with TR.) It is not a conspiracy (just read the books) that the goal was to eliminate God and the Constitution because they were seen as impediments to a more socialist European state.
The war we see now is the result of a growing base of progressives.
Interestingly, I heard a woman yesterday say that the women’s march was a protest of women terrified of their fertility. I agree with that idea. Many of these women are ashamed of their reproductive ability and want nothing more than to be rid of it. If there is any case of leftists who call themselves evolutionists and deny it at the same time, this is it. (Much like an evolutionist vegan.)
Dennis Prager is not the sort to run around with his hair on fire, so if he’s talking about civil war, we best sit up and take notice.
Of course, from the Canadian point of view, the War of 1812 was a war of survival as an opportunistic USA decided to ally with Napoleon at a critical point in a worldwide struggle in order to grab some easy pickings in British North America. The USA was spectacularly unsuccessful in their aggression (despite outnumbering the opposition by ten to one), however, they did get some concessions that later doomed First Nations peoples in the lower 48. Many of those refugees settled in Upper Canada (now Ontario). YMMV
“First Nations” (American Indians) in the lower-U.S. were “doomed”? How is it there are still hundreds of thousands of Native Americans today?