The New Civil War?
The times are increasingly in parallel with those of the era of the Civil War. It strikes me how many factors are in common between today's unrest and the factors that led to what southerners prefer to call "the war between the states".
Back then, moral outrage in the North over the continued slave trade was building. It represented one of the core issues behind a push toward more power of the Federal Government to set policy for the states. Southerners chafed at what they believed was a direct threat to their freedom in what might lead to an all-powerful and dictatorial Federal Government meddling in their affairs.
Today we have realized that all-powerful dictatorial Federal Government that has once again split the country down the middle. But this time it's not between the North and South, but between the coasts and the hinterland. Between the big cities and the small towns. Between races.
Abe Lincoln, the Republican Federalist, was elected President to the outrage of the southern Democrats. He was the most hated and vilified president in history, perhaps before George W. Bush. The hatred for Lincoln by southerners, if you look at some of the political cartoons and articles of the time, is frighteningly similar to the hatred for Bush today. And that hatred for Lincoln resulted in the only American Civil War. Are we in danger of repeating history?
The issues are different today. Those who elected and support Bush generally view abortion in much the same light as abolitionists saw slavery 150 years ago. Today's Democrats seemingly will stop at nothing to maintain the barbarism of tearing babies from their mothers by the millions and throwing them in the trash, citing pretty much the same reasons as slave owners did in those dark days of the past. But there's much more to this story today, as there was more to the story back then.
The source of the conflict goes deeper than abortion today. Like in the mid-1800's, there were many deeper issues at stake. Among the core issues in conflict today are: Conflict between religious freedom of expression and suppression of religious expression in favor of freedom of licentiousness. Conflict between capitalists and socialists. Conflict between philosphies of color-blind policies and race-based preferences. Conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims. Conflict between tradition and patriotism and radical change to a world government.
As I read and listen to the political speech of today, I can't help but wonder whether the strident tone of debate isn't leading to a new Civil War. Has it already started with terrorism, and will it spread into French-style rioting in the cities? Have the left and right become so alienated from each other that there can be no compromise or understanding? Can we survive the hate?
If we are to have any hope of overcoming the problems of our polarized society, it must begin with demanding that our political leaders rediscover civility. Those who continue to stridently use spin, lies, and half-truths for political gain must be censured by their colleagues and the press, regardless of their party affiliation. Arguments must be based on facts and aimed at solving problems rather than destroying reputations of opponents. People must be convinced based on the strength of an argument rather than insinuations against the opponent.
Back then, moral outrage in the North over the continued slave trade was building. It represented one of the core issues behind a push toward more power of the Federal Government to set policy for the states. Southerners chafed at what they believed was a direct threat to their freedom in what might lead to an all-powerful and dictatorial Federal Government meddling in their affairs.
Today we have realized that all-powerful dictatorial Federal Government that has once again split the country down the middle. But this time it's not between the North and South, but between the coasts and the hinterland. Between the big cities and the small towns. Between races.
Abe Lincoln, the Republican Federalist, was elected President to the outrage of the southern Democrats. He was the most hated and vilified president in history, perhaps before George W. Bush. The hatred for Lincoln by southerners, if you look at some of the political cartoons and articles of the time, is frighteningly similar to the hatred for Bush today. And that hatred for Lincoln resulted in the only American Civil War. Are we in danger of repeating history?
The issues are different today. Those who elected and support Bush generally view abortion in much the same light as abolitionists saw slavery 150 years ago. Today's Democrats seemingly will stop at nothing to maintain the barbarism of tearing babies from their mothers by the millions and throwing them in the trash, citing pretty much the same reasons as slave owners did in those dark days of the past. But there's much more to this story today, as there was more to the story back then.
The source of the conflict goes deeper than abortion today. Like in the mid-1800's, there were many deeper issues at stake. Among the core issues in conflict today are: Conflict between religious freedom of expression and suppression of religious expression in favor of freedom of licentiousness. Conflict between capitalists and socialists. Conflict between philosphies of color-blind policies and race-based preferences. Conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims. Conflict between tradition and patriotism and radical change to a world government.
As I read and listen to the political speech of today, I can't help but wonder whether the strident tone of debate isn't leading to a new Civil War. Has it already started with terrorism, and will it spread into French-style rioting in the cities? Have the left and right become so alienated from each other that there can be no compromise or understanding? Can we survive the hate?
If we are to have any hope of overcoming the problems of our polarized society, it must begin with demanding that our political leaders rediscover civility. Those who continue to stridently use spin, lies, and half-truths for political gain must be censured by their colleagues and the press, regardless of their party affiliation. Arguments must be based on facts and aimed at solving problems rather than destroying reputations of opponents. People must be convinced based on the strength of an argument rather than insinuations against the opponent.
posted by Dan S. at 8:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home