The Coming Second American Civil War?
With all the talk of a new Civil War in the air, this piece in the far-left New Yorker, which originally ran in August 2017 in the wake of Charlottesville, is worth revisiting on this Memorial Day weekend. The New Yorker seems these days to be written entirely by spoiled children and mouthpieces for the Central Intelligence Agency, but it is a reliable barometer of the increasingly lunatic preoccupations of the seething Left, and it behooves us to keep an eye on it. So let's take a short trip in the Wayback Machine and have a look:
Just to prove it's on the side of the angels, look whom the magazine quotes in the very first paragraph:
A day after the brawling and racist brutality and deaths in Virginia, Governor Terry McAuliffe asked, “How did we get to this place?” The more relevant question after Charlottesville—and other deadly episodes in Ferguson, Charleston, Dallas, St. Paul, Baltimore, Baton Rouge, and Alexandria—is where the United States is headed. How fragile is the Union, our republic, and a country that has long been considered the world’s most stable democracy? The dangers are now bigger than the collective episodes of violence. “The radical right was more successful in entering the political mainstream last year than in half a century,” the Southern Poverty Law Center reported in February. The organization documents more than nine hundred active (and growing) hate groups in the United States.
When the first "authority" you cite is America's foremost hate group, you know you're off to a bad start:
America’s stability is increasingly an undercurrent in political discourse. Earlier this year, I began a conversation with Keith Mines about America’s turmoil. Mines has spent his career—in the U.S. Army Special Forces, the United Nations, and now the State Department—navigating civil wars in other countries, including Afghanistan, Colombia, El Salvador, Iraq, Somalia, and Sudan. He returned to Washington after sixteen years to find conditions that he had seen nurture conflict abroad now visible at home. It haunts him....
Based on his experience in civil wars on three continents, Mines cited five conditions that support his prediction: entrenched national polarization, with no obvious meeting place for resolution; increasingly divisive press coverage and information flows; weakened institutions, notably Congress and the judiciary; a sellout or abandonment of responsibility by political leadership; and the legitimization of violence as the “in” way to either conduct discourse or solve disputes.
Almost everything about that last paragraph was and is nonsense. While it's true we are polarized -- largely because the Democrats (just as they did in 1860) refuse to accept the results of the last presidential election -- it's hardly true to say the press coverage is "divisive" when it's almost entirely one-sided in its slant (the Left, good; the Right, bad); or that the judiciary -- which finds a compliant federal judge at the drop of hat to try and nullify the lawful powers of the executive -- is "weakened." It is true that some elements of "political leadership," most notably the Clintons and their apologists in the media, have abandoned their responsibilities to the country they profess to love and serve. But if there's violence -- and there is -- it comes almost entirely from the Left, in the forms of Antifa, Black Lives Matter and other groups of provocateurs.