What will the coming civil war be about?

While I don’t agree with everything in this article, it raises an interesting question: We Are In a New Civil War … About What Exactly?

I think people have a gut-level feeling that the country is divided, but it’s not always clear where the lines are drawn. Here are some suggestions.

  • The woke vs. people with brains
  • The elites vs. the common man
  • Tradition vs. change (Or, perhaps, rapid change vs. slow change)
  • A Republic vs. a Democracy
  • Central control vs. local control
  • Family authority vs. government authority
  • Objective vs. subjective (e.g., sex vs. sexual identity)
  • Critical Race Theory vs. people with brains
  • America is racist vs. America is the greatest nation on earth
  • Collective vs. the individual (guilt, rights, etc.)

It’s tempting to list “facts vs. rhetoric / conspiracies,” but it would be hard to pin that on one side or the other. Both sides seem equally guilty.

Feel free to add your this vs. that ideas in the comments.

33 thoughts on “What will the coming civil war be about?”

  1. White nationalism vs. global inclusion of all races. (The “The Turner Diaries” must be harder to come by nowadays than it was for Timothy McVeigh.) “They’re coming to taking away your Bible and your guns” is often code for: “They’re taking our country away from us white folks.”

  3. Also, racism was, after all, what the last civil war was about. We have seen that a lot of the rightwing extremists romanticizing about the side that fortunately lost.

    1. QUOTE: We have seen that a lot of the rightwing extremists romanticizing about the side that fortunately lost.

      Seems the Charlottesville Unite the Rightrally was a recent example. Unfortunately, that led to bloodshed and loss of life.

      1. Merely stating the case and even taking some of the blame, that isn’t whining. Raging in public repeatedly is whining. Sending his mob into the Capitol building is much worse than whining. Gleefully sitting and watching that mob engage in violence for a hours without lifting a finger to stop it – that is altogether criminal.

      2. Did that person organize a protest rally and then did the rally participants storm government buildings and kill police in the process?

        If so maybe we can compare… Or, maybe I don’t listen to enough Joe Rogan or Alex Jones and therefore I’m out of the loop and don’t know all of Hillary’s crimes…

        1. In Repug/FoxNews/OAN circles, a “patriot” is someone who showed up on Jan 6 and tried to overthrow election results. Talk about Orwellian doublespeak.

        2. You’re getting your facts from an inaccurate source. No police officers were killed at the Jan. 6 rally. The only person who was killed was a protestor, although other people died. https://www.factcheck.org/2021/11/how-many-died-as-a-result-of-capitol-riot/

          There was plenty of “not my president” from the left after Trump was elected. And there were riots. And there was property damage.

          Trump is a sore loser and an ass, and his idea that Pence had the authority to not accept the results was stupid. Ben Shapiro’s show yesterday was exactly on target about Jan. 6.

          Neither side has been willing to “accept the results” of elections. Remember Al Gore?

          1. Agreed…neither side likes to lose and whine about it. Yet, a distinct difference…one side “generally” used legal, constitutionally sanctioned means to display their dismay of the outcomes. The other side, in expressing their displeasure, has attempted to cheat, obstruct, and lie about the election outcomes.

            1. I honestly don’t know which side you mean.

              The left has rioted, started fires, burned cop cars, assaulted police, illegally changed voting laws in local jurisdictions ….

              The right has rioted once (that I’m aware of, although they attacked the Capitol, so that should count extra). They have not burned cop cars, but they did attack police. They did not change voting laws, but they did push ridiculous theories about cheating, and proposed that the VP had powers he did not have.

              Neither side looks good here.

              1. Here we go again, shifting attention to Joe Schmoe the leftist, where we are talking about the politicians. Of course there are violent leftists (but them pussies ain’t quasi-militarily organized like the rightwing militas). But the politicians, most notably Trump himself, did try to obstruct election outcomes on a grand scale. There is no comparison here. He and his political thugs are much worse, as far as “sides” are concerned.

                Moreover, if we take into the account the Joe Schmoes and the Joe Blows, there have been far more acts of violence or attempts to commit them, such as running cars into crowds, attempting to kidnap and kill a governor, and numerous others.

              2. QUOTE: I honestly don’t know which side you mean.

                Maybe you need better sources to stay informed?

                That said, OF COURSE, there has been misbehavior on the left. Yet, in your effort to created a false equivalency, you missed the point.

                “Generally” speaking, the left used legal and constitutionally sanctioned means to express their dismay. In fact, the very article you cited stated that protests were mostly peaceful…despite 124 arrests and some vandalism…out of 10 of thousands of protesters. Interestingly, according to the US Attorney General, there’s been 725 arrests relative to the right wing mob riot, with the possibility for more.

                The right attempted to overthrow the government and threatened harm to government officials. They threatened and attacked police. They attempted to interrupt the certification of a legitimate election with a bogus lawsuit that even a right-leaning SCOTUS dismissed. The Republican president invited and instigated the “mob”…he brought the matches and they lit the fire. He attempted to get state election officials to illegally change the certified election results in his favor. He attempted to influence state legislators to wrongfully alter the voting certification practices to favor his re-election. The conservative media openly “mocked” police that were attacked by the Capitol mob. What happened to “Blue Lives Matter”?

                So, in my view, there is no comparison to the impact of each side’s behavior. Indeed, the left isn’t faultless…they whined and complained when things didn’t go their way. There was even some vandalism and damage at their hands. Yet, the right attempted to subvert the will of the American people and overturn a legitimate election. Even now, a year later, many on the right feel those who did these things were justified and are true patriots. So, it seems the “rule of law” no longer matters when the right doesn’t get their desired outcomes.

          2. QUOTE: Neither side has been willing to “accept the results” of elections. Remember Al Gore?

            Given the initial unclarity of the results, it was reasonable for Gore to question the results (as many Republicans have done). Yet, once the SCOTUS ruled, Gore conceded and said…“for the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession”. He did this within weeks of the election.

            Funny thing, the 2020 Republican presidential candidate has yet to concede, didn’t attend the presidential inauguration and more than a year after his loss, he and his cronies are still falsely claiming he won the election. In fact, they’ve produced no credible evidence of their claims (please release the Kraken), lost numerous law suits and conducted multiple audits. In some cases, the audits revealed a larger loss for Trump. Indeed, he is the biggest loser! Under these circumstances, if Republicans think they can credibly compare Gore and Trump, they too are big losers.

      3. Indeed Hillary did whine…enough already….you lost…get over it! Yet, she also graciously conceded the election and publicly pledged to provide support to the incoming administration. What she didn’t do was attempt to overturn the outcome of a legitimate election nor instigate a mob riot that attacked the nation’s Capitol Building and government officials.

        1. We can agree that Trump was an irresponsible jerk, but you don’t get your own facts here.

          Trump did not instigate a mob riot. He told them to protest peacefully, and he never urged anyone to go into the Capitol. He failed to try to stop the riot once it started — and that was almost criminal. But he did not instigate it.

          1. Well, we will definitely disagree here. Trump attempted to overturn a legitimate election. As well, whipped up the “mob” gathered in DC as he instructed them to go to the Capitol Building. As I said previously, he instigated the a mob.

          2. Greg needs to get his facts straight. Trump told the mob to MARCH peacefully to the Capitol building. He did not tell them to protest peacefully. Looking at the big picture, however, confirms that he did instigate the mob. You can’t justify his actions by isolating a word here and there. The easier thing to prove at this junction is nonetheless something else, namely that he gleefully watched the terrorist attack on the Capitol for about three hours. That is obviously a severe dereliction of duty and most likely criminal.

            1. Indeed, Crowhill has been drinking too much of that right-wing Kool-aid.

              Trump invited his “mob” to DC and said ….“we will never give up…we will stop the steal…we have come to demand that Congress do the right thing…we are going to walk down to the Capitol…you’ll never take back our country with weakness…we’re going to have to fight much harder…we fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore…we won this election and we won it by a landslide”.

              Yet, if Trump’s own words aren’t enough, the words of some of his supporters give insight. The “mob” chanted…“Fight for Trump!”. Some yelled, “We were invited here! We were invited by the president of the United States!” Some on bullhorns yelled to the mob…“patriots, Go!” Some led group cheers…“Who’s country is this…our country! Who’s house is this…our house! Do you want your house back…Yes! Take it!” Some chanted, “Hang Mike Pence”. Some said in interviews, “I’m just a patriot protesting against what I think is a stolen election”. “I believed I was following the instructions of former President Trump”. Some of the mob claimed they couldn’t have been trespassing because they entered the Capitol at the “invitation” of President Trump, following his direct orders. One rioter felt he deserved a pardon, as he was only in the Capitol because he had “hitched his wagon” to Trump and felt he was answering a “call” from the president to go there. Interestingly, among the rioters who say they took Trump’s words to heart are those accused of perpetrating some of the most violent crimes on January 6.

              Despite Dems not being flawless, what Democrat president has ever done this ? Yet, some attempt to make false equivalencies

  5. “Central control vs. local control”

    Makes me laugh. If it’s something the Republicans want to control, they’re all for central control.

    To go with “Republic vs. Democracy” need to include “Voting vs Coup to get what you want”

    1. Republicans want BOTH central and local control. That is: Total Control.

      Compare: Totalitarianism.

    2. Who says the division is Republican vs. Democrat? The question is what are the current fault lines in society. Some of them align with party. Not all.

      1. For decades the Republicans have been shouting down the throat of Americans about their aim to reduce central government. It has plainly been one of their glowing talking points, no matter how bullshitty in its essence.

        1. That’s quite a trick, shouting down throats. And rather silly.

          We all know that what politicians say and what they do is at odds. The question — since I obviously have to repeat myself, based on the non sequiturs in this thread — is what are the actual fault lines?

          For example, “America is racist vs. America is the greatest nation on earth” is clearly one — no matter how well any party reflects either side.

          1. Fault lines have much to do with mouth service to a principle. When I criticize Republicans for their obvious hypocrisy in championing local control, this doesn’t exonerate Dems from certain strains of BS. If it came to a civil war, these lines of BS would become battle cries.

            PS. What I am getting from Dems is for the most part that America is great, but it has quite a way to go in combating racism. That is probably the closest to the truth on the matter.

            1. “Fault lines have much to do with mouth service to a principle.”

              I don’t see it that way. I believe the fault lines are real, and politicians pretend to go along with them in order to appeal to a group.

              1. Perception is reality. When people respond to loudmouths, it becomes political reality.

            2. QUOTE: PS. What I am getting from Dems is for the most part that America is great, but it has quite a way to go in combating racism. That is probably the closest to the truth on the matter.

              Agreed. The Dems have their issues and not always consistent with their stated values. Yet, in this space, they seem to have their finger on the country’s pulse and reading it fairly accurately.

  6. Central control vs local control… as I wrote before…laughable.

    I can think of two things here in the state of Oklahoma

    1) A small suburb of Tulsa was thinking of putting in a $15 / hr minimum wage. The state legislature and gov then passed a bill that said no city, municipality, etc. could pass a law that would make the minimum wage different than the stat minimum wage.

    2) The OK legislature and gov passed a law stating that no school district could make masks mandatory in their school districts.

    So local control or central control? We know that the Repugs are totally for central control if they are the ones in control.

    1. I thought I made this clear, but apparently not. The question is not “are Republicans or Democrats consistent on any of these issues.” The question is “what are the fault lines in society.”

      We all know both parties are hypocrites.

Comments are closed.