Irreconcilable Social Divisions, By Chris Knight (Florida)
Brandon Smith, "The Unifying Principle: Why the Political Divisions in the US Today Cannot be Mended," is an article which has been circulated and widely reproduced, and I picked it up at Survivalblog.com. The basic point made is one which I and others at the blog have made over some time, namely that the US, as a leading example, and following closely behind, Europe, have now become such divided societies that any sort of compromise of values is no longer possible. What Smith does not go into is that there are not merely divisions in the US (and Europe, with Australia to a lesser degree), but open warfare declared against conservatives, as seen by the lawfare actions against Trump and other conservatives, arrests of Christian protesters outside abortion death centres, and of course, the open borders travesty, which has set the country up for terrorism, as even the FBI director admits.
This is not merely a divided country as Smith describes it, but one which has fallen apart.
"Recently, I was watching a short documentary about the history of political discourse and division in the US and it got me thinking about how the internal conflicts of the past might relate to the rampant social battles Americans are dealing with today. From early disagreements between various Founding Fathers on hot-button issues like the Sedition Act, central banking, and standing armies, to epic and disastrous conflagrations like the Civil War, America has never been "of one mind" on everything.
Overall, though, the longstanding assumption is that even when we slip and fall into disarray Americans will find common ground and move on towards the future together. It's a nice sentiment, but what if this ideal no longer applies?
There are some people that argue there was never a golden era for the US; that we've always been destructive, or exploitative, or "imperialist." Of course, it's very easy to examine any given time period through the lens of modern sensibilities and pass judgment. How we would do things today is not necessarily how we would do things yesterday. We can't easily condemn the men and women of the past without at least recognizing that we will probably never see the issues of their day from their perspective.
The political left is the most egregious violator of this principle. They have a bad habit of trying to rewrite history according to their current ideological cultism and applying their taboos to time periods when civilization had very different views on how to function. The progressive philosophy is partially rooted in "futurism"; the idea that all old ideas and ways of doing things must be abandoned to make way for new methods. In other words, they think everything "new" is better and must be embraced.
Frankly, this theory has never been proven correct. Not every old idea should be left behind and not every new method is better. In fact, most ideas that leftists think are new are actually very old. There's nothing groundbreaking about DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion), it's just another form of Marxism based on personal identity rather than traditional class politics.
Do you want to know what DEI really is? It's a vehicle for forced association.
Forced association is used to leverage populations into a homogeneous soup, a hive mind with no individual thought or right to discriminate against destructive groups and ideologies. But if America is experiencing an agenda of forced association today then we have to ask – What is there to be gained? Why pressure people who fundamentally disagree with each other on every level to coexist within a society? Why do the people in power want this so badly?
Well, for the central planners (usually socialists/globalists), tribalism is a big no-no. People going their own way is unacceptable. If the populace thinks they can divide and separate and live differently from each other, then how can the establishment continue to exist? For a one-world government to be achieved ALL divisions must be erased and everyone has to either love or fear the purveyors of "unity."
Separation must, therefore, be demonized. The problem is, there's no way to blackmail a population into association, not in the long term anyway. A group is an abstraction without form; it means nothing until the individuals involved share a unifying principle. When I look back at political disagreements in history I find that there is a vital factor that existed during past conflicts that does not exist today.
Even during the worst of times including the Civil War both sides of the division held the same basic principles and morals. They had a lot of the same values, a shared religion, and a shared understanding of reality. They were people connected by the same American soul, they merely disagreed on singular issues. The goal for each side was for America and its fundamental heritage to survive, even if they didn't always obey every aspect of the Constitution or the existing leadership at the time. This is not how things work in 2024.
In terms of surface level politics it's obvious that there will never be peaceful reconciliation between woke progressives and conservatives/independents. One side or the other has to go, and I think the majority of people in the US want leftists to go.
To be clear, I'm not saying that all people on the political left are exactly the same. There's definitely a political spectrum from traditional liberals to extreme activists. But there is no denying that, for now, woke zealots control the levers of power and influence within the Democratic Party and the leftist media. They also have the explicit backing of every major institution from corporations to NGOs to government.
You don't see a whole lot of average Democrats with the guts to stand up and criticize their own side even when they know there's something very wrong happening. They go along with the program either out of laziness or fear. With conservatives the reverse is true. Conservatives can't seem to organize a damn thing because we constantly disagree with each other when it comes to solutions.
…. There are a lot of factors that set conservatives (and many moderates) apart from the political left, but the core disconnect is so deep and disturbing it's hard to quantify. I can only summarize it down to this:
1) The unifying principle of the left is deconstruction. They find their meaning or purpose in the act of tearing down and destroying what other people have built.
2) The unifying principle for conservatives is to build and protect what has been found to work.
Humanity's best bet for success is liberty with responsibility, free markets, and meritocracy. All things we are trying to preserve, and all things that leftists want to blow up.
For progressives the most important question is: What happens when they've destroyed the last edifice? What comes next? If dismantling systems is their unifying principle what will they do when they have nothing else to dismantle? What happens when every plate in the china shop is broken? They are incapable of creating a new and functional society so they would need an outside foundation.
In this regard, I set globalists apart from typical leftists. Globalists are indeed leftists at their core but they are also builders, and not in a good way. Globalists don't build societies, they build prisons. Once the useful idiots on the left have finished the job of deconstructing America the globalists plan to come in with a new ideal, a new religion, a new foundation based on worshiping them.
Here is where we find the greatest split of all – The spiritual nature of our impasse.
Liberty can indeed be a unifying principle, but it has to be freedom combined with wisdom and moral compass. Meaning, liberty alone is not enough. …
For the globalists and the woke mob morality is nothing more than a social construct, but we know that these ideas are inborn and inherent for the majority of people. If they weren't, humanity would have gone extinct ages ago from self-destruction. Leftists don't agree with the concept of a basic moral code. Leftists don't even agree that morals are a necessity. They think they can manifest their own reality from thin air. How can we possibly live side-by-side with people who despise every pillar that holds western civilization together?
The answer is – We can't. For now, I see no path to peace. Peace would require a unifying principle, a mutual respect, and that does not exist."
Comments