Thursday, August 27, 2020

A Plea For Dissolution

At the beginning of what promises to be a long, hot, unfortunate two month period, I once again make my plea to seriously consider dissolution of the Union.

The events of the summer - and year to date for that matter - indicate that, simply, we are no longer one people.  We have two very different views of politics, the world, and (in fact) civilization itself.

In point of fact, we are already at the point of two (or more) nations.  Yes, I know, one nation and all that, but in point of fact we face a situation where a segment of the population wants nothing but violence and a very different country and on the other hand, a group of people that - it seems - are being drawn to the point of deciding that if no one else will act on their behalf, they will.

We have been atomized to the point where the two sides really have not a single thing in common.  Nor, it seems, is there any interest any more in finding commonalities. For one side, a desire to just live their lives.  On the other, a desire to enforce by violence a new social order.

And are there any remaining commonalities?  I am not sure, nor am seeing any on the horizon that would change that opinion.  One side calling the other "enemies of the state" and "the side of darkness" is hardly likely to evoke any sense of wanting to let bygones be bygones.

To be clear - this is not meant to be a discussion of race, religion, ethnicity, sexuality, or social background.  These are no longer where the lines appear.  This is a line between people that see violence as progress to the point of gaining power, then violence as a means of enforcing that power and the population as a taxable base to create a Utopian society and those that simply want to live their lives with as little interference from the government as possible.  So let us at least have clarity on that.  It is a disagreement about philosophy and direction instead of any of those other things.

(Usual comment here about how we do not discussion politics et al here.  As usual, we discuss concepts and theories.)

Civil wars have started for less.

We no longer share a national consciousness.  We have ceded the ability to have meaningful discussions about policy and beliefs.  We have carefully discarded, one by one, the ties that bound us together.  And every organization that has the potential to bring us together has either been consciously eviscerated or unconsciously surrendered its power to do so.

I write this with a heavy heart.  I grew up in a nation-state that had unifying characteristics and a sense of "us".  I deplore the use of violence to accomplish an ends - but I equally deplore the idea that one side should sit, endlessly a target of the other with those that should know better doing and saying nothing.

I know - divorces are never easy.  At the best of times, they are unpleasant - legalities, who gets what, which set of friends do you want to keep versus who do I want to keep.  At worst, they are bitter fights full of words of hate.

But a divorce can far exceed the years and years of bitter fighting, unhappiness, and social destruction that can also occur as a result.

Please.  Can we just agree that we no longer want to be together and separate on okay terms instead of continuing to pretend that somehow things will work out when in point of fact we know they will not?


16 comments:

  1. When my wife was a little one, she asked her mother about marriage and divorce. Her wise mother took a spoon of salt and a spoon of sugar and mixed them. "Can you put all the sugar back in one spoon and all the salt back in the other? That's marriage." And that is the US. We've been balkanized. There is no way to divvy up, at least that I can see.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is an apt comparison STxAR. That said, I do not understand how we can keep shambling forward like we are without a major societal breakdown occurring. Sometimes all one can do is manage the powered glide and hope for the best.

      Delete
  2. Glenfilthie8:49 AM

    “ To be clear - this is not meant to be a discussion of race, religion, ethnicity, sexuality, or social background. These are no longer where the lines appear.“
    —————

    Having grown up among those types - I’m undoubtedly biased and possibly full of beans... But TB... I don’t think you understand who you’re dealing with. Whether you want to fight or parley with an adversary effectively... you have to understand him...her...it. (They have 52 genders over there now). Studying them is very difficult because their politics are so revolting. I only did it because my daughter and her demons forced me to. I believe that there is indeed darkness and evil over there. Those people want some very bad things, both for themselves and for us.

    Discussing them properly without invoking politics isn’t possible. If what follows is too political for you - please just delete it. I’ve been censored before and it doesn’t bother me at all. To me we are just shooting the breeze.

    Social justice is not about justice. It’s about vengeance. Vendetta. White, male Christians like you are what is wrong with the world. You don’t deserve anything you have. You’ve taken it from it’s rightful owners as your parents did before you. You are guilty by the colour of your skin, your sexuality and your icky bigoted faith. This is your starting point for any fair and peaceful negotiations.😆👍

    A divorce with these people will not be painless. A national divorce will be like the worst abominations from the family courts. Restraining orders will need to be backed by blood and lead. If you have any misconceptions about a peaceful, fair divorce... guess who owns those courts? From here on out it descends Very much into politics.

    I hope I’m wrong about all this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Glen - First of all, no worries. You know (I think) what I am trying to achieve here, discussion - and this is correct way to do it.

      I would also concur that social justice and justice can be two disconnected terms (as someone said, "Words mean things"). And I can even agree that it seems less about any sort of justice than it does about revenge or vengeance - after all, why burn businesses which have little to nothing to do with any sort of "justice" but provide a service.

      Perhaps I am shying away from all you say because, as a student of history, I understand what such a thing as you are describing entails. Let us be clear: it is war, and war of the most brutal kind. If if it never devolves beyond angry and name calling (hopefully), it is still...Alarming? Repulsing?...that I would have to become what I would have to become to fight that sort of thing.

      But perhaps I am already becoming that and that is what is bothersome. Or perhaps I am coming to see that no matter how much I want to believe the best of everyone, that is simply not the case.

      Delete
  3. We have family members to whom we barely speak due to politics, and I can't seem to fix those rifts. I sure don't know how we can reconcile our differences on a national level, but this rioting and destruction, I mean peaceful protesting, cannot be allowed to continue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. sbrgirl - I am not quite there but rapidly approaching that point as well. I do not have any greater insight than you do. There seems to be no path forward to reconciling anything, thus my original post.

      The only good - if there is a good - thing coming out of this is, I think, perhaps people (maybe myself) are being made very clear about the sides and stakes involved. Perhaps that is the only good we can draw from it.

      Delete
  4. I'm fairly new to your blog and rules so forgive me if I tread close to a line of which I am unaware. 100 years ago our country was bitterly divided after years of war, a pandemic that was finally coming to a close, riots were happening in Chicago and attacks on Wall Street were producing fears of radicals and terrorists. Oh, and one political party was trying to get re-elected by campaigning on a return to normalcy.

    All this is to say, we aren't divided anymore than we were 100 or even 200 years ago. There have always been sides and people like me in the middle shaking my head and wondering what is this world coming too. But we always pulled through again just like we will pull through this one and those 100 years from now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you're right, Ed. You guys have to stick together. The mass media is very biased in this, and is openly fomenting treason and bloodshed. People are seeing that, and only a very small minority is getting caught up in it. Most of you on both sides of the political divide do not want a civil war. It pays to remember that and take your information from the media with some very large grains of salt.

      Delete
    2. Ed - First of all, thanks for stopping by and being a contributor!

      My general rule about politics and religion is not so much to avoid them at all as it is to have a helpful discuss - conceptual, not personal, if that makes any sense. Name calling has pretty much gotten us to where we are today.

      There is history - and you are correct in all the facts you point out - and then there is history. The Chinese empire had undergone multiple issues throughout its history. The Communist Party was pretty clear about what it was going to do. So how did work out that they cleaned out the Kuomintang so completely (yes, I understand the reasons: instability, corrupt government, inability to control internal politics and warlords, basic economic issues)?

      Sometimes things do not come back. And my worry is that we have so little holding us together now - even to Glen's point it is a small minority that is being destructive, there is a larger group that buys into the general principles. The violence is merely the logical outcome. And we, at least we Americans, seldom follow things to their logical outcomes.

      Delete
    3. Glen - Agreed in principle. But that also means that those who, at some level, support the ideas and thoughts of those who are fomenting, have to be willing to compromise around some kind of center. I truly do not get the sense that this is a option for them. They are so blinded by their individual dislikes or issues that they cannot see the larger picture. And this is where Chaos truly succeeds: not in the overt demands, just in reaching some level of critical mass to gain power.

      I wish we actually studied the rise of authoritarian governments like Nazi Germany and Communist Russia (or China). This would be instructive to the people that think that there is just a little "extremism" going on.

      Delete
  5. Dissolution... 'Trouble is, where do you draw the line? This isn't a nice, easy, delineated Mason-Dixon thing. This is a conflict between people in the same neighborhoods. The situation here in the Wild, Wild West is a good illustration. Everyone sees California as a hopeless Left-wing cesspool, And if all you look at is the "population centers," that's true. Thing is, you get away from the cities, and things turn strikingly Conservative. There are more Right-wingers in California than the entire populations of several "flyover" states combined. So... when the machine flies apart, who gets to stay, and who becomes a refugee? Out here, the Left has the numbers,... but the Right has all the guns...

    ...This ain't gonna be pretty...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh Pete, I do not know. I wish I did. That is part of the issue I cannot resolve.

      California is the perfect example. Outside of the coast, it is (generally) conservative. But the weight of the population is in those areas. How does one divide it? Not sure. But better it be done consciously or you end up with the Pakistan/India dissolution, which did not go well at all.

      Delete
  6. Dissolution definitely seems like a better solution than continuing as we are, but I seriously doubt the left will allow it. Their obsession to annihilate seems to know no bounds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Leigh, I think you are right - or not willingly, anyway. One side is very much dependent on the other for everything from basic supplies for living to funding everything. Without that, I really believe they collapse.

      Delete
  7. the wheat grows with the tares until the end
    only God is capable of such sifting

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quite true Deb. And it is all rather intertwined now, is it not?

      Delete

Comments are welcome (and necessary, for good conversation). If you could take the time to be kind and not practice profanity, it would be appreciated. Thanks for posting!