A patriot’s perspective (it's not civil war but a great divorce that looms on the horizon)

[mountaineer]

A patriot’s perspective: David French says it’s not civil war but a great divorce that looms on the horizon
by Marvin Olasky in Franklin, Tenn.
Post Date: July 03, 2018 - Issue Date: July 21, 2018

David French, 49, has the rare distinction of graduating from Harvard Law School and then volunteering for a tour of duty in Iraq during the Bush administration’s surge. He is a National Review Institute senior fellow and a major in the U.S. Army Reserve. He and his wife Nancy have three children: I interviewed him in their home in Franklin, Tenn. Here are edited excerpts.  ...

What’s your thesis?
               My theory is we’re not heading for a civil war: We’re heading for a divorce. A civil war would imply you care enough to fight and die to stay together, but the disdain we are beginning to feel for each other in this country is so great that if California or Texas years from now said, “We want to go our own way,” there would be an awful lot of people ready to kick them out.  America now has negative polarization: You belong to the Republican or Democratic party not because you love Democratic or Republican party ideas, but because you despise the other side.   ...

             We have a 20th-century government designed to combat three of the century’s great challenges: the Great Depression, imperial Japan/Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union. There’s an 18th-century solution called federalism for our 21st-century problem—but to embrace federalism, people have to give up the will to dominate and the will to power. That’s the real challenge. ...

Read entire interview at World Magazine

[Sanguine]

We have a 20th-century government designed to combat three of the century’s great challenges: the Great Depression, imperial Japan/Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union.

The "Great" depression, created to a great extent by the federal government, and certainly made worse for longer by the federal government?  He's already lost me at this point in the essay.

Edited: Nevermind, I read on.  This is a good thought:

In the absence of an external factor that we cannot anticipate, America will either have to decentralize or divide. We can be together if we decentralize and de-escalate the stakes of national politics so California can be California, Tennessee can be Tennessee.

...We should allow an enormous amount of latitude, but federalism does not put basic civil liberties up for negotiation. Since we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, California can’t take them away. The right to life should be up to states: Roe v. Wade should be overturned and that would return it to states just as a matter of default, but in my ideal world you would have a Human Life Amendment. In my conception, California could go as far in sanctuary as it wants, and it could articulate its own carbon emissions standards or become single-payer on health. It would still need to protect free speech and free exercise of religion because those also are rights endowed by our Creator. But matters of economic policy, of social welfare, should be up to the states.

[Axeslinger]

Ive said for years, even way back on TOS, I’d much rather have an amicable divorce than a murder-suicide.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

@Sanguine

The "Great" depression, created to a great extent by the federal government, and certainly made worse for longer by the federal government?  He's already lost me at this point in the essay.

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409

[INVAR]

Ive said for years, even way back on TOS, I’d much rather have an amicable divorce than a murder-suicide.

There is no way in hell the the Left is going to permit or allow a 'divorce' unless they get alimony from the rest of us for the rest of eternity that makes and keeps them in perpetual prosperity, and they will war and take it from us if we refuse.

Not only that but the Beast at Mordor on the Potomac in no ways is going to permit States to act autonomously outside of it's authority with the ability to feed on our wealth to continue to grow itself in power.

You an call it divorce instead of civil war - but what it will end up being is plunder and chaos even if some of what the author suggests happens.

But it is not going to happen, not until the dollar collapses and our fiat economy implodes to worthlessness.  THEN, THEN, you might see a 'divorce'.

But all divorces are ugly things, especially for the parties that think they was wronged.