Summary: As the stress on the Republic increases and the cracks appear, people look ahead to the coming conflicts. Here William Lind spots an opportunity for the political factions in America to attack the Republic. Exciting times lie ahead.
By William S. Lind at Traditional Right, 1 April 2019.
Posted with his generous permission.
I just returned from three weeks in the Confederacy, where the breezes were balmy, the barbeque wonderful (conveniently, the Confederate government has outlawed any open observance of Lent) and the support for President Trump strong among his base. The Establishment’s endless venom directed against the president has, if anything, helped him. I sensed he may be taking on the status of a tragic hero, a good man trying to do the right thing who is thwarted at every turn by wicked forces at court. That is a somewhat ironic image for Donald Trump, but it is politically powerful. If I’m right, his enemies have given the president a wonderful gift.
I don’t think the base’s support for President Trump is a function of his position on issues. Some issues obviously are important, especially immigration and the wall. Native-born Americans have come, in too many places, to feel like strangers in their own country.
But something far more powerful than any issue is motivating the base: an ever-stronger feeling that it’s us against them. “Us” is average people who work for a living, follow the rules, go to church on Sunday, and try to be good fathers, mothers, and neighbors. “Them” is a mix of elites who despise average people, blacks and immigrants who live on working Americans’ tax payments while committing violent crimes and the Globalist 1% who get rich by exporting average peoples’ jobs.
Within this framework, “us” sees President Trump as their champion, and attacks on him just solidify their support for him. “Them”, meanwhile, are seeking their champion for the 2020 election from among a whole pack of skunks and weasels. What if the Democrats nominate someone from the far Left, someone as clearly “them” and Trump is “us”, and win?
From what I heard from the base during my trip, I don’t think it will accept that outcome, not when a radically Left Democratic president starts opening the borders, turning the White House into a LGBTQ wedding chapel and lets millions of black criminals out of jail while giving them the vote. At that point, there is going to be a rebellion.
In much of the South, the rebellion could take an old/new form: nullification. That issue seemed to be settled before the Civil War, when the Supreme Court ruled that states could not nullify acts of the federal government. But in recent years, nullification has come back, not from the Right but from the Left, and, because it is coming from the Left, it has been accepted by the Establishment. Two clear cases are laws regarding marijuana and enforcement of federal laws against illegal immigration. On the former, state after state has legalized marijuana despite federal law that makes its sale or use illegal. It is as clear a case of state-level nullification as I can imagine. With regard to illegal immigrants, many Left-ruled cities have proclaimed themselves “sanctuary cities” where local police will not enforce federal immigration laws.
This country’s legal heritage is Anglo-Saxon, not Roman, law in which precedent is highly important. Precedent has been established in both these cases that nullification is legal and the federal government should defer to it. The Left has set the precedents, but the Right can use them. What if Texas responds to opening of the borders by sending the National Guard and civilian volunteers to close it again? What if South Carolina refuses federal orders to release prisoners? A Supreme Court attuned to interpreting rather than creating laws would face conflicting precedents. It could get interesting.
If nullification fails, the Trump supporters I talked to throughout the South will not just say “Oh well, we tried, I guess we just have to accept being second-class citizens in our own country.” They are going to fight back. How, I don’t know. So long as a buoyant economy continues, it may provide enough glue to hold the country together. When the debt crisis hits and with it a second Great Depression, all bets will be off.
One thing is certain: the vast geography of red America, as seen in the 2016 election, will not allow itself to be ruled by the tiny blue enclaves–enclaves which cannot feed themselves. If the checkpoints start going up, that will be relevant.
Many on the Right fantasize about armed rebellion, often while fondling their guns. The Left also dream of revolution, but less often from guns. These common dreams – Wait for the Great Day When We Arise and Smite Our Oppressors – are distractions from contemplating our passivity and apathy (the core cause of our problems). Yea, Revolution in some vague future date! Pass the chips and TV remote.
Lind points to one of the many alternatives to mass action: nullification (see Wikipedia). This theory goes back to 1798, as some Southern states sought ways to back out of the Constitution regime. For over two centuries these attempts have failed. But the Left has given them an opening. The Left has been building a new political regime, brick by brick, on the weakening structure of the existing one. Weakening freedom of speech, weakening equal protection of the laws, attacks on the legitimacy of the Republic (including discrediting the Founding), and now allowing local nullification of Federal laws.
All of these loosen the binds tying us together. This creates opportunities for all foes of the Republic. Lind describes on such way.
What about “checkpoints”, cutting off food to the cities, etc? Dreams of bold action by a people unwilling to take even small actions to stop America’s decay. But continued growth of small scale political violence is likely. It has been endemic in America since the beginning. It’s part of our culture, for better or worse.
As for the Confederacy – I have no sympathy whatsoever for those who began the Rebellion in order to keep their slaves.
About the author
William S. Lind is director of the American Conservative Center for Public Transportation. He has a Master’s Degree in History from Princeton University in 1971. He worked as a legislative aide for armed services for Senator Robert Taft, Jr., of Ohio from 1973 to 1976 and held a similar position with Senator Gary Hart of Colorado from 1977 to 1986. See his bio at Wikipedia.
Mr. Lind is author of the Maneuver Warfare Handbook (1985), co-author with Gary Hart of America Can Win: The Case for Military Reform (1986), and co-author with William H. Marshner of Cultural Conservatism: Toward a New National Agenda (1987).
He’s perhaps best known for his articles about the long war, now published as On War: The Collected Columns of William S. Lind 2003-2009. See his other articles about a broad range of subjects…
- His posts at TraditionalRight.
- His articles about geopolitics at The American Conservative.
- His articles about transportation at The American Conservative.
For More Information
Ideas! For shopping ideas see my recommended books and films at Amazon.
If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See all posts about political violence, about civil disobedience, about reforming America: steps to new politics, and especially these …
- Important: A 4th of July reminder that America is ours to keep – or to lose!
- Fear the rise of political violence in America. We can still stop it.
- America abandons the ideals that made us great.
- Visions of America if the Left wins.
- The Left goes full open borders, changing America forever.
- America isn’t falling like the Roman Empire. It’s worse.
- Important: A new, dark picture of America’s future.
Posts about the civil war …
- We have trouble coping with our present because we’ve lost our past.
- American faux history: could we have avoided the Civil War?
- American faux history: why did the South leave the Union?
- Keep the Confederate monuments. Rededicate them to our needs.
A cautionary tale for those seeking to exploit our political divisions.
By Dirk Schumann.
It can happen here. From the publisher …
“The Prussian province of Saxony – where the Communist uprising of March 1921 took place and two Combat Leagues were founded – is widely recognized as a politically important region in this period of German history. Using a case study of this socially diverse province, this book provides a comprehensive analysis of political violence in Weimar Germany with particular emphasis on the political culture from which it emerged. It refutes both the claim that the Bolshevik revolution was the prime cause of violence, and the argument that the First World War’s all-encompassing “brutalization” doomed post-1918 German political life from the very beginning.
“The study thus contributes to a view of the Weimar Republic as a state in severe crisis but with alternatives to the Nazi takeover.”