American Civil War: 2.0

The first American Civil War happened because the nation was forced into making decisions which divided them. The same thing is happening right now. There are calls from both Democrats and Republicans that you are either for or against. You are for gun rights, or against gun rights. You are for hate, or against hate. You are for life, or against life. You are for the nation, or against the nation. Making all these binary choices fragments our society. It moves people closer to a binary choice of I am for this side, or against this side. And that is how strife erupts.

Let's take for example the American Civil War. T.R. Fehrenbach writes in Lone Star:A History of Texas and The Texans in chapter 18 Secession that the political crisis brewing in America at the time was based on social and economic reasons. “The real enemy of the North was Southern political power, insisting upon the strictest construction of the Constitution in a defense of states' rights that hindered and hamstrung industrialism and infuriated Eastern bankers, railroad magnates, and manufacturers. The true enemy of the South was industrialism itself, which threatened its agriculture with a worse colonialism..” He further writes “the two sections, doing what came naturally, had built two quite different societies”. Here a prime example of deep social divide existing based largely on lifestyles is described. It's hard not to see that current in modern grievances with a group of people demanding free, or affordable, higher education and healthcare. They often are the same group demanding that hatred and intolerance is growing in the country and that it is the result of instigation by the President Trump and Vice-President Mike Pence, and all of their red MAGA cap wearing supporters, which are “all redneck white males”.

T.R. Fehrenbach continues that “With genuine economic and political grievances against each other, the Northern states and the South found their flashpoint in the question of Negro slavery. The Negro question made the states' rights question so crucial and violent. The South insisted upon states' rights to maintain the status quo, which the North was increasingly determined to alter.” Those economic and political grievances are mounting. The disparity between have's and have nots is growing. Many have nots feel they have no political voice. Legislation is being brought up to make changes to how the Electoral College works.  A recent NPR article about the Popular Vote Movement contains the quote from Seth Masket that "the status quo is unacceptable," he said. "This might not be the best way of changing it, but it's at least a way of forcing some change and forcing some discussion of it." Lines are being drawn. People are demanding change, often demanding it being changed immediately.

Does that mean Civil War is inevitable? There is still opportunity for people to discuss and bridge the divide. It will take willing ears and a lot of compromise. But the opportunity for a flashpoint exists, one which could firmly cement lines and division. We'll discuss next week how to identify these pitfalls and how to develop some resilience against reacting in a way with the flashpoints which could lead to further division.