Partisanship and Divisiveness are Not the Problem

Grievances between different factions in the US are profound.  Their goals do not align. Their ideas about how governance can achieve those goals are incompatible.

It’s become clear that keeping these factions under one president, one Supreme Court, and one government for the long term would require the kind of oppression that is only found in authoritarian states. This is true with or without a civil war. It will be true before and after a second civil war, unless one side is completely eliminated.

US society is divided by ideology (Right, Left, Libertarian, etc), ethnicity, culture, religion, lifestyle, urban/rural economies, traditional values/new morality, etc.

Calling for unity in the US isn’t working. It won’t work.

A statesmen acts in the present to shape the future for the common good.  Statesmen will work to move the conversation in a healthy direction.  We should be inspiring people to think in terms of a divide that is healthy and sustainable.  Most divisions in US society are not healthy because people from both sides of such a division have to share neighborhoods and employers.  

A division between red states and blue states can be sustained without violence if these states become separate countries. They would no longer compete for control of Washington DC.  People don’t have to share a neighborhood or an employer with people from other states.

We should stop calling for unity in the US.  Maybe even calling for unity within a state is a bit premature because after states secede, there will be people who voluntarily migrate in or out.  Also, border states should allow certain counties to split off to join a neighboring country that suits their values.

No matter what happens, this continent will not, in this century, have a state that is 100% of one ethnicity.  Even ideologically, most women lean Left and most men lean Right. Since most people want a mate, and 96% are heterosexual, even a red state must allow the presence of wives who lean Left.

A difficulty in getting along between California and Oklahoma is a territorial division that can be resolved by drawing a national border on the map. We can let them be in separate countries.

A difficulty in getting along between between ethnicities is something that can’t be completely resolved territorially by drawing borders. There are inter-ethnic marriages, multi-ethnic employers, multi-ethnic churches, and multi-ethnic communities.  

Territorial divisions are the only kind of division that can defuse the tension in this empire we call the US.

Let’s de-emphasize our complaints about “the Left” and let’s start complaining about “the blue states.”  Yes, it is less precise, but blue states are a group of people that we actually can be rid of.  Let’s start framing our problems and talking about our problems in a way that lends itself to a solution.  Blue states are a problem for the red states that can be solved.

Partisanship and divisiveness are not our problem.  Our problem is the kind of divisiveness that makes it hard for a community to remain functional.  Territorial divisiveness is the one kind of divisiveness that doesn’t do that.

It’s tempting to say that “we can’t live with the Left.”  But the elements of the Left that we can’t live with are exactly the individuals who would move out of state when a red state secedes.  Conservatives can easily outvote the Left in a true red state, so actually we can live with those who remain in the state after secession.  We discussed this more completely in an earlier essay here:

8 thoughts on “Partisanship and Divisiveness are Not the Problem

  1. Agree generally with map. However a bit too gerrymanderish in places. Particularly the alley from Savannah to Atlanta. Have a personal interest as do not want to end up on the wrong side of the fence as live just below Richmond Hill which is just below Savannah. These areas are extremely conservative and ready to fight–particularly as Ft STewart is in that corridor and many vets retire here. Don’t throw us over the fence.

  2. I live in Savannah and you’d be surprised how many people walking down the street in mid-town compliment me on my Trump flag. I think, we are beginning to wake up. I am concerned about this runoff however. The “kid” as I call him has no real experience and was trained in New England although he was born in Georgia. The cinematic commercials that outside money has paid for are movie quality. I think that Savannah will stay with Georgia. I’m just worried about the corruption of Stacy Abrams and I don’t trust the Secretary of State. Keep us red!

  3. You are correct in that most women lean or are left. This is easily solved by women not voting. Some people would say it is a step backwards but it is actually a step forward. The great majority of women lean left and I only see that getting worse as the population grows as it normally does.

    1. Historically,some other very wise socio-political observers agree with you that women should not be voting. I don’t agree, but your observation that most women lean left is true. The social problem in this regard is, if a man votes ‘right’ and his wife, (or sister or mother), votes ‘left’ this indicates that a deeper social problem exists, namely that the male/female relationship in society is imbalanced. Biblically, a woman is supposed to be the subservient help mate of a man. Political division between men and women is unnatural in this regard. The reason is, the ‘left’ wants to disrupt this natural balance in order to disrupt the natural familial balance of humanity and institute total political control of the population where children are wards of the state and nobody has the right to free thought or expression. I think what we are seeing in society is a spiritual problem, not a political one. The Machiavellian ‘divide and conquer’ strategy to control people is expertly manifest in the division between sexes. ‘Feminism’ just like ‘woke-ism’ like ‘leftism and communism’ are essentially spiritual maladies that manifest in the minds and actions of weak minded people.

    2. Of course I would prefer a government based upon Christian principles, where women could not vote (except perhaps in agreement with their husband.) The idea that women lean left is actually not the whole story. Younger and unmarried women lean left, as they look to government as a sugar-daddy to provide for them; but women that are married with children move right, as they resent the burden of taxation on their home economy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *