AS I WRITE THIS, Congress is still debating whether to destroy the U.S. economy — and in the process blow up the rest of the world — to stop President Obama’s signature domestic policy achievement.
They are risking an economic crisis that would make 2008 look like a minor credit crunch, a crisis that would almost certainly result in people starving, and rioters taking to the streets as the entire world economy craters. And all to destroy a health care plan designed by Newt Gingrich and the Heritage Foundation and previously implemented at the state level by a Republican governor.
My hope is that as you read this, congressional leaders have found a way to back the country away from the brink, and cooler heads have somehow prevailed.
That said, the spectacle of the last few weeks has got me asking a question as unsettling as it is pragmatic: Has the United States become ungovernable as a single, unified entity?
Do me a favor: Look at a county-by-county breakdown of the 2008 or 2012 presidential elections. What you will see are islands of (mostly urban and Democratic) blue in a sea of (mostly rural and Republican) red.
Then there’s this: According to a recent poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University, 44 percent of Republican respondents agreed that “In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect our liberties.”
To my blue, urban eyes, that result makes no sense. When I contemplate what it would take for me to seriously consider armed opposition to the government of the United States, I must say we are a very long way from a situation where I might begin to believe it would be necessary.
What would it take for me to begin to believe it necessary to take up arms against my own government? It would take something that threatened my basic civil rights and freedoms — a military coup d’état, say, or a declaration by the national executive that the Bill of Rights was being suspended or abolished; the dissolution of the legislative and judicial branches of government, perhaps, and suspension of the right of citizens to vote, together with crushing of dissent by the military or national law enforcement entities. And it shouldn’t be necessary to point out that such events bear virtually no resemblance to the current moment.
And yet, a non-trivial fraction of the Republican Party believes “armed revolution” may be necessary. I think it would be a mistake to dismiss this as mere redneck paranoia. An America composed of islands of blue in a sea of deeply alienated red — especially given the evident anger out in those red hinterlands — ought to give all of us pause. People, especially in large numbers, don’t just acquire red state-level rage for no reason.
I think we in the blue counties need to ask ourselves: Why do the residents of the red counties often view the blue counties with such suspicion and distrust? Is there, in some sense, good reason for their animosity? Is there any validity whatsoever to it? My friends on the left often say to either ignore or dismiss it. But to argue that it is utterly groundless makes no sense to me, given the (tenuous) wisdom I’ve gained from being alive for a few decades. We do so at our peril, because I believe that is ultimately a recipe for national disintegration.
Maybe that’s the fate the U.S., but I personally think the country is worth saving.
My perspective on this is partially personal and familial. I’ve mentioned this before, but there are plenty of rural folks in my extended family (I have lots of uncles and cousins on my mom’s side who are ranchers, dairymen and farmers, and mom herself grew up in relatively rural circumstances), and I’ve spent enough time with them to say definitively that there are reservoirs of decency out there that it would be good for urban and suburban folks to experience from time to time.
I believe the current divisions in the country are a symptom of profound failures of our political institutions and parties — institutions of both of the left and the right. But the failures also go deeper than that. These failures are also cultural and social — and even personal — as well as political.
I am convinced that any realistic correctives to these failures require us to acquire and nurture a perspective that transcends the usual boundaries of the “culture war” and the left/right dichotomy.
The problems facing the country are serious — perhaps even existential.
I think it is worth trying to sketch the outlines of a map that will lead us home from the wilderness we find ourselves in. Much more on that next week.
Matt Talbot is a writer and poet, as well as an old Benicia hand. He works for a tech start-up in San Francisco.
Sharing is caring!
Matt, I appreciate your wonderment about the divided condition of the country. Existential is the correct word for the extremity to which this nation has been pushed by a self-idealizing faction motivated by deliberate, “hot-button” pushing operatives hired by, or sympathetic to, a few anti-social, ultra-wealthy people like the Koch brothers and their colleagues. External manipulation of these Tea Party folks’ feelings toward intense expression plays off of internal conditioning by their pseudo-Christian, evangelical fundamentalism. In their blind zeal and radical fanaticism, they resemble certain extremist Islamic sects more than followers of Jesus. I approve of your continued good work and agree much with what you write.
I refer you to my discussion, written today, titled “Free Will v. Moral Reason.” If not soon in the Forum, it will appear on my blog, later tonight at: http://www.robertmshelbypoetry.com/wordpress/ .
Sorrty Matt you are wrong. Do you think the name calling Harry Reid is solving the problems?
Once again speaks Robert Livesay of the living dead. I see Matt making no mention nor tangent allusion to Harry Reid whom you have pulled out of the parking-lot way beyond left field. To mention your idiocy does not call you a dreaded name. It raises descriptive fact.
By the way, you are no gentleman to attack our fine lady, Mayor Patterson, once more as you so often do. Talk about agenda-driven people, you’re at the head of that crowd. You rant on her the way poor, old Pugh rants on Obama. But, both your “agendas” are doomed to fail. I’m sorry you can’t stand women in authority any more than Pugh can stand even a half-black in office. I want more women in Congress, so I support Emily’s List candidates.
Obama’s presidency is time-limited. So too is Elizabeth’s time as mayor limited. Both you and Jim ought to just sit back, quit yapping and be patient. Give the rest of us a break from your hyped-up, tirelessly loud-mouthed egotism.
Robert when you come to your senses we might have no need to make our comments. Ii am right about the mayor and have always been. I will keep at it. So sit back and enjoy the ride.
(The)… “unelected dictatorship of money.”
From the above article:
That said, the spectacle of the last few weeks has got me asking a question as unsettling as it is pragmatic: Has the United States become ungovernable as a single, unified entity?
An excerpt from the article below for the community and Mr. Talbot to consider…
“The United States, despite its formally democratic character, is firmly in the hands of a moneyed oligarchy, probably the most powerful ruling class in history.”
http://www.zcommunications.org/a-nation-brought-to-the-verge-of-ruin-by-paul-street.html
Barack Obama vs. Tommy Douglas
From the above article:
“And all to destroy a health care plan designed by Newt Gingrich and the Heritage Foundation and previously implemented at the state level by a Republican governor.”
An excerpt from the article below for the community to ponder…
Check out this sequence, for example:
How many people in the United States die each year because they have no health insurance?
45,000. How many people in Canada die each year because they have no health insurance?
Zero. How many people go bankrupt each year in the United States because of medical expenses?
922,819. How many people go bankrupt each year in Canada because of medical expenses?
Zero .How many Americans do not have health insurance? 50 million.
How many Canadians do not have health insurance?
Zero.How many Americans go without medical care because of costs? 115 million.
How many Canadians go without medical care because of costs? Zero.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/17/grand-theft-health-insurance/
From Will’s response: ”How many people go bankrupt each year in the United States because of medical expenses? 922,819.
So if medical expenses are such a heavy contributor to US bankruptcies and medical expenses are not an issue in the wonderful Canadian health care system, perhaps you can explain why the Canadian bankruptcy rate vs. the US rate has been essentially the same in the past eight years.
The fact is the causes of bankruptcies are complex including many factors beyond medical bills and the impact of medical debt is exaggerated.
Obama is the choice of the elites–
From the above article:
“That said, the spectacle of the last few weeks has got me asking a question as unsettling as it is pragmatic: Has the United States become ungovernable as a single, unified entity?”
From the article below:
The politics of lesser evilism remains a crippling idée fixe for most of the Left, despite the carnage strewn across the landscape by the politicians they have enabled over the last two decades: from the Clintons to John Kerry and Obama. The Democratic Party itself has become a parody of a political
enterprise, a corporate-financed ghost ship for the gullible, the deluded and the parasitical. For all practical purposes the party has been superceded as a functional entity by pseudo-interest groups like MoveOn and their new house organ, MSNBC, which provide daily distractions from and rationalizations for each new Obama transgression.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/18/empire-of-the-senseless/
So, 44 percent of Republicans think an armed revolution might be necessary. For the sake of argument, let’s say they actually carry out an armed attack on some aspect of our government. How is that not treason?
Benician, individual treason is easy to deal with. The society as a whole can overpower the individual. Once you start talking 100 thousand or more ( your 44%). the winner decides who was treasonous. The founding fathers of this nation were all traitors, and if they had failed, would of been hung for their treason. But the won, so now are considered the founding Patriots. One thing is certain though. Win, lose or draw, if it comes to open violent rebellion of the status quo, you will never return to that status quo.
What’s happening here, is more than partisan conflict. We are engaged in a resurgence of the dreams of a defeated Confederacy that has taken up the cause of strangling the Union under pretext of controlling the national debt. The radicals are too obsessive about it, for it can be gradually mitigated. Unfortunately, we have a class of ultra-rich folks in corporate and banking roles who benefit from the enormous interest our government has to pay on that debt. Catch 22 !!! Note that some of these ultra-rich have been egging on the Tea Party for their own reasons apart from lowering national debt. It doesn’t take rocket science to grasp that keeping our society at a rolling boil furthers the aims of divide and rule-behind-the-scenes. The trick is control both parties and determine all options in advance, preventing deviation not to the manipulators’ interests. Sorry. That’s the stinking way it is. These party shenanigans are just playing croquet on the Titanic’s deck. The manipulators know their Titanic won’t sink because they can drain the ocean itself, financially speaking, any time they get ready.
Matt Stated: According to a recent poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University, 44 percent of Republican respondents agreed that “In the next few years, an armed revolution might be necessary
Although the above statement is true, it is worth a closer look at that poll.
The poll also found that 38 per cent of ALL respondents agreed regarding the need for an armed revolution. Here is the actual breakdown on those in agreement:
Democrats: 18%
Independents: 27%
Republicans: 44%
The poll was conducted in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting when the anti-gun fever was at a pitch. It would be interesting to see what the results would have been of a poll taken shortly after the OWS demonstrations had occurred, if the question had been framed as:
“Do you think that a full scale revolution, in order to promote economic equalization, might be necessary in the next few years?”
Here is a link to the poll:
BELIEFS ABOUT SANDY HOOK COVER-UP, COMING REVOLUTION UNDERLIE DIVIDE ON GUN CONTROL
The poll was conducted in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting
Clarification: The Poll was conducted in May, 2013, The shooting occurred in Dec. 2012.
29% overall, not 38%.