
By 1860 our country was so hopelessly divided that it broke up, and
only by force was it kept unified. While the North and South had
profound political, economic, and moral differences, institutional
slavery being paramount, the two halves had a great deal in common, so
much so that after the bloodletting and rage subsided, we were able to
come back together, let bygones be bygones, and live together in mutual
respect. More or less.
I’ll join any condemnation of Union atrocities and will not sit
quietly while revisionists paint the Union army as an avenging angel
doing God’s work trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath
were stored i.e. the South. The conduct of too many Union generals and
soldiers was vile. But, in fairness, it was war after all, and our
resistance to the invasion so tenacious that the North ultimately chose
to wage total war to win it.
But one thing I can say about the bluecoats was that they were not
trying to overthrow a common sense understanding of human nature. They
were not seeking the removal of God from public discourse, the
establishment of the welfare state, sexual liberation, abortion,
so-called gay marriage, or the feminisation of the military. While we
had profound differences, we shared the same core values.
The unity that was established after that war by and large remains
between the Old North and the Old South throughout America’s Town &
Country country. The new geographic division is between America’s
mega-cities and this same Town & Country.
But vastly more ominous is the contest between two worldviews,
secular and Christian, which has resulted in the elimination of
virtually all common ground.
My question is, how can any form of government umbrella two such
hopelessly irreconcilable worldviews as well as this new geographic
division between Town & Country and Mega-City?
It would seem to me that a return to the original federalism where
the states can once again challenge the federal government is the only
way to keep two disparate peoples at least nominally united under the
same constitution. That is, under a federal system California could
become a socialist utopia and Tennessee could remain backwards but at
least litter free. But our constitution does not address the new
elephant in the room. What is to keep Nashville from doing to Tennessee
what Chicago has done to Illinois and what New York City long ago did to
the state of New York?
It is said that the ancient Roman Republic finally collapsed in part
because the constitution that it had developed in its early years and
that had guided it so brilliantly for so long, ultimately wasn’t able to
stand the strain of Rome’s extraordinary success. Another factor was
the inevitability of changing times that the founders of that republic
could simply not have imagined much less accounted for.
Today in our country, time and changing circumstances have produced massive societal forces that are at loggerheads.
A return to federalism could relieve the tension between the states.
As to the rising tension between some of the states and their respective
Mega-Cities, I agree with those suggesting a constitutional change that
allows for the existence of semi-autonomous city states. Just something
to think about.
I can hear the people of Illinois cheering the idea.
The Abbeville Institute