This is interesting: What Issue Was Really at the Heart of the Civil War, and is it Relevant Today? Excerpt:
The central question regarding secession, in both cases, was the same as South Carolina’s in 1832 and 1861. If the people of a state surmise that the federal government is pursuing policy which comprises the liberty and prosperity of its citizens, does that state have to conform to what is perceived by the people of the state as unconstitutional abuse of power, or, more bluntly, intolerable tyranny?
Dumbing down history to simple, easily digestible falsehoods (like “the Civil War was fought to free the slaves,” for example) is the easiest and most effective way to make those falsehoods common knowledge. That’s why the leftist propagandists and racial grievance hustlers in academia, the media, and the government do it. The truth about what led the country to the Civil War, however, is anything but simple or easily digestible.
Red and blue states have, in fact, diverged into patterns of life which have become increasingly antithetical in recent years, and antagonisms and rivalries are growing in intensity. Blue states did fleece the taxpayers of red states last year by demanding a federal bailout for their decision to keep their states irrationally closed during the pandemic and in order to keep their broken, and internally unsustainable, entitlement programs afloat. There is a high moral tone being expressed on abortion in red states, an institution which disregards the right to life among the unborn just as the institution of slavery disregarded the right to liberty among slaves. Extremists on both sides are inflaming passions. Effete coastal liberals and elitists in the media and academia view middle-class, red state denizens as anachronistic God-worshippers who prioritize their families and communities before the needs of the national collective, and are thereby impediments on that Hegelian path of history toward their inevitable vision of “progress.”
Red and blue states do, in many ways, seem as separate parts locked in a struggle which must be resolved if we are to function as a nation. Will this warring duality be resolved, or will we explode when, for example, the federal government decides to mandate vaccination IDs be issued by all of the states, and several states refuse?
Again, if the people of a state surmise that the federal government is pursuing policy which comprises the liberty and prosperity of its citizens, does that state have to conform to what is perceived by the people of the state as unconstitutional abuse of power, or can it express its autonomy and liberty without the prospect of being attacked by the federal government for having done so?
That last sentence is key. Why? Well, I’m a-gonna tell you.
The big question, of course, is “if one or more states announces their secession from the Union, will the Imperial City seek again to restore that Union by force of arms?” My guess is “probably not,” but that doesn’t mean there wouldn’t be a conflict.
I’ve hashed this out a number of times in these virtual pages. To say a civil war is something no sensible person wants to see happen is the grossest of understatements. But it’s also getting hard to deny that we’re in something of a cold civil war now, and it’s getting harder and harder to see how things will shake out – because the current state of affairs sure can’t last forever.