Reading: Billmon on "A House Divided"

While some of us spent yesterday celebrating Jeffersonian rationalism or Voltairean irony (or just kicked back with our TiVo backlog), over at the Whiskey Bar, Billmon marked Independence Day by posting a long, thoughtful, grounded--and depressing--meditation on the state of the union. He starts with a thumbsucker by the NYTimes' John Tierney: What if the Confederacy had won the Civil War? Would it have headed off the discord of the so-called Red and Blue states that we see in America today?

Billmon's response works through three centuries of Anglo-American history, the Spanish Civil War, and the Civil Rights struggles of the 1960s to arrive at this answer: No.

Here's a taste:

If I had to boil our modern kulturkampf down to two words, they wouldn't be blue and red, they would be "traditionalist" and "modern." On one side are the believers in the old ways -- patriarchy, hierarchy, faith, a reflexive nationalism, and a puritanical, if usually hypocritical, attitude towards sexual morality. On the other are the rootless cosmopolitians -- secular, skeptical (although at times susceptible to New Age mythology) libertine (although some of us aren't nearly as libertine as we'd like to be) and less willing to equate patriotism with blind allegiance, either to a flag or a government.

Those are still crude oversimplifications -- although at least they avoid the inanity of making musical taste into a political philosophy. But I think they capture something essential about modern Amerrican society, which has been transformed from a still heavily agrarian provincial backwater (circa 1930 or even 1950) into the post-industrialized center of a global empire in a historical blink of time.

Rapid social changes often produce cultural reaction, which in turn spawns angry political movements. Post Civil War industrialization and financial colonization produced the Populists -- both good (Mother Jones) and bad (Tom Watson and Pitchfork Ben Tilman.) The waves of 19th and early 20th century immigration spurred the rise of the Know Nothings and the modern Klu Klux Klan. The New Deal and the civil rights era incited the John Birch Society and Goldwater conservatism. And now the blowback effects of globalization (what conservative ideologues sneeringly deride as "multiculturalism") coupled with the patriotic and xenophobic passions unleashed by the war against Al Qaeda, have turbocharged the traditionalists into declaring something close to all-out war on the modernists -- as symbolized, at the moment, by the traitorous New York Times.

But two things complicate the schematic. One is the fact that the modern American political dialectic is superimposed on older but still extant divisions: geographic (North and South), religious (Catholic and Protestant), ethnic (WASPs and everybody else) and of course class (with the great divide in American politics usually falling between the middle class and the poor.)

These geographic layers of conflict -- some still active, others now almost dormant) vastly complicate the political landscape and create major headaches for partisans on the opposing sides. And so we get books like What's the Matter With Kansas?, and have Weekly Standard editors who wonder whether Big Business economic policies won't eventually wreck the GOP coalition.

All of which leads Billmon (by way of a wide-ranging historical argument that I've skipped but you shouldn't) to this:

Talk of disunion and civil war may seem like hyperbole. I'm sure it would certainly seem so to the vast majority of Americans who don't think much about politics or culture and just want to get on with their lives. I'm sure most Spaniards felt the same way in the summer of 1936, just as most Americans did in the winter of 1860.

But the historical truth is that civil wars aren't made by vast majorities, but by enraged and fearful minorities. Looking at America's traditionalists and the modernists today, I see plenty of rage and fear, most, though hardly all, of it eminating from the authoritarian right. For now, these primal passions are still being contained within the boundaries of the conventional political process. But that process -- essentially a system for brokering the demands of competing interest groups -- isn't designed to handle the stresses of a full-blown culture war.

Compared to most countries, America has been very lucky so far -- those kind of passions have only erupted in massive bloodshed once (well, twice if you count the original revolution.) By definition, however, something that has already happened is no longer impossible. It's easy for newspaper columnists to fantasize about disunited states, but only madmen would actually try to make them so. Unfortunately, the madmen are out there. It's up to the rest of us to keep them under control.

It's on the Readings list.