War and Culture, Pt. 3: The Breaking
The picture here may be stupid, but it actually refers to the classic Marvel "Civil War" comic book crossover arc. And it so happens that there are good reasons for my picking this particular image and theme - quite aside from the fact that I am a massive nerd, and the fact that this particular crossover arc dates back to the days when Marvel Comics had not completely surrendered to the SJW entryists and were still telling really good stories with good characters.
(That was ever so long ago...)
This is the final entry in a set of posts that I started writing nearly 2 years ago and never quite got around to finishing. The purpose of this group of posts is to look at the reasons behind the ongoing collapse of the West, and make some predictions as to how that collapse will play out. Let us be clear that when I talk about "The West", I mean very specifically the collection of nations that were built atop the three founding pillars of Western civilisation - the Graeco-Roman philosophical legacy; the Christian code of ethics, morality, and law; and the European nations.
Since the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and large parts of Eastern Europe all conform to these parameters, I lump them in with "the West". Arguments can be made for or against including Russia into that mix; I personally view Russia as more "Western" than "Eastern" anyway, but for the purpose of argument let us consider the Russian Federation as something of a different entity.
In the first post, I explored the reasons why the Western world has lost pretty much every war that it has fought since WWII. The fact is that the West has had almost every possible technological and material advantage in every war that it has fought since the epochal battles of the Second World War, and yet has repeatedly failed to achieve any kind of lasting victory. (The notable counterexample is the West's victory in the Cold War, which actually simply proves the point.)
I looked at the macroscopic situation across the Western world - and, I readily admit, made a number of fairly sweeping generalisations in the process - and concluded that the reason why the West has lost just about every war that it has fought in the last 70 years is because the West simply has no idea what it is fighting for anymore. "The West" as an identity no longer has any significant meaning or cohesion, and for that reason, the West always loses whenever it encounters an enemy that has a clear sense of self and identity.
In the second post, I narrowed my macroscopic examination of the West's serious strategic problem down to a more detailed look at the United States of America's particular problems, and I asked what would happen if America divided itself into two diametrically opposed armed camps. Who would win?
My conclusion was that the group with the greatest will to fight for something would win - and the group that fights against something would likely lose.
But, at that time, the possibility of open armed conflict, within the time of the God-Emperor's blessed reign, looked relatively remote.
That was in January 2017. Things have changed dramatically since then, in that the situation has severely deteriorated and become extremely volatile.
Take a look at the American political landscape today. What do you see?
If you look through the eyes of the Hard Right, you do not see a single American nation anymore. Such a thing has not existed for many years now. It is just that we are only now beginning to notice the rupture.
What you see today is two armed camps, each convinced that the other is profoundly evil and stupid.
The two-party political system is fracturing along the lines of group identity and racial politics. This is entirely to be expected; America is now a multiracial, multiethnic society, where non-whites agitate increasingly vocally and in some cases violently for their own group identities and their own right to govern themselves as they see fit.
The Republican Party is breaking apart into two main factions. The first and most visible is the party of the Washington Establishment, which believes in a relaxed attitude toward immigration, strong links between business and government, a muscular and interventionist foreign policy, and cheap labour and corporate welfare.
The second is a direct consequence of the legendary and spectacular victory of the God-Emperor, Donaldus Triumphus. It is basically the party of White America. It does not call itself that, yet, but that is basically what it is. There is, by the way, nothing in the least bit wrong with this. Nor is it surprising. That party wants tightly secured borders, a recognisably American nation, the preservation of Western - which is to say, white European Christian - civilisation, and limited involvement on the world stage.
The two factions of the Republican Party hate each other - but the Establishment wing is losing, and they know it full well. Trumpism and the civic nationalist philosophy of the mighty God-Emperor - flawed though it is - waxes strong in its ascendancy. The neocons and "Noble Defeat" cuckservatives are on the run. They hate that fact almost as much as they hate us, but their failures are so many and so manifest at this point that they have nothing useful left to contribute to the conversation.
However, if the ruptures among the Republicans are severe, the fracturing of the Democrat Party is far, far worse - and far more dangerous for the American ideal of a single, strong, unified country that lives by the motto, "E Pluribus Unum".
Take a close look at who the Democrats are putting up as their candidates these days, and you will quickly understand the depth of the problem:
And take a closer look at how liberalism, which was the dominant ideology in the USA from the 1950s to about the early 1970s, has mutated into the mind-rotting cancer that is modern Leftism:
If the rifts in the Republican Party are bad, the ones in the Democrat Party are much, much worse.
Republicans disagree mostly on what bits of Western civilisation are the most important to conserve - and on the most effective means of doing so.
Democrats disagree mostly on how fast America should drive the entire American experiment of self-governance over a cliff. One wing simply wants to take that T-bird swan dive off the cliff about 10-20 years later than the other, and at "only" 70mph instead of 200 - as if the lateral velocity would make the slightest bit of difference with respect to the force of the impact on the canyon floor.
(Few people have ever been dumb enough to claim that SJWs are particularly good at maths and physics, after all.)
That is more than merely a difference of opinion. That is literally two different countries trying to coexist in the same patch of land - it's a bit like dropping all of Venezuela into Colombia and then letting the two sides duke it out to see who wins.
So, to recap, the facts on the ground are as follows:
First, "The West", as a collective entity and identity, can no longer win wars against outside forces because it has no identity, no sense of self, to fight for any longer.
Second, the USA, which serves as a representative example of Western civilisation given its roughly hundred-year history as the great economic, cultural, and political engine of that same civilisation, is fracturing into two mutually antagonistic and extremely hostile armed camps. Those camps are defined by a clear sense of identity, of "us" and "them".
And third, there is no more common ground between these two armed camps. None whatsoever. The ideas and policies of one side are complete anathema to the other.
There is only one possible outcome from such a situation: war and bloodshed on a truly horrifying scale.
To understand why, you have to look back to the last time the USA was this divided internally.
That period consists of the days leading up to the War Between the States - a catastrophic, epoch-ending, generation-killing war that slaughtered over 600,000 young men, over 10% of America's population at the time, and left the entire South utterly shattered and destitute.
The war that is tamely known by most historians as "the American Civil War", and by Southerners by the rather more picturesque (and, it must be said, accurate) name of "the War of Northern Aggression", was so terrible, so destructive, and so appalling that in many ways the American South still has not recovered to this very day from what happened back then.
Yet... even back then, even with tempers fraying and passions running high, it was still possible for men from opposite sides to attend the same wedding together. Such is what happened when a certain Captain George Armstrong Custer, from the Union, attended the wedding of a certain Captain John Lea in Williamsburg, Virginia.
The men in question were friends. They had much in common. Their differing loyalties and views about the rights of the several States relative to the Federal government, and the question of slavery as an economic institution, pitted them against each other on the field of battle. But they were still kin in many ways. They still believed in most of the same things. They still had deep loyalties to the idea of America - they simply had different interpretations about how to go about achieving that idea in practice.
As the article from The American Spectator linked above points out:
One need only compare the Confederate Constitution to the United States Constitution to see that the former bears a striking resemblance to the latter. And far from being a national socialist charter, the Confederate Constitution puts even more restraints on federal power and limits the president to one six-year term.
The great seal of the Confederacy bears the image of George Washington, many of whose relatives served with the Confederacy, including Lieutenant James B. Washington, a West Point classmate of Custer’s (the two had a famous picture taken together — Washington was a prisoner of war — a few weeks before Lea’s wedding).
North and South venerated the Founders. They shared the same language, the same religion, and, in large part, the same general stock. Most of all, they shared what Jeff Sessions was recently rebuked for calling an “Anglo-American heritage” of liberty under law, stretching from the mists of medieval England — even before Magna Carta — to our own Bill of Rights.
Today, however, our divisions are so deep and fundamental that Americans cannot even agree on what marriage is or what a man or a woman is (which is pretty darn fundamental).
There was common ground between North and South in the days leading up to the War Between the States. There was still common ground even when the two sides traded mortal blows and bled each other dry on battlefields across the American heartland.
There was common ground even after the South was finally vanquished and surrendered, exhausted, starved, thoroughly beaten, at Appomattox Courthouse in 1865. On that day, General Joshua L. Chamberlain, one of the truly legendary and gallant heroes of the Union's armies, ordered his men to salute the defeated Confederates and honour their courage and fighting spirit.
That war, dreadful and terrible though it was, had been fought by men who viewed the idea of America through fundamentally very different lenses. They agreed on almost everything, except the question of whether the individual States had the right to repudiate the mandates and laws of the Federal government and secede.
And for that one difference, more or less, over half a million men died at arms.
That was then. Today, that common ground is gone. It no longer exists in America. At all.
The neo-Marxist, SJW-dominated Left hates America and everything about the Spirit of America. It believes that America is a racist, sexist, homophobic, bigoted, intolerant country run by white men. It believes that the power structures envisioned by the Constitution are oppressive and demeaning to non-white races, and seeks to divert power away from white people into the hands of those oppressed minorities. The amount of power to be allocated to any given identity group is defined based on how "oppressed" that identity group is, according to an ever more detailed and ever expanding list of group identities that become more specific and more ridiculous the deeper on looks.
The Hard Right loves America, or at least, what America USED TO BE. It loves an America that was safe, clean, orderly, civilised, quiet, efficient, well-run, and - this is quite important - predominantly white and Christian. That is because, when America was these things, it worked. It functioned. It was a profoundly good place to live in.
These two sides have nothing whatsoever in common. There can be no reconciliation between two sides who are so fundamentally opposed on so many levels.
The only possible outcome, both in the USA and across the rest of the Western world, is war.
Now, most of the Hard Right would argue that just because we right-wing nut jobs have all of the guns and plenty of itchy trigger fingers, we will win by default against whiny Leftist losers with no nuts and no jobs.
I am not nearly so certain anymore about our prospects.
You see, the problem with us right-wing nutters is that we are a highly individualistic bunch. We don't like being told what to do. We don't trust central authority. We trust in our neighbours and our communities. We trust those most like ourselves.
That's all well and dandy in a country where you can trust your neighbour, and it leads to some generally quite good outcomes because people are simply left the hell ALONE to live as they please as long as they leave everyone else alone.
But that sort of loose militia-like structure is not going to win a war against organised, if cowardly, enemies.
As to how we can overcome this problem, I leave that for another day and for far better and wiser minds than mine. All I can say for certain is that war is coming. It is absolutely inevitable at this point.
I had hoped, and indeed prayed, that war of this sort could be avoided with the victory of the God-Emperor. But, through no fault of his own, the God-Emperor's victories are themselves the things that are driving the Left absolutely berserk with rage and hatred.
They will not listen to reason or compromise with us any longer. Nor are we interested in compromising with them, for they represent everything which is evil and degenerate.
All we can do at this point is prepare, and be ready when the day comes - for it will come - when we too must pledge our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honour to defend all that we hold dear.