The Civil War and Today's America Part 2

You might be asking yourself how the civil war has anything to do with today's America. It is definitely not an obvious comparison to most. America is so different today than it was back then, what with smart phones, the internet and about ten thousand new laws in place. Not to mention that slavery has been over for a long time and race relations are supposedly much better than they were. Take a moment and recall the causes of the war, the crippling of state power and the economic interests of a large segment of Americans not being represented in the National government. Sound familiar? It should. The middle class has been under attack in this country for all of my twenty plus years of life and the working class has been hit over and over with regressive taxation and abuse by the wealthy.

I struggle with a belief that the next great civil war in the US will be fought over civil rights, security and class. As I promised in my last post, this will be a limited analysis of the USA PATRIOT Act, race relations from the perspective of a white male in NJ and other issues dealing mainly with the economy. Again, my goal is to answer this question, "Are we living in the the second great antebellum period of United States history?"

This discussion will begin with the Patriot Act. I will definitely not go deeply into my beliefs about this piece of legislation, but will only say that I feel as though it is an outright attack on our civil liberties in favor of security. Also, as long as prisons such as Guantanamo Bay exist and our speech is so completely monitored by our government, we are not truly free in America; at least not as free as we used to be and believe we are. The Act is essentially a huge expansion of government power allowing for 1) easy access to any electronic communications made by citizens to anyone domestic or abroad, 2) a reduction in checks and balances that historically have existed to make the process of arrest and investigation deliberate and slow in order to be both complete and error free, 3) the elimination of legal loopholes that allow American citizens to go free when their rights are not respected during an investigation, most notably Miranda rights, 4) an expansion of surveillance on American citizens under the guise of increased security against terrorism and other increased government powers. My first thoughts when I read this legislation were about the name and about how much these provisions remind me of George Or well's 1984, in which the government controls every aspect of every citizen's life through excessive monitoring. All of these together equate to an increase in federal power at the expense of state power, one of the major issues facing America during antibellum.

Of course, to be against a bill called the Patriot Act is viewed by the uneducated masses as being anti-patriotic. Of course, those of us who know a little bit about American government and political theory understand that criticizing the government and its policies is not only patriotic, but a duty of every American in order to check and balance its powers. Politicians are experts at using language like this to pressure the legislature into handing out yes votes in order to remain electable next cycle. What senator or congressman in his or her right mind would vote against something with the word Patriot in its title? It would likely be career suicide regardless of what the bill actually was about, simply because the ignorant masses will think of them as unpatriotic, voting them out of office as soon as possible.

In addition to this law in particular, the government has also supported on numerous occasions provisions for gun control, citing public safety. Regardless of your position on gun ownership, I think we can all agree on this one point. Every good government should serve and fear its people as its primary goals. The people should not fear its government. Today, I believe that the American populace definitely fears its government more than ever before. I ask this fundamental question. In a United States without a large, independent standing militia (keeping in mind that the National Guard is government controlled), how are the people supposed to stand up against their government when its leadership oversteps its function of serving the people and becomes tyrants only interested in maintaining or growing the power of those in office? A disarmed America is a compliant America. Some might argue that I am missing the part of the debate where the NRA is one of the largest and most influential lobbying groups in the country, or how states fight for the right of gun ownership. Think about the gun amendment of the constitution. At the time, Americans feared invasion by Britain and wanted every citizen to be able to individually protect the nation if the necessity arose. When the next great civil war begins, who will have all the military power? Certainly not the general populace. The US military will put down any insurrection, no matter how just, no matter how needed, in order to protect the interests of a small group of predominantly rich, white men.

In regard to the topic of race relations in my view, you must know a little bit about my personal history. I am a twenty something white male who grew up in a lower middle class family in what most of my peers would refer to as a wealthy town. I lived in a housing development that quickly transformed from predominantly white, to predominantly Latino, variations of black, Asian and Middle Eastern. The school I went to had a population of roughly 3,500 students, only about twenty to thirty percent of whom would be classically labeled as minority. Of the remaining white population, roughly seventy to eighty percent were first or second generation Italians. Being mostly Polish, German and Irish, I was what I considered a white minority. The students, as teenagers tend to do, were struggling to find an identity and mainly identified ethnically more than any other factors such as interests, hobbies and socioeconomic status. Basically, the school was a good representation of what I have seen so far in this country, a series of self-segregated social groupings with a few exceptions. I have never believed in the notion of a melting pot, where different cultures mix so thoroughly that distinctions are difficult to make between people of different racial backgrounds. Though this certainly does happen over time, the time it takes for this viewpoint to come to fruition is greater than the short lifetime of this nation thus far. I more believe America is a mixing bowl. Different ethnicities live together in the same bowl, but often separately. Homogenization of cultural differences does occur slowly, yet almost imperceptibly. Have you ever visited an inner city? Perhaps a China Town, or a Little Italy? These places exist in our country because of this lack of melding. Is racism alive and well in America? You betcha. However, it is no longer limited to white Europeans' beliefs about black Africans. All ethnicities in this country have racial stereotypes about each other and a certain level of hatred for perceived differences. Not only that, but special holiday periods such as Black History month continue to point out how our populace believes we are quite obviously different and need to study those differences. Shouldn't awareness of other cultures and histories be an obvious goal of American Education without the need for such specialized attention? In summation, we are no less a racist nation than antebellum America before the war. Don't believe that unfair and unequal laws don't exist in today's America either. Affirmative action, hate crime legislation and anti-terrorist profiling has created a nation of unfairness and irregularity.

In regards to slavery in particular, is our working class not in an almost slave state? This socioeconomic status often leads to a fatalistic belief in that the only way to be upwardly mobile is to become famous or commit crime. This does not sound like the mobility promised to my peers and me when I was a youth being told that I could do anything I wanted when I grew up. Sure, given the right parents, the right school and the right opportunities I could grow up to be, oh I don't know, a history teacher or some such. However, take any of those away and I'm just one more working class gentleman with no ability to increase my salary. A lack of choice is what defines slavery throughout history. Whether that choice be taken away by a personal belief or by a master with a whip, Americans are living enslaved to those in power.

I believe that the election apathy I have witnessed in my lifetime is not necessarily an indication of submission to an oppressive government. Though our leadership has done a great job of molding public perception into a belief that there are no tyrants in office, that all laws passed are in our best interest, the big cooperation controlled propaganda machine we call the media has been losing the faith of the people. The internet has expanded our minds in its ability to allow us to communicate our ideas free of censorship and spin, despite big brother watching every second. The American people's economic interests are again under attack in much more complex ways. It will only take one unifier, one charismatic leader to speak the obvious truth to the people in order for the oppressed masses to rise up against this government. Fortunately, that leader is not me. I simply observe and report. Election apathy may be a sign of something else, a growing disdain for voting for career politicians who no one trusts. I see a day coming when our government will experience votes of no confidence, where neither major party is greatly supported. This may also once again turn into notions sussession from states who think they can do better. Again, I will restate my initial hypothesis. The next great American civil war is coming. It is not a matter of if, but when.

I would like to end this post with a quote from my favorite historical author, John Locke.

"Whensoever therefore the Legislative shall transgress this fundamental Rule of Society; and either by Ambition, Fear, Folly or Corruption, endeavor to grasp themselves or put into the hands of any other an Absolute power over the Lives, Liberties and Estates of the People; By this breach of Trust they forfeit the Power...whenever the Legislators endeavor to take away, and destroy the Property of the People, or to reduce them to Slavery under Arbitrary Power, they put themselves into a state of War with the people..." - John Locke, Two Treatises of Government

The Civil War and Today's America Part 1

I often wonder when the next civil war will be in this country. It is not really a matter of if in my mind, but when. The original civil war was fought over social and economic issues that were incredibly important to the nation at the time. As we continue into this brave new world of terrorism, super-sized government control and technology that is advancing faster than our ability to make moral decisions, it is important to remember what is at stake. In this two-part post I will examine the USA PATRIOT Act, race relations in America today and other modern issues. My hope is to aid the reader in deciding an answer to this question, "Are we living in the the second great antebellum period of United States history?"

Freedom was one of the largest reasons for the American Revolution and had roots in English writers such as John Locke and Thomas Pain. These men, and the revolutionary thinkers who came after, believed that the head of government should exist in order to protect and promote the safety, happiness and property of the people. Property in this sense was not just land, but possessions, investments and interests. When British colonists felt thoroughly opressed by taxation and felt ignored by a lack of their economic interests being represented in England, they decided to separate. This separation has easily be seen as more of a succession from England rather than an internal revolution. This sentiment was again seen during what I refer to as the first antebellum period in the US.

Causes for the civil war usually are typically whittled down to the issue of slavery and because of this emphasis, it is useful to examine the issue from a historian's viewpoint. As a history teacher and as a teacher who has been in several districts for a few years, it still amazes me how little students in public schools know about the issue of slavery in America and how they know nothing at all of slavery elsewhere. While, I won't fully examine the issue in this post, some thought must be given in order to understand the issue. Generally, the consensus tends to be that evil white men enslaved innocent black men, women and children for their own economic gain. This is an extremely racist view, not only because it assumes that white men were inherently evil and ambitious imperialists, but also because it assumes that Africans were like children, lacking in intelligence, martial defense and civilized resistance. However, racism was the key idea when it came to slavery and the idea that more advanced civilizations should conquer less civilized peoples was a strong belief in Europe for centuries.

It is a common misconception, especially with students, that 1)slavery has never existed before white Europeans oppressed black Africans and 2)the abolitionist, free North had no ill will toward freed Africans. This couldn't be further from the truth. Slavery has existed in several forms for thousands of years, including ancient civilizations such as Greece and Egypt. It never blinked out of existence throughout human history and still continues in various forms today. Secondly, racism was a big part of being an American, even in the North. Northerners generally believed that it was not only immoral, but not economically necessary. The North was using a totally different economic system in which they had paid employees manufacturing products, not slaves. In reality, slavery was always an economic issue more than it was a moral issue. Unfortunately, students seem to miss this important concept.

The slavery issue eventually came down to Federal power versus State power. Keep in mind that the US was a series of independent colonies with their own government and power structure. These states were essentially countries in their own right unified under a central government in order to have unified military protection from foreign interests. At the time, the moral and economic debate of slavery transformed into a political power issue of who should decide whether a state would be free or slave. The Federal government, especially under the administration of the recent presidents leading up to and including Lincoln, were enacting policies that clearly demonstrated how the national interest trumped the state interest by introducing new, free territories into the nation. The South, feeling as tohugh its policial power was crippled and its economic interests were being ignored, decided to go the route of the US and succeed. Essentially the civil war can be seen as an attempt at what I will call the Confederate Revolution of North America. This revolution, unlike our own, ultimately failed. Slavery was abolished by Lincoln crippling the South's economy and military.

Look for comparisons of these events to today's America in "The Civil War and Today's America Part 2."