The Enemy Within

America was created by peoples predominantly of a single race. The overriding ethic was European Judeo-Christian. The motto of the original 13 Colonies encapsulates the essence of this formation: e pluribus unum – out of many, one.

John Jay's famous passage in Federalist #2 reflects on this cohesion:

With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people -- a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.

In the article, "The Democrats’ Second Secession & America’s New Civil War - How to look at the bizarre turn our political life has taken" (FrontPage Mag, May 26, 2017), David Horowitz misses the mark, stating:

Normally, nations have been formed on the basis of common origins, ethnicities, and languages – a modern form of tribalism. In contrast, America was created by peoples of diverse origins and ethnicities and on principles that were universal. The American union was forged in a set of founding documents that insisted on the equality of citizens – regardless of origins.

In actuality, America was created by people of similar origins and ethnicities, and upon founding documents that established the rule of law, individual rights, equality of citizens under the law, and a limited scope of centralized government. 

Horowitz then regains traction as he notes the lengthy effort required to solidify our foundational ethic, pointing out that it took two hundred years of struggle, including a Civil War to achieve the American ideal. Today, this ideal has become remarkably shattered. Horowitz writes:

If one political faction is now able to redefine the ideal to conform to its own sectarian beliefs, the country we have known will cease to exist. But that is just what the current creed of the Democratic Party - “identity politics” - entails, and is why the current divisions in our political life seem so intractable. Identity politics is, in fact, the antithesis of the American idea. It is a reversion to tribal loyalties. It regards diverse origins – colors, ethnicities, genders and classes - as primary, and proposes a hierarchy of privilege based on them, which it justifies as a reversal of past oppressions.

Howoritz observes how the Democrat party has transmogrified from a political party into a full-blown political resistance movement:

It is not the proper role of an opposition party in a democracy to mount a “resistance” to a duly elected government and press for its overthrow at the very outset of its tenure. But that is precisely what the Democrats have done in the first months of the Trump administration. For the second time in its history, the Democratic Party has opted to secede from the Union and its social contract. This time there is not going to be an actual civil war because the federal government is now so powerful that whoever controls it will decide the outcome. The passions of an irreconcilable conflict are still present but they are channeled into a political confrontation over the executive power...

It might be noted that the Democrat party today is anything but Democratic. Horowitz explains the essence of the Democrat rage, which derives from an ethic that is the antithesis of America's foundational ethic:

Behind this Democratic rage is the conviction that the Trump administration represents a reactionary throwback to the status quo ante before Obama began “fundamentally transforming the United States of America,” as he promised on the eve of his election. The new order towards which progressives think they are marching is called “social justice.” To Democrats the hierarchy of privileges they offer groups on the basis of ethnicity, skin color, and gender is “social justice.” It defines the society they intend to create, which in their eyes is mortally threatened by the Trump regime and its conservative supporters.

During the second presidential debate, there was a seminal moment illuminating this conflict. It occurred when Trump turned to the fifty million viewers in the television audience, and said, “You have to understand, Hillary has tremendous hatred in her heart.” He was referring to Clinton’s campaign remark that her opponents belonged in “a basket of deplorables – irredeemables,” whom she went on to name: “Racists, sexists, homophobes, Islamophobes, xenophobes…” Trump, she said, had “raised them up,” and that made him “unfit” to be America’s president...

Horowitz further explains the leftist ideology:

The theory behind “identity politics” is an ideology the political left refers to as “cultural Marxism.” This is a perspective that takes Marx’s view that society is divided into warring classes, and extends it to encompass races, genders, and ethnicities. It is a vision that regards one group’s success as another group’s oppression. “Social justice” - the proposed remedy for inequality and division - punishes oppressor groups by redistributing their incomes and privileges to the “under-represented,” “marginalized” and otherwise oppressed. It is a vision that disregards the accountability of individuals and ascribes to group identities the inequalities that are allegedly unjust...

“Systemic racism” and “institutional racism” are anti-American mythologies that drive the Democratic Party’s political agendas. The Democratic platform and Democrats generally, regard every social disparity as prima facie evidence of racial or gender oppression, and attribute such disparities not to individual decisions and performances but to un-named “policies,” which if they actually existed would be illegal...

Similarly, the animus behind Democratic assaults on Republicans and their support for law and order as “racist” is the direct consequence of viewing all social disparities through the distorted lens of oppression politics...

It can be noted that in principle, conservatives desire to honor and protect America's founding ethic, while progressives advocate its replacement. The Democrat party embraces an agenda of squabbling special interest groups in order to bolster their support for the Party. The payoff for the special interest groups is that of increased political power as well as handouts paid for by American taxpayers. In particular, illegal aliens reap a huge amount of public handouts, doled out primarily by the Democrat party.

Horowitz points out that patriotic conservatives have recognized this danger:

Trump and his followers not only understand the fateful nature of the conflict triggered by decades of these assaults. Their campaign to “Make America Great Again” is inspired by them...

At this point, it will take a monumental effort for the Trump administration to rout out entrenched deep state progressive / cultural Marxist / Democrat operatives who so vehemently oppose the patriotic principles by which President Trump was elected. Better get to it. 


CAIRCO Research

The Political Spectrum

Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness

Identity Politics: squabbling factions

Movement Conservatism, Neoconservative orthodoxy, and Trump