Orchestrating Conflicts

It seems all too likely that the peoples of the States are being led purposefully by the Elite into open, physical conflict.  Consider some of the emotionally-charged issues that have come to the fore recently:

-Border wall vs no border wall;

-Pro-Israel vs pro-Palestinian/Assad/Iran;

-Impeach Donald Trump or protect him;

-Socialist vs capitalist;

-For Confederate monuments or against;

-Man-made climate change ‘believers’ vs climate change ‘deniers’;

-Trans-genderism vs ‘cis’-genderism;

-Pro-abortion vs pro-life.

This last is the most important.  Several States have simultaneously introduced legislation to protect abortion ‘rights’.  Recalling Hillary Clinton’s recent comment about using the States’ powers to protect ‘civil rights’ (https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/blog/progressive-neo-confederates/), this smacks of serious behind-the-scenes collusion (to use one of the favored political buzzwords of the day). 

Given that both sides of the abortion issue are extremely zealous for their causes; that the pro-life side sees this issue as precisely a replay of the fight between abolitionists and slave-owners (with themselves as the inheritors of the righteous mantle of the Yankee abolitionists); that the vast majority of pro-lifers view very favorably Lincoln’s war against the South ‘to exterminate slavery’ (this is the lie they tell themselves about that war, anyway:  https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/review/the-dark-side-of-abraham-lincoln/); that many pro-lifers love to sing ‘The Battle Hymn of the Republic’ with its gory, blood-soaked lines that glory in the slaughtering of Southerners - given all this, we have in the making another powder keg that could possibly explode into physical violence. 

To make matters worse, both sides, the left and the right, are insisting more than ever on pure majority rule to settle the issue.  But King Numbers is a terrible master, as John Randolph of Roanoke was fond of pointing out.  Abortion is a terrible evil, but the answer isn’t to cram yet another divisive federal law or ruling down the throats of those who disagree.  A better path forward is a return to what John C. Calhoun advocated and what the States had under the Articles of Confederation:  government by unanimity (or very large supermajorities at the very least).

Mr Calhoun, in his studies of history, had seen the divisive effects of simple majority rule, how it provoked a continual warfare between majority and minority for control of government.  For the health of the social organism, he rightly perceived, there must be harmony amongst all its organs, not the pulverization of them and their scattering and scrapping as little, isolated political atoms (see his Disquisition on Government).  At the federal level, this will mean unanimity of the member countries (States) in House and Senate.  At the State level, this will mean unanimity of the members that make up the organic whole of each State:  churches, guilds, clans, towns, counties, parishes, schools, and the like.

It is well to remember here that kings are also a great boon to harmony in a country.  Not belonging to any of the classes, institutions, etc., that make up his realm (with the exception of the Church, to which most usually belong anyway, however), he is able to act as a peacemaker amongst them all.  Such are the blessings we miss out on here in the South for being too wedded to republican ideology.

Withal, unanimity is the goal, but it is not always attainable.  But all efforts ought to be made toward that end.  On the pro-life front, Louisiana’s law requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital is a good ensample of prudent lawcraft:  It passed with near unanimous votes in both legislative chambers, 85-6 in the House, 34-3 in the Senate (https://www.heritage.org/courts/commentary/supreme-court-halts-louisiana-abortion-law-now). 

By this sort of margin (a near unanimous supermajority, ¾, 4/5, 9/10:  the higher the better) all laws ought to be passed in order to have a peaceful political life here in the States.  No matter how important we think a measure, let it become law only where it can be passed with such numbers, whether it is a sleepy little town or a whole State.  This will defuse many of the social tensions being experienced here in the States at present.  We ought to be glad to see proposed laws fail time after time so that we can live in peace with one another.  As the Holy Apostle Paul says, ‘Be of one mind’ (Phil. 2:2).

But foolishly, very foolishly, those who call themselves conservatives (Sen Ben Sasse, Tony Perkins, Pres Trump, etc., etc.) desire to force pro-life measures on States who don’t want them by federal dictate (and vice versa).  Yet such fanaticism (and it needn’t be on the life issue, either; it could just as easily be immigration, the Mueller investigation, etc.) is exactly what the demonic Elite want so they can swoop in and put an end to the non-stop dialectical clashes with a new totalitarian synthesis of their own devising.  Let us be content, therefore, to do our work, as much as possible, quietly and by small degrees, keeping in mind the parable of our Lord about the leaven and the measure of meal (St Matthew 13:33).

--

Holy Ælfred the Great, King of England, South Patron, pray for us sinners at the Souð, unworthy though we are!

Anathema to the Union!