Ricochet Member Recommended FeedRecommended by R> Members

U.S. Grant and Michael Corleone on Safe Spaces…

 

…and also featuring appearances by Dred Scott, Happy Gilmore, and the Alien movies.

Personal Memoirs of U.S. Grant, written as he was dying, is one of the finest memoirs by a senior Civil War officer (the other is Fighting for the Confederacy by Edward Porter Alexander). In its conclusion, Grant gives his views on the underlying reasons for the war:

Slavery was an institution that required unusual guarantees for its security wherever it existed . . . Hence the people of the South were dependent upon keeping control of the general government to secure the perpetuation of their favorite institution . . . They saw their power waning, and this led them to encroach upon the perogatives and independence of the Northern States by enacting such laws as the Fugitive Slave Law . . . Northern marshals became slave-catchers and Northern courts had to contribute to the support and protection of the institution.

Prior to the time of these encroachments the great majority of the people of the North had no particular quarrel with slavery, so long as they were not forced to have it themselves. But they were not willing to play the role of police for the South . . .

Recently rereading this passage I was struck by the echoes of 21st century Progressive thought with its invocation of “safe spaces” that require ever wider scope to make those feeling threatened be secure (and what was the Dred Scott decision other than making the entire United States a safe space for slavery?). It emphasizes what has become ever clearer since 2008; because Progressivism is a philosophy in which everything in society is political and thus potentially subject to government control, progressives cannot feel safe until all of society is aligned properly with their values. For most of us non-progressives our “happy place” is internal to us, or a portion of our private lives; for progressives it encompasses all of society. That is why progressives so aggressively seek domination of all aspects of society.

The long-standing and flourishing civil society institutions of America can only be allowed to operate in conformance with progressive philosophy; if not, progressives feel threatened. No breathing space is allowable.

That’s why every baker and florist who objects to SSM must be crushed;

that’s why the Little Sisters of the Poor must be forced to pay for contraceptives;

that’s why those who donate to non-profits not aligned with progressive values must be publicly identified and intimidated from making further contributions;

that’s why those who express contrary opinions are fair game to be hounded from their jobs even if those opinions are not expressed at work;

that’s why the First Amendment must be changed so people can’t make movies critical of progressive political candidates;

that’s why the IRS needs to stifle opposition political groups;

that’s why, as Peggy Noonan noted last year, progressives are unappeasable – they simply will not feel safe until all opposition is eradicated, privately as well as publicly.

In the name of diversity and tolerance they seek to impose a stifling comformity of thought, a conformity unprecedented in American history.

It’s a viewpoint captured in Godfather 2, when Michael Corleone points out in response to Tom Hagen’s question about why Michael needed to continue to kill people when he’d already won his gangland war, “I don’t feel I have to wipe everyone out, Tom. Just my enemies“.

The 21st century saw the open eruption of a toxic mix of progressive thought just like the creature bursting from the chests of crew members in the Alien movies; the first generation, which held sway into the 1960s, with its overweening confidence in central government control tempered by nationalism and pro-assimilation, combined with the post-Vietnam generation focused on identity politics and a black armband version of American history. We saw it come to fruition in the second Obama administration. It now seems evident to me that progressives felt the time had come to “run the table“, They held the Presidency, the permanent bureaucracy was staffed by their acolytes, they controlled most of the mass media, entertainment and sports worlds, the courts were increasingly in the grasp of living constitutionalists, academia and the major foundations were in their hands, the tech oligarchs and much of the financial services world on their side, and the rest of the business community mostly neutralized or even supporting parts of their agenda. To top it off, they believed demographics were inevitably playing out in their favor. It was payback time.

We saw how this all works together in practice in 2012. In 2008, candidate Obama assured Reverend Rick Warren that he opposed gay marriage stating, “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. For me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union — God is in the mix.” In 2012, President Obama announced he had changed his mind. Immediately, anyone who opposed gay marriage was denounced by all of the institutions listed above as a bigot, driven by malice, and worthy of expulsion from public life (or, in the case of Brandon Eich of Mozilla, from their job). We saw the same dynamic play out more recently on transgender bathrooms. Now these subjects are not even considered worthy of reasoned discussion by progressives; only haters apparently think there might be other considerations that can legitimately be raised.

It is this alignment of a charismatic leader figure, political party and the major institutions of our society immersed in a common progressive worldview that poses an authoritarian threat to the rest of us. They were already feeling angry, frustrated, threatened, and bewildered by the 2010 and 2014 elections when what looked to them like an ignorant, bigoted and substantial portion of the electorate disagreed with the progressive agenda. Now, it’s even worse – the unthinkable has happened and we have President Trump. If the Democrats regain the presidency and congress (which they will do eventually) while still retaining control of these other institutions it is going to be a very grim time for all of us nonconformists and dissenters.

You may doubt their sincerity about feeling threatened. While there is an element of political tactics, I think it is a real feeling for many progressives. We can see it in the way they project their fears and how they act themselves:

During the campaign we heard a lot of rhetoric about the threat Trump supporters posed to other campaigns, yet it was Clinton and Sanders supporters who disrupted Trump rallies, sometimes violently.

Immediately after the election we heard reports of hate crimes exploding across the country, supposedly encouraged by Trump and his supporters. Yet the vast bulk of such crimes turned out to be perpetrated by a diverse crowd of progressives. Imagine the how extensive media coverage would have been, and its tenor, if during that time a mentally disturbed individual in Mississippi killed someone because they thought they were Hillary Clinton? Yet, in Ithaca NY, a mentally disturbed man killed someone he thought was Donald Trump, and it got brief, one time mentions in some publications with no follow up.

And progressives were convinced that after January 20 the new administration would suppress dissent and maybe even arrange for a Reichstag type event to seize power. Yet it’s been progressives in Berkeley, Middlebury and elsewhere who have been the ones violently suppressed opposing viewpoints since Trump’s inauguration.

Donald Trump has a lot of problems, but today the authoritarian threat in this country is from the Left, not the Right. It’s serious and it’s a big problem for all of us.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s growing community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Members have made 15 comments.

  1. Profile photo of Quake Voter Thatcher

    Brilliant piece from start to finish. VDH-like. Thank you. You can replace “Slavery” with “Planned Parenthood” in the Grant quote seamlessly with a few geographic edits.

    • #1
    • March 19, 2017 at 6:37 pm
  2. Profile photo of Percival Thatcher

    Gumby Mark: We saw how this all works together in practice in 2012. In 2008, candidate Obama assured Reverend Rick Warren that he opposed gay marriage stating, “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. For me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union — God is in the mix.” In 2012, President Obama announced he had changed his mind.

    I always wanted someone to ask Obama about the revelation that he experienced. If it was a “sacred union” and God was in the mix, then Obama couldn’t just change his mind, God must have changed His. It would be quite a story: the President of the United States receiving direct communications from the Almighty. Yet somehow, that never happened.

    • #2
    • March 19, 2017 at 7:16 pm
  3. Profile photo of Quake Voter Thatcher

    Percival (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark: We saw how this all works together in practice in 2012. In 2008, candidate Obama assured Reverend Rick Warren that he opposed gay marriage stating, “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. For me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union — God is in the mix.” In 2012, President Obama announced he had changed his mind.

    I always wanted someone to ask Obama about the revelation that he experienced. If it was a “sacred union” and God was in the mix, then Obama couldn’t just change his mind, God must have changed His. It would be quite a story: the President of the United States receiving direct communications from the Almighty. Yet somehow, that never happened.

    Percival, he lost his spiritual adviser after 2008.

    • #3
    • March 19, 2017 at 7:26 pm
  4. Profile photo of Fake John/Jane Galt Thatcher

    I find it interesting that the Left side of my Facebook regularly portrays the killing of Trump and his supporters in a very casual manner. I do think the possibility of Trump being assassinated is high and a Left wing progressive tyrant rising afterward that will allow open season on the Left’s enemies to be somewhat likely. They just need to find their avatar.

    • #4
    • March 19, 2017 at 8:13 pm
  5. Profile photo of Richard Finlay Member

    Gumby Mark: And progressives were convinced that after January 20 the new administration would suppress dissent and maybe even arrange for a Reichstag type event to seize power.

    Of course they fear this; it is what they would do, given the chance.

    • #5
    • March 20, 2017 at 9:13 am
  6. Profile photo of Rightfromthestart Thatcher

    The whiplash inducing transgender bathroom thing may have been the bridge too far for many, what was perfectly normal one week was simply unthinkable the next.

    • #6
    • March 20, 2017 at 9:52 am
  7. Profile photo of Johnny Dubya Member

    Fantastic post. Really valuable and original insight.

    My only criticism is minor: You should provide links and/or references for the second and third block quotes.

    • #7
    • March 20, 2017 at 10:39 am
  8. Profile photo of Ford Penney Member

    The liberal left is the most self righteous, judgemental and Fascist group of anarchists anywhere. They will give no quarter so don’t expect any rational communication. They label anyone they disagree with as a ‘Nazi’ therefore they can do ‘what is necessary’.

    Equality of Outset by Robert McReynolds is a great post on this subject and should also be read.

    This is a quote from his piece:

    “There is no compromise with these people. There is no common ground on which we can stand. The battle we are engaged in is not a battle over minds via persuasion. The battle is over power, which side has the power can exert that power on the other side. They do not wish to work with us, they wish to rule over us. The sooner we all realize the ground on which they wish to fight this war, the sooner we can start beating them.”

    • #8
    • March 20, 2017 at 11:27 am
  9. Profile photo of barbara lydick Member

    Free speech for me but not for thee…

    • #9
    • March 20, 2017 at 12:16 pm
  10. Profile photo of Larry Koler Member

    Gumby Mark: And progressives were convinced that after January 20 the new administration would suppress dissent and maybe even arrange for a Reichstag type event to seize power.

    I do think you are right here that a lot of progressives said this — but I don’t really think that most of their leaders believed it. Most of their talk is in the form of rallying points to gin up hatred in the people in their ranks who might actually be stupid enough to believe this stuff. They need and depend on stupid people. This kind of talk is what makes it perfectly reasonable to use violence in the furtherance of their goals and the defense of themselves. The leaders don’t do the violence and they don’t openly (usually) foment violence but the reasoning employed in their rhetoric DOES indeed endorse and recommend violence.

    Although I call the progressives who do actually carry out the violence in the streets and in the universities stupid — in reality it makes sense to gain favor and notice among their progressive masters and most aren’t affected by a night in jail and are simply not chastened by any of the soft reactions used against them.

    I remember Christopher Hitchens talking about the Saddam Hussein regime scouring the countryside looking for evildoers. Yes, just like our government does — right? Well, the difference with Saddam (and the Bolsheviks, too, don’t forget) is that they were looking for potential employees in their police state whereas most governments look for criminals to get them off the streets.

    • #10
    • March 20, 2017 at 2:19 pm
  11. Profile photo of Bruce Caward Member

    Gumby Mark: Immediately after the election we heard reports of hate crimes exploding across the country, supposedly encouraged by Trump and his supporters. Yet the vast bulk of such crimes turned out to be perpetrated by a diverse crowd of progressives. Imagine the how extensive media coverage would have been, and its tenor, if during that time a mentally disturbed individual in Mississippi killed someone because they thought they were Hillary Clinton? Yet, in Ithaca NY, a mentally disturbed man killed someone he thought was Donald Trump, and it got brief, one time mentions in some publications with no follow up.

    Good grief, I live in Ithaca! and I did not hear about this. Granted, I work on construction projects out of state all week, but I’m home every weekend. I certainly heard about the pussy-march, all of Trumps crimes against humanity, anonanonanon, but this is a new one on me.

    If ths dude had shot an innocent UPS guy insisting it was Barak Obama, I’m sure the whole world would know his name.

    • #11
    • March 20, 2017 at 4:43 pm
  12. Profile photo of Ansonia Member

    Very suprising and interesting post, Mark.

    Question: Does Edward Porter Alexander’s memoir end up inadvertently verifying what Grant says about the reaction of Northerners to encroachments on their freedom for the purpose of protecting slavery ?

    Absolutely no mention is made of what Grant is saying here in a U. S. history book I sent to my daughter in law.

    • #12
    • March 21, 2017 at 9:23 am
  13. Profile photo of Ansonia Member

    The book I sent my daughter in law is ……

    Everything You Need To Ace American History In One Big Fat Notebook.

    It was written by a public school teacher (I think all the books in the series are) for Middle School students.

    • #13
    • March 21, 2017 at 9:46 am
  14. Profile photo of Gumby Mark Member
    Gumby Mark Post author

    barbara lydick (View Comment):
    Free speech for me but not for thee…

    Back when I was a liberal I thought of free speech as a principle. I still do, but to today’s progressives it is a tactic in which it can be disposed of when they have the upper hand.

    • #14
    • March 21, 2017 at 2:28 pm
  15. Profile photo of Gumby Mark Member
    Gumby Mark Post author

    Ansonia (View Comment):
    Very suprising and interesting post, Mark.

    Question: Does Edward Porter Alexander’s memoir end up inadvertently verifying what Grant says about the reaction of Northerners to encroachments on their freedom for the purpose of protecting slavery ?

    Absolurely no mention is made of what Grant is saying here in a U. S. history book I sent to my daughter in law.

    My recollection is that it does not. I don’t think it invalidated it, but don’t think it is addressed either way. The memoir has an unusual origin in that it was not published in Alexander’s lifetime (he died in 1909). It was pieced together from a memoir he’d written but it was not published until around 1990. It is very candid in its assessment of his fellow Confederate commanders. Alexander was reconciled to the Union and appointed by President Cleveland to mediate a dispute between two Central American countries and later lectured at West Point.

    • #15
    • March 21, 2017 at 2:33 pm