“Wisconsin: What’s the Right Analogy?”
Gettysburg was a battle in a war over federalism and states’ rights — in this case the dubious and odious “right” to treat human beings as chattel — a cause that has given the phrase a notorious name for over a century and a half. Madison (ironically, named after a Founder and drafter of the Constitution) is also a battle over states’ rights — in this case the right of a state to rein in the new slaveholders — public employee unions who extort taxpayers to give them better wages and benefits than those who provide their funding by threatening to shut down vital services if their demands aren’t met. And this time, the new slavemasters are being supported by Washington. Let us hope that in this new civil (so far) civil war, in the cold winter battle of Madison, unlike on that hot July day in southern Pennsylvania, the rebels against the central government win, because this time, it will be in defense of human liberty.
Is it okay to call this a “new civil (so far) civil war”?
Because I was told doing so makes one a fringe extremist who polite society must self-righteously shun.
At any rate, I don’t think it very helpful. Truth is oftentimes messy and ugly: shouldn’t we therefore just do the civil thing and pretend that what we’re witnessing play out on the streets in Madison (and soon in other cities) is a just a kind of friendly battle over competing ideas — and not something that is, on an existential level, a very real battle for our country’s being?
I mean, we as a political movement want to attract “moderates” and “independents,” right? And we all know that such people are too stupid to understand anything that ventures beyond basic, milquetoast cant…