The Case for Christian Secession

Please note that this essay was written one day before the 2016 Presidential Elections in the United States, and it was that election cycle, as well as all the cultural issues surrounding it, which served as the catalyst for the thought that Christian secession was an idea whose time had come.

No matter what happens during America’s 2016 Presidential election, and regardless of whether Trump or Clinton become the next president of the United States, what this election has done is clearly display not only the deep divisions which separate the people of the United States, but it has also truly shown the contempt with which large swaths of the American population view each other. One side of the political spectrum calls great chunks of the other side “deplorable” and labels them with every “ism” that there is; at the same time, the other side views its political opponents as corrupt, godless, and often degenerate. So, in light of this animosity, how can such a national relationship continue? Indeed, consider that if a husband viewed his wife as a degenerate, and the wife viewed her husband as a deplorable racist and sexist, then how long would such a marriage last? More importantly, why the hell should it last at all if it did not need too? Indeed, when huge portions of the populace truly despise each other, and when they each view the other side as irrational, and when they also each seek political power to force their views on large groups of people who completely oppose those views, then why should such a population stay together, especially if they do not have to?

The fact is that the people of the United States are no longer united by one large and overarching moral worldview with mere political differences at the edges of their ethical landscape. Rather, now, the separations that exist occur at the very core of their different worldviews. For example, one side views abortion itself as abhorrent, the other side finds any restriction of abortion as abhorrent. One side views bigger government and more restrictions on firearms as desirable, while the other side views more government and a restriction on firearms as the beginnings of a tyranny against their liberties which they will not be able to defend against. One side sees prayer in school as the start of a theocracy, and the other side sees a lack of prayer in school as the imposition of secularism where it never belonged. And these are, of course, just a few examples of the issues that divide Americans. But such examples illustrate that the divisions that now exist between people in the United States exist at such a fundamental level, that reconciliation is simply not possible, for each side views the other as irrational, and the worldviews of each side are so disparate that each side looks at the world in a fundamentally different way. The United States is, in a way, a country filled with different nations. It is no longer one nation under God. And note that when we speak of a division in the country, we are not speaking of something like a theological difference, which, though important, nevertheless still allows different groups to be bound together by the core moral belief that they are, say, all creatures of God; rather, this is the type of division between a socially liberal progressive group that thinks that God either does not exist, or is unimportant, or that He accepts all currently fashionable progressive behaviors, and a socially conservative group that thinks that God should be at the center of a nation’s spirit and also views many of the aforementioned progressive behaviors as wrong, immoral, and even absurd.

Thus, at this point, with such deep divisions, the only thing that will maintain country-wide unity is either force, distracting past-times, or the mass conversion of one side or the other. And while mass conversion will not happen to either side, and while distracting past-times are at best a mere smoke-screen that solves nothing, the fact is that force, via the state, is the only option left to one side or the other. But as things become more heated between the two large groups in the United States, the use of state-sponsored force, whether by one side or the other, may soon cause the beginnings of civil disobedience and/or outright violence when one group feels that it has been pushed too far, as has occurred so often in the past when countries with different ethnic and ideological groups become so bitterly divided that co-existence is no longer possible. In fact, the American Civil War is a clear example of this point in action. Yet even if you think that such problems will not happen in America, or that they are still a long way off, consider that the divisions that divide the United States have already caused moral and political damage, for they have already made the people sacrifice their principles and ideals in clear ways. For example, many conservative Christians realize that Donald Trump is a flawed candidate who they would rather not vote for given their principles and ideals. However, those same Christians fear a Clinton presidency so much, because of her potential policies and Supreme Court appointments, that these Christians quite rationally calculate that it is very likely only a Donald Trump presidency that will give them even a slim chance of achieving the political goals and objectives that they have. Now, on the other side, many liberals and progressives would rather elect someone other than Clinton, but they themselves fear a Trump presidency to such a degree that they feel the need to vote for Clinton, even though they may not want to. And so when this occurs, and when each side is willing to bend their own principles to an unheard-of degree simply because each side fears the other side so much, and when this division is almost fifty-fifty across the country, then you most definitely do not have a healthy nation. In fact, as stated earlier, you don’t have a nation; you just have a landmass with borders and with two separate groups of people inside it who fear what will happen if their opposing group gains power. But then the question must be asked: Who the hell would want to live like this? And furthermore, how is it even just or moral that one group should yield power over the other group if neither group wants this to occur?

This is why conservative American Christians, and any right-leaning traditionalist proponents of Western Civilization in the United States, must seriously consider the idea of a peaceful and mutually-agreed upon secession from the groups that oppose them, regardless of whether this secession is official or a de facto arrangement where Christians can govern themselves as a separate state within the larger borders of the United States. Indeed, only in this way can Christians, and others who share in a Christian-like worldview, finally stop having to sacrifice their principles to seek victories in elections, or worry about state courts imposing state rules and regulations which are contrary to orthodox Christian values and beliefs. At the same time, why should leftists and progressives, as well as progressive Christians, be forced to live under a government that favors conservative ideals if such an existence is unnecessary given the fact that secession, like all things political, is possible so long as there is a will to achieve it. Indeed, would it not be best for progressives to have politicians to choose from who are all fundamentally progressive, but who differ in minor policy details? Would this not be a better and more sustainable way of having a democracy, where policy items can actually be discussed, rather than neglecting policy, principles, and everything else simply in order to ensure that your hated opponent is not elected. It seems to me that such a democracy, where the fundamentals are agreed upon but the details are disputed, would be much better than a democracy where the fundamentals are wholly different, the details don’t matter, and only your fear and hatred of your opponent is driving you to vote your candidate.

And so, the long and short of it is this:  the divisions between conservatives and liberals in the United States are too vast and too substantive to overcome naturally or rationally, for each side views the other as fundamentally wrong and even immoral, and so what this means is that undesirable consequences will follow as these divisions continue to develop and become more pronounced. However, a peaceful and natural secession—something done in numerous countries before now—would ease the tension and let each side go their own desired way. And this, in turn, might be the only way to prevent less desirable types of separation from occurring in the United States in the future. At the very least, it is something that all Americans should consider.

Anno Domini 2016 11 08

Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s