Items In Our Ongoing Civil War

Because of certain events, we interrupt the regularly scheduled broadcast (Summa Contra Gentiles) to bring you news of the latest in the civil war in the once United States of America. Not talking about won’t make it go away.

Item: The combatants are the Reals and Progs. The Reals hold with Tradition in the metaphysic of Realism, with all its implied limits, strictures, and glories. Their flag is red. The Progs hold with Will in the metaphysic of Nominalism and say what is true is what is asserted and what feels good. Their flags are blue or a rainbow.

As with all wars, most citizens are not combatants in any active sense.

A common error is assuming the battle is between Republicans and Democrats. Nearly all, but not all, of official (active) Democrats are Progs, while only a majority of official Republicans are Progs. Unofficial members of these political parties may fall into either camp or are non-combatants.

The war is of long standing (well over a century in existence), and is usually a cold war, as the Progs, who have been consistent winners and are the majority in positions of power, have been content with small victories since the last major hot war. But lately the Reals have begin to rebel, which riles the Progs. Regular skirmishes are now routine. Even though all are not combatants, depending on how hot the war becomes, choices may be forced upon many. Like all civil wars, it’s father against son, father-pretending-to-be-mother against daughter, and worse and worse and worse and worse and worse.

It is also understood that among Progs and Reals there is great variance. Not every Prog thinks his will supreme, and not every Real has a solid grasp of reality. These variances are tolerated, and even encouraged when the war grows cold. But they will wane and even disappear as it heats up. It will be of interest to predict exactly what official stances are decided in both camps if the war becomes hot (e.g. this).

Item: About those stances, the above video, in which we find terms like “eliminate” and “f*** you and f*** the police”, is not a clash between Reals and Progs. This is strictly an internal conflict among self-identified Progs. The hard liners of the Progs are winning, in spite of the liberal members having all rightful authority on their side. This proves the old saying that all crises are spiritual. Do note the point in the middle where one Prog mentions threats they received from outside Reals. These are likely genuine, but what is surprising is the Prog was surprised to receive these threats. This is a affronted reaction we expect in a person in a position of power.

Item: Adopting tactics taught and used by Progs on their training grounds, two Reals ran upon the stage in New York’s Central Park where the nightly mock-bloody execution of President Trump was occurring (the play satisfies the blood lust of the Progs). The Reals did not stop the play from continuing. The incident is significant because this is the first and most public act by Reals nowhere near a training ground.

As proof that most Republicans are Progs, we have a prominent one who said of the incident, “Anyone on the ‘right’ who defends the BS that went down at the play tonight is showing themselves to be tribalist, not conservative.” That, Mr French, is rather the point. Here’s another example.

Item: Not to be outdone, Progs did the same thing at a St Louis symphony orchestra concert, hanging flags commemorating deceased Prog Michael Brown (Brown, a thief, tried to grab the gun of a cop and was subsequently shot). It’s unclear, but the number of Prog flag-hangers were more than two.

Item: Prog Chelsey Gentry-Tipton, an official in Nebraska and member of its “black caucus”, reacting to the Prog attack mentioned next, said “Watching the congressman crying on live tv abt the trauma they experienced. Y is this so funny tho?” When told her words passed from cold to hot, she said she refused to resign from her official position.

Being black, Gentry-Tipton has a lot of weight with Progs, so it will be of interest if she can be forced to resign without screeching “Racism!”, a tailsmanic word among Progs. If she is forced to resign, the civil war is not as far advanced as some fear. If she stays, and given she said she was “having a hard time feeling bad for” the Reals who were shot, the war is more advanced.

Item: A Prog opened fire on a baseball diamond last week, with the intent of killing as many Reals (or whom the shooter took to be Reals) as he could. This was previously discussed.

Item: There have been a spate of openly violent confrontations with Progs and Reals, mostly centered around Prog training grounds. These have been spreading, however. Many are minor, like the MAGA flag (a Real proxy) shot at (note the shooter).

One site has compiled a list. Most attacks by far are Prog on Real. This is not unexpected for many reasons, the least of which that there are simply many more active Progs. Progs, of course, have their own list; and though it is generously padded (“anti-Muslim bias”, “anti-Semitic”, etc., without including attacks by Muslims or subtracting faked ‘hate’ crimes, which is an even larger list) some items are nonetheless genuine. It is of major interest that the Prog article did not write “the majority of ‘hate crimes’ were perpetrated by non-whites” and instead wrote, “Of all the hate crimes carried out that year, over 48 percent were committed by whites.”

Item: The race war is immensely complicated, with the Progs forcing the Reals to make it more open. On Prog training grounds, many white Progs will ritually declare “I am a racist (All whites are racist).” But this doesn’t go over well in Real country. There can be no common ground on this question if it is pushed to its limits.

Item: Progs have begun removing statues and other reminders of past Reals (or said-to-be Reals), most notably from New Orleans, not being able to bear the reminder they had (at one time) important enemies. The old enemies are branded “racists”, from which (as the above video shows) there is no defense.

Item: That Taliban-like vanishing statuary accounts for the imagery in the poster for the “Unite the Right” event, which is deliberately provocative—and proof of the choices that are being made. This event, which takes place 12 August, will be written about separately. But here, the intentionally incendiary nature of this meeting will in Progs confirm all their worst fears, and will likely induce in some of their members actions which will, in turn, provoke the Reals. Et cetera.

Thiw is, after all, what makes a civil war.

Item: For those of either camp interested in home defense, I suggest this informative and enjoyable video. Many Progs are of course armed, but most denounce arms ownership, content (as the majority) with being protected by armed Prog servants. Reals are much more likely to have more than one personal weapon, which makes Progs all too nervous.

25 Comments

  1. Your brain will turn to mush if you read too many of these sites. As for the Reals, they are as crazy as the Progs, as racists and counting on a civil war so they can kill “libtards”. They want it as bad as Progs do (your terms are interesting—I feel like I”m in one of those Star Trek episodes with the Indians and Europeans re-enacted on another planet with the same outcome). Trust me. Pointing out the hypocrisy gets you banned from the Reals sites—they are NOT open minded in the least. It seems decades of education without any actual teaching or learning, hate encouragement by the media and virtually everyone in politics has finally acheived its goal. Open warfare.

  2. Is there a timeline? Would it be safe to visit the USA for watching the august total eclipse of the Sun, for instance?

  3. @Sheri
    I don’t think any Reals media personality said Gabby Gifford deserved what she got. However, this is not an uncommon and public opinion being expressed about Scalise. This is one example, but many more can be given: indeed, just consider how many liberal events get shut down by protest v.s. conservative events.

    It terms of revealed preference by violent and disruptive action: Progs show a great deal more preference for offensive action through open, violent conflict than Reals. Reals, on the other hand, tend to spend their money and time on defensive measures. I think actually quantifying the elasticity of offensive v.s. defensive behavior (in economic terms) would be one way to make precise the claim that Progs want the war more than the Reals.

    But, this is all changed if one accepts the Prog view that speech is violence therefore Prog physical violence is defensive. Though, a society that views speech is violence must end up becoming totalitarian, of course. This is, of course, natural as the Progs are all materialist Hegelians: believing in a secular progress to history through material revolution (and thus kindred of Marx if not exactly Marxist)

    Karl Schurz a German who became U.S. Secretary of the Interior under President Hayes, and had known Marx well, is quoted as saying:

    “Marx’s utterances were indeed full of meaning, logical and clear, but I have never seen a man whose bearing was so provoking and intolerable. To no opinion which differed from his own did he accord the honor of even condescending consideration. Everyone who contradicted him he treated with abject contempt; every argument that he did not like he treated either with biting scorn at the unfathomable ignorance that had prompted it, or with opprobrious aspersion on the motives of him who advanced it. I remember most distinctly the cutting disdain with which he pronounced the word bourgeois: and as a bourgeois–that is, as a detestable example of the deepest mental and moral degeneracy–he denounced everyone who dared oppose his opinions.

  4. I think it’s a mistake to use the term “prog”. Progressive is how they see themselves, they actually think they’re going in the right direction (but so do lemmings). Letting them keep that name is like letting them name their adversaries “reactionaries”.

  5. “I think it’s a mistake to use the term “prog”. Progressive is how they see themselves, they actually think they’re going in the right direction (but so do lemmings). Letting them keep that name is like letting them name their adversaries “reactionaries.”

    The solution is linguistic jiujitsu–“Politically Correct Progressives,” or “PC-Progs” combines their chosen tag–Prog–with the exact description of their belief system–PC.

    It is a succinct, clear, and absolutely accurate appellation.

    Details, based on deep historical research and analysis, are here:

    http://intelctweekly.blogspot.com/2014/07/politically-correct-progressive-belief.html

  6. Removing the statuary of the confederacy would be acceptable if it accompanied the removal of the Democrat Party, the party of slavery and the KKK.

    If not “Prog” what term to give them?

  7. Mark said, ” This is, of course, natural as the Progs are all materialist Hegelians: believing in a secular progress to history through material revolution (and thus kindred of Marx if not exactly Marxist)”

    Leftist not only saw ownership of the material means of production as oppressing the “workers” they also extended this to language, architecture, music, painting, psychology, ethics and – God help us all – mathematics, physics and mechanics.

    Marx’s turning Hegel’s dialectic “on its head” led to the nonsense – and the main root of all current Nominalism – Logical Positivism and Analytic Philosophy.

    Words, concepts, propositions have no meaning – they are just social constructs. Nobody is right, nobody is wrong.

    From Obama’s Press Secretary, Josh Ernest (see link at bottom):

    ““In some ways this is actually just a war of narratives, and so we want to make sure that we get out our counter narrative against ISIL and we’re having some progress,” Earnest said during an appearance on MSNBC, urging Americans to stop blaming terrorist acts on Muslims.”

    Even if the Josh is just too stoopid to understand the nonsense he’s spewing, that makes it actually even worse. That is the true Nominalist’s dream and end goal.

    http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/19/josh-earnest-fighting-war-narratives-islamic-state/

  8. Prog is a fine term. Reals believe in an objective reality that can be known and has been known (if imperfectly) throughout history (e.g. Tradition and Realism mentioned by our gracious host). Progs believe our conception of reality (and hence society) must undergo perpetual revolution in the name of “Progress” as an expression of the Will and nominalism. Reals are “reactionary” at least in so far as they seek to restore common sense Realism as the underlying philosophy of our society.

  9. @Jim S

    Thanks for the paper link–the anti-platonist (anti Augustinian?) take on St. Thomas has always seemed a little dogmatic given what I’ve read in his actual writings.

    ‘Leftist not only saw ownership of the material means of production as oppressing the “workers” they also extended this to language, architecture, music, painting, psychology, ethics and – God help us all – mathematics, physics and mechanics.’

    Couldn’t have said it better myself.

    Also a shout out to all Fathers today, St. Joseph pray for you so that many blessing are bestowed upon your families.

  10. “I think it’s a mistake to use the term “prog”. Progressive is how they see themselves, they actually think they’re going in the right direction (but so do lemmings). Letting them keep that name is like letting them name their adversaries “reactionaries.”

    The solution is linguistic jiu-jitsu–“Politically Correct Progressives,” or “PC-Progs” combines their chosen tag–Prog–with the exact description of their belief system–PC.

    It is a succinct, clear, and absolutely accurate appellation.

    Details, based on deep historical research and analysis, are here:

    http://intelctweekly.blogspot.com/2014/07/politically-correct-progressive-belief.html

  11. Briggs: a natural person cannot be a “member of the EU” – it is a union of States, not persons. A person can be an EU citizen, but not a member of the union.

    Similar concept to the United States of America – it is a union of states, not individuals.

    So, what else is wrong in the content of this podcast and how do I know what is true and what false?

    (otherwise, good stuff, keep it up)

  12. After listening to the rest of the podcast, I’d make the following comment: You write much better than you speak.
    Your written blog material reads as something well thought out and well presented. The podcasts sound like a rambling rant from a “right wing nut job”.
    Sorry, there it is, just my take.
    My suggestion: script it and read from the script. That it is your writing that you are reading from will give it enough life.
    Why not try an a/b test and see what your readers/listeners think?

  13. Kent,
    It helps to understand that the Progressive Left is not “against” racism, homophobia, capitalism, etc. It’s more twisted than that.

    They are “against” anyone who is “for” anything. This is the very working definition of Nominalism (or Deconstructionism, Post-Modernism, etc.).

    This can easily be seen in the DNC and Podesta emails where they talk among themselves about “needy Latinos”, wonder aloud about how to use Bernie’s Jewish faith against him in the Deep South (both anti-Jew and anti-Southerner, by the way) and how Catholicism is probably adopted by those on the Right, not due to the strength of its theological arguments, but only because it’s less offensive than Protestantism (a two for one slam, again).

    The fact is that – even though they pursue fractalized, identity-politics – they can’t stand one another.

    They are a coalition of victim groups, each competing for a piece of the tax-payer-funded pie. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need”. The group that can show they are the neediest and most victimized, wins (per their twisted logic). It’s a race to the bottom.

    I’d be willing to bet that 95% of the Leftist leaders are atheists. So why are they “Pro-Islam”? Because to say that there exists something that is objectively “wrong” would be to admit, by default, that there must also exist something (or somethings?) that are objectively “right”. And they can’t open that Pandora’s Box….

  14. Mark said, “Thanks for the paper link–the anti-platonist (anti Augustinian?) take on St. Thomas has always seemed a little dogmatic given what I’ve read in his actual writings.”

    That Thomas was a Neoplatonist is a given. As someone with no (religious) skin in the game, I can’t see how anyone can reach any other conclusion.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *