The Good, the Bad, and the Really Awful

America is a very diverse country, not in the fatuous, superficial, racial sense of present day political correctness but in terms of the habits, lifestyles, opinions, and weltanschauungen  of its people.  Millions of Americans hold beliefs that millions of other Americans find questionable, false, detestable, or idiotic. Millions of Americans conduct their lives in ways and engage in activities that millions of other Americans see as wrong, counterproductive, immoral, despicable, or even evil. Some differences are ephemeral and reconcilable,  but many are deep, lasting, and intractable. This is nothing new. Nostalgic  references to a time  - whether the turn of the 20^th Century, the Eisenhower years,  or some other good old days  – when things were completely  harmonious and homogeneous  do not  hold up in light of history.  However there are times when the differences lead to more contention, rancor, and conflict than others. We are in one of those times now. 

Libertarians offer a good solution for this. Leave each other alone and allow every person to lead his life as he wishes so long as he commits no crimes against the life or property of anyone else.  In a free society  many people  still would have no use for the beliefs or actions of some of their fellow citizens, but they would not be able to get officials to harm or punish them on account of it. Approval would be optional, but tolerance would be unavoidable.   

This was the principle  the Founding Fathers followed  in separating religion and government.   Jefferson wrote, “The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God.” Likewise it does me no injury  if my neighbors have sex with one woman, two men, or no one at all, eat kale or Big Macs,  dress  as men, as women, or alternate according to mood,  read porn or devotionals,  save money or spend foolishly,   drink, smoke, consume drugs, or abstain,  like John Wayne, Meryl Streep, both, or neither, own a dozen guns or none, stay in shape or get fat, are hunters  or vegans, drive  F250s or  Priuses,  or like me or decline  to associate or do business with  me with so long as they do  not attempt to have their ways forced others.  If enough people realized that and acted accordingly, our differences and  mutual dislikes would not be the problem and danger they are. (There would still be hard cases, gray areas, and controversies – many about public areas and property.  But we would have a better basis for a civil and liberal society.)

However there is not much evidence these days that a libertarian solution is a likely one, at least in the short term. So it is worth looking at other less desirable ways in which the situation could play out. Perhaps  the worst likely outcome would be for the present condition  to continue or worsen with disparate groups and coalitions struggling to gain control of the federal government to impose their wishes on the entire population,  and either one faction gaining long term control or the abusive power rotating and  the people being yo-yoed  by changes of administration and political fashion.   It is easy to see how continuing on the present trend in either way could produce worse sectionalism, bitterness, and hostility than we have today. In the extreme case of a group in power grossly overstepping,  it could lead to dissolution of the union  or even guerrilla civil war.

Several people have proposed a renewal of federalism as a palliative to ease tensions and  reduce  present day conflicts. In their proposals  the power to decide many contentious political issues would move from the federal government to state or local governments.   If officials in California, New York, Portland, or  Philadelphia wanted to ban guns that look scary to them, dictate what information job seekers could put in resumes, mandate seminars on transitioning  gender for third graders in the public schools, prohibit showering with hot water, or punish people for throwing the residue of an unappetizing dinner in the trash, they could with impunity but  without any possible effect on those outside their jurisdiction.  If officials in Texas, North Carolina, Oklahoma City, or Pensacola wanted to require drilling for oil in city parks, prohibit cross dressing men from using women’s restrooms,  mandate pro-abstinence indoctrination in the public schools, or impose fines on any  able bodied citizens not having adequate  means of self-defense in their homes, they could with impunity but without any possible effect on those outside their jurisdiction. 

This idea has some merit. However it is important to remember that it is still a bad outcome.  Being pushed around by state and local politicians  and bureaucrats  is not intrinsically better  than being pushed around by federal ones. But at least a person could move away.  And it might lower the pressure and help keep the lid from blowing off, at least for a while.