The ideological divide in the United States is a topic of significant concern. This divide, however, extends beyond the traditional lines of Republicans and Democrats. Instead, it mirrors the divisions evident during the American Revolution (Foner, 2017).
An illustrative example is the recent Williamson GOP reorganization, as reported in “The Tennessee Conservative”. In this event, grassroots candidates secured Republican leadership positions in the county, a testament to their ability to mobilize a higher voter turnout. Yet, the election’s aftermath has been far from harmonious. Those defeated have expressed bitterness and have attempted to discredit the new GOP county leadership. They’ve been accused of manipulating state bylaws to secure future advantages. This discord is not limited to Williamson County but is echoed elsewhere, even in counties where incumbent leadership remains intact.
A particular bone of contention involves those who identify as “Patriots.” These individuals began voicing concerns about perceived threats to freedoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, their political opponents have often labeled them as “far right extremists”. These “Patriots” have been particularly active in protesting against mask mandates, pornography, gender ideology, and critical race theory in schools. Detractors, including members of their own Republican party, have even compared them to “domestic terrorists,” echoing sentiments expressed by the federal government (Johnston, 2020).
Notably, Cathy Sessums, in a discussion with Debra Marggart on Sumner County Republicans, characterized both ends of the political spectrum as having their extremists. She argued that the majority of Americans hold more moderate views, expressing the sentiment that “the squeaky wheel gets lots of attention.”
This discourse calls to mind the ideological divisions at the onset of the American Revolution. Historically, the colonists were divided into three main groups: the Patriots, the Loyalists, and the Fence-sitters. The Patriots, accounting for 40-45% of the population, supported independence from Britain and were ready to fight for it. The Loyalists, a minority at 15-20%, favored maintaining ties with the British monarchy through military support or trade. The remaining 35-45% were the Fence-sitters, individuals who were either apathetic, pacifistic, recent immigrants, or otherwise disinterested in committing to either cause (Middlekauff, 2005).
Drawing parallels between the past and the present, we can identify modern-day Patriots, Loyalists, and Fence-sitters. Sessums and Marggart, for instance, echo the sentiments of the Fence-sitters. On the other hand, the MAGA Republicans or new Republicans, who are prepared to protest policies infringing on freedom and support freedom-protecting policies, resemble the Patriots. The modern Loyalists, meanwhile, lean left, willing to relinquish liberty to authoritarian forms of government.
One wonders if Sessums and Marggart appreciate the role of Patriots in ensuring the United States’ independence. Would they acknowledge that our nation’s freedom might not have been secured had the Fence-sitters been in control of the revolution, with no Patriots willing to fight?
I recently shared my thoughts on this matter in a comment on a public thread. I expressed that the GOP’s failure to stand firm on key principles, such as upholding the Constitution, opposing unaccountable government, returning rights to families, and supporting limited government, has necessitated the formation of other political factions. It’s become painfully evident as the GOP appears reluctant even to stand for the Second Amendment, traditionally a non-controversial issue for Republicans.
This failure to act has led to losses to the left. Rather than standing for principles, many within the GOP have chosen to capitulate to a leadership marred by scandal. In this shifting political landscape, I contend that the only party the GOP can rightfully blame for this situation is itself. The politics of yesteryears—country club politics and voting for acquaintances—are a relic of the past. Today, voting is more about supporting those who will uphold and fight for principles, even when they stand alone.
Maggart mentioned the turn that Republicans took in the 1970s towards advocating for lower taxes and limited government—a shift we remain thankful for today. Yet, Republicans must recognize that today’s left is far different from that of the 1970s. Ronald Reagan presciently warned that the forms of liberalism emerging today would usher in either fascism or communism. In this new political landscape, the true ‘domestic terrorists’ are not the Patriots but those loyal to an increasingly authoritarian federal government—an entity striving to model the United States more after China than its traditional self.
Moderates, in this case, the fence-sitters, are doing little to halt this shift. As expected, these fence-sitters are not leading the charge toward revolution. This complacency reminds us of Lord Tytler’s theory on the cyclic nature of democracy, which historically tends to last about 250 years. His theory suggests that societies move from bondage to faith, courage, liberty, abundance, and eventually back to bondage (Adams, 1975). In Tytler’s framework, our current state appears to be a transition from abundance to apathy, setting the stage for a return to bondage.
COVID-19 was a test of this theory. Many who consider themselves moderates complied with mask mandates and embraced vaccinations, adopting the “greater good” mentality. However, there were individuals, particularly parents, who became the new vocal Patriots, driven to action not by choice but by the necessity to protect their children’s freedom. These individuals echoed Reagan’s quote: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free” (Reagan, 1961).
Being one of these new Patriots, I’m leading efforts in my local school system and guiding a local freedom group. Despite being branded as “far right” by local fence-sitters, I stand firm in my fight against what I see as a leftward shift toward communism.
We should remember that during the American Revolution, Patriots were successful in persuading many neutralists toward their cause despite holding only a slim majority (Ferling, 2001). As we face challenges from ‘smart cities’, increasing debt, poverty levels, a growing welfare state, manipulation of education and news, class warfare, and gun control legislation, it’s crucial to reflect on our position and potential role in shaping the future.
In light of this, I hope that the modern-day fence-sitters reconsider their position. The path to freedom has never been forged by those sitting on the fence. It’s my hope that they align themselves with the Patriots because that is the only way we can fight for and retain the freedom of our nation, the freest nation on Earth.
From Abundance to Apathy: a state of the past, and now present.
The ideological divide in the United States is a topic of significant concern. This divide, however, extends beyond the traditional lines of Republicans and Democrats. Instead, it mirrors the divisions evident during the American Revolution (Foner, 2017).
An illustrative example is the recent Williamson GOP reorganization, as reported in “The Tennessee Conservative”. In this event, grassroots candidates secured Republican leadership positions in the county, a testament to their ability to mobilize a higher voter turnout. Yet, the election’s aftermath has been far from harmonious. Those defeated have expressed bitterness and have attempted to discredit the new GOP county leadership. They’ve been accused of manipulating state bylaws to secure future advantages. This discord is not limited to Williamson County but is echoed elsewhere, even in counties where incumbent leadership remains intact.
A particular bone of contention involves those who identify as “Patriots.” These individuals began voicing concerns about perceived threats to freedoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, their political opponents have often labeled them as “far right extremists”. These “Patriots” have been particularly active in protesting against mask mandates, pornography, gender ideology, and critical race theory in schools. Detractors, including members of their own Republican party, have even compared them to “domestic terrorists,” echoing sentiments expressed by the federal government (Johnston, 2020).
Notably, Cathy Sessums, in a discussion with Debra Marggart on Sumner County Republicans, characterized both ends of the political spectrum as having their extremists. She argued that the majority of Americans hold more moderate views, expressing the sentiment that “the squeaky wheel gets lots of attention.”
This discourse calls to mind the ideological divisions at the onset of the American Revolution. Historically, the colonists were divided into three main groups: the Patriots, the Loyalists, and the Fence-sitters. The Patriots, accounting for 40-45% of the population, supported independence from Britain and were ready to fight for it. The Loyalists, a minority at 15-20%, favored maintaining ties with the British monarchy through military support or trade. The remaining 35-45% were the Fence-sitters, individuals who were either apathetic, pacifistic, recent immigrants, or otherwise disinterested in committing to either cause (Middlekauff, 2005).
Drawing parallels between the past and the present, we can identify modern-day Patriots, Loyalists, and Fence-sitters. Sessums and Marggart, for instance, echo the sentiments of the Fence-sitters. On the other hand, the MAGA Republicans or new Republicans, who are prepared to protest policies infringing on freedom and support freedom-protecting policies, resemble the Patriots. The modern Loyalists, meanwhile, lean left, willing to relinquish liberty to authoritarian forms of government.
One wonders if Sessums and Marggart appreciate the role of Patriots in ensuring the United States’ independence. Would they acknowledge that our nation’s freedom might not have been secured had the Fence-sitters been in control of the revolution, with no Patriots willing to fight?
I recently shared my thoughts on this matter in a comment on a public thread. I expressed that the GOP’s failure to stand firm on key principles, such as upholding the Constitution, opposing unaccountable government, returning rights to families, and supporting limited government, has necessitated the formation of other political factions. It’s become painfully evident as the GOP appears reluctant even to stand for the Second Amendment, traditionally a non-controversial issue for Republicans.
This failure to act has led to losses to the left. Rather than standing for principles, many within the GOP have chosen to capitulate to a leadership marred by scandal. In this shifting political landscape, I contend that the only party the GOP can rightfully blame for this situation is itself. The politics of yesteryears—country club politics and voting for acquaintances—are a relic of the past. Today, voting is more about supporting those who will uphold and fight for principles, even when they stand alone.
Maggart mentioned the turn that Republicans took in the 1970s towards advocating for lower taxes and limited government—a shift we remain thankful for today. Yet, Republicans must recognize that today’s left is far different from that of the 1970s. Ronald Reagan presciently warned that the forms of liberalism emerging today would usher in either fascism or communism. In this new political landscape, the true ‘domestic terrorists’ are not the Patriots but those loyal to an increasingly authoritarian federal government—an entity striving to model the United States more after China than its traditional self.
Moderates, in this case, the fence-sitters, are doing little to halt this shift. As expected, these fence-sitters are not leading the charge toward revolution. This complacency reminds us of Lord Tytler’s theory on the cyclic nature of democracy, which historically tends to last about 250 years. His theory suggests that societies move from bondage to faith, courage, liberty, abundance, and eventually back to bondage (Adams, 1975). In Tytler’s framework, our current state appears to be a transition from abundance to apathy, setting the stage for a return to bondage.
COVID-19 was a test of this theory. Many who consider themselves moderates complied with mask mandates and embraced vaccinations, adopting the “greater good” mentality. However, there were individuals, particularly parents, who became the new vocal Patriots, driven to action not by choice but by the necessity to protect their children’s freedom. These individuals echoed Reagan’s quote: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free” (Reagan, 1961).
Being one of these new Patriots, I’m leading efforts in my local school system and guiding a local freedom group. Despite being branded as “far right” by local fence-sitters, I stand firm in my fight against what I see as a leftward shift toward communism.
We should remember that during the American Revolution, Patriots were successful in persuading many neutralists toward their cause despite holding only a slim majority (Ferling, 2001). As we face challenges from ‘smart cities’, increasing debt, poverty levels, a growing welfare state, manipulation of education and news, class warfare, and gun control legislation, it’s crucial to reflect on our position and potential role in shaping the future.
In light of this, I hope that the modern-day fence-sitters reconsider their position. The path to freedom has never been forged by those sitting on the fence. It’s my hope that they align themselves with the Patriots because that is the only way we can fight for and retain the freedom of our nation, the freest nation on Earth.
References:
Adams, J. L. (1975). “The Cycles of American History”. American Historical Review.
Ferling, J. (2001). “A Leap in the Dark: The Struggle to Create the American Republic”. Oxford University Press.
Foner, E. (2017). “The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery”. W. W. Norton & Company.
Johnston, R. (2020). “The rise of right-wing extremism in the United States”. CQ Press
Like this article?
Danielle Goodrich
Danielle Goodrich