Thread by @alexthechick

🧵A morning discursion: as National Divorce was once again being discussed & since people who I do, in fact, believe know better, since it's their paying job to know better, acted as if they did not know that the concept has been around for decades, I believe it's time for a chat

National Divorce has been a concept since at least the 90s. While the proposals and details differ, the underlying concept is this: since the Left refuses to accept anything other than total capitulation to its views, let us attempt to part peacefully before we part violently.

National Divorce is not now nor has it ever been a synonym for civil war. That is obvious in the name of the thing itself. Divorce is not murder, after all. Again, I find it mind bottling that people claim to not comprehend this. It's obvious. That leads to the next point.

National Divorce recognizes that there is, and has been, a cold Civil War waging for many years now. It is the most basic observation of reality that there is a fight being waged. Now, you do not have to think it is a good idea, you do not have to think it will work, that's fine.

I am, at best, highly skeptical that it will work. I do, however, desire most fervently that people open their eyes and accept the reality of the situation. There is a fight on. There has been a fight on for decades. And, at some point, people poked with sticks will fight back.

The political class on the Right, nearly to the entirety, has refused and continues to refuse to accept this. The mocking of Trump and at least he fights did not indicate that the person doing said mocking was raising thoughtful objections to the manner in which Trump fought.

It indicated that the person doing so was mocking the very notion that a fight needed to be fought and that most vigorously. It indicated a lack of basic observational skills of the state of reality. Again, it wasn't about Trump. It was never about Trump.

Jack Phillips is being persecuted by the state of Colorado. That is not hyperbole. He is being persecuted by the state of Colorado for wrongthink. SCOTUS dodged resolving the central issue of the case in the Masterpiece ruling. We'll see what happens in 303 Creative vs. Elenis.

Let's say that SCOTUS (I mean Roberts) decides not to be cowards and rules, as it should, that the First Amendment means what it says and that a person cannot be compelled to create a matter in violation of religious beliefs. Do you think that is going to stop Colorado?

Because, I assure you, it will not stop Colorado from going after Jack Phillips. The being that is filing the claims against him will not stop. Colorado will not stop. He is engaging in wrongthink. He must be stopped and the power of the State must be used to stop him.

For those saying that Federalism is the solution, a question: how will Federalism resolve Jack Phillips' situation? Should people of faith not live in Colorado? Does the First Amendment not apply in Colorado, at least not fully? How, with specificity, will Federalism solve this?

Now, I do not think National Divorce will work on a practical level, though there are those who have done some thoughtful work on the practicalities of it. I do think that the term itself has use for pointing out the fundamental incompatibilities currently existing.

Reality exists independent of theory, much to my utter dismay and disapproval. The reality is that the Left (obviously I am painting with the broadest brush) refuses to accept anyone thinking and living with different beliefs. The Left is weaponizing State power to enforce this.

Try getting a social worker license if you do not accept gay marriage. You want to teach at a public university? Here, fill out that DIE (I refuse to use DEI, it's DIE) statement. You object to the curriculum in your child's school? Well, you're now being reported to the FBI.

I will repeat, ad nauseum, that people poked with sticks will eventually lash back. This is the way of things. National Divorce, as a concept, is an attempt to channel that lashing back into non-violent channels. Mocking the concept will serve only to block off that channel.

The lashing back will occur. Again, this is the way of things. This is how human beings are. This is how human beings have been since humans existed. I know how this story ends. I would far rather there be a different ending. I have no solutions, only red pandas. /fin