We're in danger of losing our country
In the aftermath of the election and the struggle of Congress to solve the fiscal cliff, the debt ceiling and now the sequester, we think that our legislators are more polarized than ever before.
However, there was another time in our history when parties were so polarized that they were willing to kill each other. That time was before and during the Civil War when Democrats were largely for slavery and Republicans were largely opposed to slavery.
One of the most vicious incidents was the result of a disagreement over the border war being waged in Kansas.
On May 19, 1856, Sen. Charles Sumner, Republican of Massachusetts, presented an address titled “Crime Against Kansas.” In the speech, he outlined all of the administration’s illegal actions in Kansas, the illegal voting of Missourians, and the premeditated violence perpetrated against free-staters in Kansas.
Sen. Sumner called southern sympathizers “…hirelings picked from the drunken spew and vomit of an uneasy civilization — in the form of men.” Although Congress roared in protest, Sumner continued by addressing Sen. Andrew Pickens Butler, a states’ rights Democrat from South Carolina who had advocated the forced disarmament of free-state men: “The senator from South Carolina has read many books of chivalry, and believes himself a chivalrous knight, with sentiments of honor and courage.
“Of course he has chosen a mistress to whom he has made vows, and who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight. I mean the harlot slavery.”
Sen. Douglas replied that Sumner’s language might “provoke some of us to kick him as we would a dog.” Rep. Preston Brooks of South Carolina, a relative of Butler’s, attacked Sumner in the chamber two days later and struck him repeatedly with his gutta-percha cane until it broke, and Sumner fell bleeding and unconscious to the floor.
Brooks resigned from the Congress but was immediately re-elected by approving southerners who sanctioned his behavior and in a sign of approval, sent him dozens of gold-headed canes.
The violence in Congress was realized on a national level upon the election of Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, as president of the United States. It was the final straw, and started the Civil War in which more than 620,000 men died.
A very high price to pay for polarization, or was it? The fact is that the war freed more than 3 million slaves and changed the divided Union into a strong nation that ratified the 13th Amendment to the Constitution and would rise to become a leader in the world.
One could conclude that polarization is not always bad if a nation is polarized over a clear cut moral issue. Of course the difficulty, just as in the Civil War, is that we allow societal pressures to cloud our thinking.
The culture of the 1840s and ’50s said that slavery was OK. It had been around since the settling of the nation, and even though many states had rid themselves of it, the southern states’ culture was based upon slavery. It took the clear voice of President Abraham Lincoln to cut through the haze.
Today we are so used to a government that is in debt that we hardly notice. We live in a culture where credit cards are maxed out, bankruptcy is common and foreclosures seem routine.
We have lost our ability to see the dangers of a government that has a $16 trillion national debt that’s rising quickly. To the dim voices of persons who are trying to speak the truth, speak louder, because we are in danger of losing our nation and we need leadership even if it is seen as polarizing.
Carol Dark Ayres is a retired educator. She taught music and was an academic librarian, grant writer and director of the Leavenworth Schools Education Foundation. She is the author of “Lincoln and Kansas” (2001). She lives in Leavenworth. To reach her, send email to oped@kcstar.com or write to Midwest Voices, c/o Editorial Page, The Kansas City Star, 1729 Grand Blvd., Kansas City, MO 64108.
Mark Hastert
2 months, 3 weeks ago“To the dim voices of persons who are trying to speak the truth, speak louder, because we are in danger of losing our nation and we need leadership even if it is seen as polarizing.”
… so to disagree about our economic policy rises to the level of the debate of slavery? And to lament polarization in one sentence and then use same in the next? The author seems absolutely certain that her view is absolutely right and that those of others is absolutely wrong. There are a number of noted economists, Noble Laureates, and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve that have a different view. The US is not a family. Our credit card is not maxed out. The only time we were in danger of “missing a payment” it was the work of radical conservatives. The world economy is investing in the US. We borrow in US dollars and repay in US dollars and the interest on the money we borrow is very very low. I disagree with the doomsayers who wring their hands and fret over fabricated issues. It’s not the voices who are dim, it’s the politically motivated thinking.
Kent Mueller
2 months, 3 weeks agoWell, Mark has now stated that we don’t have a debt problem in the country. Why, there are even still people who will lend us money, so everything must be alright. The bartender is still serving and the bottle isn’t empty….then I can’t be drunk, right?
When were we in danger of missing a payment? If we were, it wasn’t the result of the work of “radical conservative” (whoever those dastardly people are). If we would have missed “a payment”, then it would have been the conscious decision of this administration to default on a debt payment instead of not spending elsewhere…..Congressional salaries, for example. Mark is still purveying that the first thing to happen would be default on our bonded debt. That would only be true if that would be the first thing chosen to not be paid.
You should quit trying to scare people with that old, faded inaccurate story.
George Hunsucker
Northland
2 months, 3 weeks agozero and his minnons tried the proven lib tactic of “there will be no firemen or policemen” and there obvious bluff was called. How a less then 3% reduction in a well-known bloated and wasteful organization can be soooooooooooooooooooooooooo painful is on the surface stupid, but alas, I am not a smart lib….
The truly said FACT is the govt. is still going to spend more this year then last year. So much for “cuts”. All that has been cut is the growth of the beast. However, we do have another chance in less then 4 weeks. There should not be any “continuing resolution” that is not a real cut in spending.
Libs will not attack spending or our trillion dollar deficits, R’s will have to…
The default on our bonds Kent is just another example of cutting cops—expoused by one of our leading libs on the blog….
Mark Hastert
2 months, 3 weeks ago“Why, there are even still people who will lend us money”
See you said it yourself. The world is lending us money at essentially 0% interest anytime we ask. Does that sound like a nation on the brink? Of course not because we’re not. Our debt is the product of
“that old, faded inaccurate”…analogy of comparing the US to a family or to Greece or Ireland or etc. None of it is valid or applies our economy or our debt and it’s just an attempt to scare and mislead people to a false politically motivated conclusion.
To get back to the point of the Op Ed we are not about to “lose our country” and certainly not even close to the level of the divisions over slavery. The hyperbole and faulty logic of the author is purely political. We can solve our issues only through dialogue, creative thinking, and compromise.
JR Beillenhouser
2 months, 3 weeks agoMark is living in a dream world. Surprise.
Simply by having the interest rate return to normal we are hosed with debt payments.
So essentially Mark is saying that we don’t have to pay back our debt. Because at some point we won’t be able to. Do you really think that people will continue to lend us money when there is no way to pay it back? Our biggest lender is not a country at all, it is the Fed Reserve.
The government’s going to keep playing the game whereby they devalue the dollar. Tell me just how this is good for the country?
Perhaps you should spend a little time surfing non progressive sites and you will learn that China, India, etc are looking at ways to end the US Dollar as the common currency. Then while you are at it, study up on what happened to England when the pound stopped being used for this purpose years ago.
Your “logic” is embarrassing.
(I’m happy I was able to post this before the sequester caused the internet to collapse from lack of funds. LOL)
JR Beillenhouser
2 months, 3 weeks agohttp://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-01/druckenmiller-sees-storm-worse-than-08-as-seniors-bankrupt-kids.html
Hmmmm. Someone who knows, unlike Mark.
George Hunsucker
Northland
2 months, 3 weeks agoYup, there is no problem…..
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamas-now-added-6-trillion-national-debt_704980.html
Only in lib vile……
George Hunsucker
Northland
2 months, 2 weeks agoNo problem Egypt… Let me borrow a few more bucks….
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_KERRY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-03-11-10-44