Following the assassination of Turning Point USA’s conservative founder, Charlie Kirk, Republican representative Marjorie Taylor Greene called for a “national divorce” between conservatives and “the left.”
Greene contends that the United States has become too divided to reconcile.
She stated, “There is nothing left to talk about with the left. They hate us. They assassinated our nice guy who actually talked to them peacefully, debating ideas. Then millions on the left celebrated and made clear they wanted all of us dead.” She concluded, “I want a peaceful national divorce … it’s no longer safe for any of us.”
This statement is uncustomary. The politically correct response to a political killing is to urge unity and demand no acts of retaliation.
After a rooftop shooter attempted to kill Donald Trump during his second presidential campaign, President Joe Biden quickly asked Americans to tone down their political rhetoric. According to The Hill: “Days after surviving the shooting, Trump delivered an address at the Republican National Convention in which he extended an olive branch to Americans who had not supported him and said the country must put its disagreements aside to reach its potential.”
A few months later, there was another attempt to assassinate Trump.
This time, Trump did not attempt to unite the nation. He insisted that Democratic rhetoric had put his life in danger. Politico reported that Trump’s statement was part of a strategy Trump’s advisors viewed as a way to hold Democrats accountable. Congresswoman Greene went beyond Trump’s strategy, but she was not the first to propose a “national divorce.”
David Reaboi, a fellow of the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank, wrote about the concept in 2021. Most intellectuals believe a national breakup is a fantasy. Divorce divides everything once shared. It’s impossible to determine which side would gain territory, industries, or nuclear weapons.
Reaboi argued that impossibility won’t be forever.
He asserted that history teaches us regimes, like all human creations, rise and fall. The United States will eventually come to an end. The timeframe is uncertain, but it will come. In America today, we have two competing, diametrically opposed, and mutually irreconcilable ideas of the good, justice, and the proper role of the state in its interactions with citizens. As time goes on, more of reality will become a battleground. If we disagree on these major issues, the essential question becomes: what force could keep us from coming apart? A national divorce is not an immediate action plan. Rather, it is a rhetorical approach to lay the groundwork for critical discussions about what happens next in America, as the country becomes increasingly divided, bitter, and angry.
Reaboi specializes in “national security” and “political warfare.”
This idea of a “national divorce” likely originated from the specialist becoming overly immersed in his field of expertise. It’s similar to what happens to a news junkie. The news captures and reports on the abnormal, but when a viewer overdoses, they begin to believe what is abnormal is normal.
James S. Bridgeforth and Emma Roshioru recently stated in The Black Wall Street Times that there are dangerous illusions of division in America. They wrote, “Here’s the truth: Americans aren’t nearly as divided as we think. The ‘Perception Gap’ study found that Republicans and Democrats wildly overestimate how extreme the other side is. Most Americans—65 percent—say they hate divisive politics. Nearly 80 percent describe the current climate as toxic. What we actually crave is constructive disagreement. We want leaders to argue fiercely but shake hands afterward. We want citizens who can sit across a dinner table without flipping it over.”
It seems improbable that Congresswoman Greene believes the country is more divided today than it was in the 1860s or 1960s. That means she’s not calling for a national divorce because the division is unreconcilable. She advocates for a national divorce because she overdosed on political violence and has lost hope.
Rich Lowery of National Review responded to Reaboi’s suggestion of a national divorce, and his response also applies to Congresswoman Greene. Lowery said, “This is an impulse that must be resisted. Breaking up is hard to do, and quitting on America is—or should be—unforgivable.”