In my latest column, sports provides the foundation of deeper issues that plague this country, even after September 11, 2001. “God bless all Americans, and our great country in which they reside.”
So were the words of my grandfather on September 11, 2001. Standing at almost six foot, the padding that had accumulated in the many years following his retirement bulged from his normal white tank top.
“God bless all Americans, and our great country in which they reside.”
Fading slowly, the gleam that was in his eye was replaced by the bright gleam of the late afternoon sun that had adverted the prison that was the top of my truck and had found a new home in the sanctity of my face.
It was at this moment that the radio came alive from the usual static grave that was sports talk in Arkansas. Finally, it seemed, the National Basketball Association had agreed on a new Collective Bargaining Agreement, and while I was looking forward to seeing another lockout giving football all the glory this fall, there was one thing that was worthwhile if a new CBA was reached, an age minimum.
It seemed initially it was too low. A minimum age of nineteen would not do any good, but that is only because of my pale complexion.
Yes, just as in the NBA MVP voting, race was brought to the center of the discussion because of course the NBA wants to keep all of the black athletes from getting into the league so that it can create a new marketing plan around the charismatic Steve Nash and the best player from the draft two years ago, Darko Milicic.
The absurdity of this assertion soon left, as caller after caller had the same opinion that this was another way to censure African Americans. But, it soon became clear what the real issue was.
Three and half years after the tragedies in New York, Washington D.C., and Pennsylvania, there are no more proud Americans, there are many angry categorized Americans.
African Americans, Southern Americans, Liberal Americans . . .these are what people take pride in now.
Anything to make them feel special. Anything to make them feel important. Anything to avoid having to commit to an idea, or a country.
If black people want to be called African Americans, fine, but instead of calling into talk radio claiming racism on anything that restricts access to people, help starving people in the Sudan. By the way that is in Africa, your native continent, and when it benefits you, your native people.
And if self appointed Southern Americans want to be considered as such, open a book and discover that the south did not succeed from the country because of slavery, or because Harvard beat their much loved Crimson Tide in the “ol’ pigskin,” but because the states that left believed the government should be ruled within each individual state and not by one strong monarchial government.
Unfortunately, this division is not only present on the national level, but any place where people have the opportunity to fight for something frivolous over a preconceived notion of identity.
While the rest of the nation considers how to find a way to call the Spurs game seven victory in the NBA Finals offensive, the citizens in the state of Arkansas is once again at war with each other. Not over race, or even religion, but about splitting football games for the local Razorbacks in Fayetteville and Little Rock.
Eastern Arkansans believe that moving all games to the actual campus in northwest Arkansas is all a ploy by the evil athletic director to make more money in the much larger stadium. Westerners believe that if almost every other team in the NCAA plays at one constant location that this team should be no different and not further the unfavorable impression the rest of the nation has on the state.
How pretentious we are to believe that the location of a football game or an age limit on entertainment matters.
People expect this country to bring peace to the Middle East and to the world, but with regional squabbles and personal vendettas this country is more turbulent than those we are trying to fix.
God bless all Americans, and the thousands of Americas in which they reside.
13 replies on “America’s New Civil War”
Advice I can see where you are going with this piece you just need to find your points and formulate a more focused argument. You are making the reader work to hard to discern your intent. I think I agree with your point but you have obscured it. Try to make some editorial changes and I would be more than happy to revisit it.
His points were pretty clear There is so much division in America it’s unbelievable.
Northerners and Southerners seem to hate each other, and there is similar antipathy in-state. Boston and New York have a sporting rivalry, but to be honest, both teams should grow the hell up.
Oh, and don’t get me started on the black and white thing….Charleston, SC is all I have to say.
This stuff has always been around I’m just glad I don’t live in a place like India. Honestly, I’d be surprised if bigotry ever disappeared entirely.
Thats the thing… ….this country is so great, our problems are about the location of a football game. Unlike other countries, america doesnt have hunger, slavery, political turmoil, corruption, etc., the worst thing we have to worry about is the age limit of the NBA.
So, would u rather have to worry about feeding your family, or the NBA’s new collective bargining agreement?
What the fuck? “By the way that is in Africa, your native continent, and when it benefits you, your native people.”
How about white Americans sending money to help starving peoples in Eastern Europe, or their Native Continent, and when it benefits us, our native people?
Southern Americans are people from South America, not from south of the Mason-Dixon line. Those are just southerners.
“succeed” should be “secede”.
Also, where did you read this history? Yes, the south did secede because it believed in states’ rights, but the immediate spark was the slavery question due to the election of the hypocrit named Lincoln. The spark was reignited by the belief in Manifest Destiny and the inability of the Polk administration to get legislation through congress setting up territorial governments out west. Taylor did not believe that these lands should be part of the U.S. anyway. Slavery, not states’ rights, became the premier factor that led to secession, which was multiplied by the election of Lincoln without carrying a single southern state. The belief in monarchial government is inaccurate. I have never read of any southern attempt to install a king in the Confederacy. What the fuck are you talking about?
“the state of Arkansas is once again at war with each other.”
A single state cannot be at war with “each other.” The people of that state can be at war with “each other”.
“Three and half years after the tragedies in New York, Washington D.C., and Pennsylvania, there are no more proud Americans, there are many angry categorized Americans.” The two “there are” sentences can stand alone, thus after the first you need a semicolon or a conjunction word.
This is terrible! You have mistakes gramatically, punctually, and historically. You also make assertions that most likely contradict your beliefs and doings. You also prove to be from the U.S. in referring to southerners as “Southern Americans” because you think that the world revolves around the U.S., which it does not. Before you bring in history, make sure you are accurate. I’m no Civil War expert, but I’ve read enough to claim that slavery was in fact the spark and that there was no significant, if any, belief in a monarchial form of government.
Thanks.
It is a shame to this site that this got published, let alone to the front page.
Thank you, but please read my statement below Thank you very much for your criticism bsd987. Let me clear up a few things that you may have been unclear on in my story. First it was my mistake on the monarchial comment, there was supposed to be a not before it to adequately reflect the feelings of the confederate states that a strong national government would eventually lead to what they hated the most, a monarchy. My information is in fact accurate, there are several different views on the spark of the civil war, the cause you are embracing is the most common perspective; however, many scholars do believe that it was states rights versus strong national government that was the primary cause. Finally, I feel that you have grosly misundertood the true point of this article. In fact, it was almost anti-American in bringing this issues to the forefront, quite the opposite of saying that everything revolves around America. Critiques are always welcomed, that means that you took the time to read the story, but if I may give you one piece of advice. Please, please tone down your language, while you and I are adults, there may be some children looking at this site, and though I am not a parents, I would not want any kid of mine reading such words. Thank you.
He’s right They’ve been drilling it into our heads the last few years that abolitionism wasn’t the cause of the civil war or even one of its main issues.
The grammatical errors were pretty bad though. I was going to say something but it seemed kind of pointless after the fact. I wish people would post their stories for editorial feedback first, I didn’t even see this in the queue before it got posted.
2 words… BSD=GOD or if ud prefer “BSD OWNS”
slavery I wrote that states’ rights was an issue, but slavery was not not an issue as you claimed it to be. Abolitionism was definitely not an issue, but slavery itself was one of the major issues in the secession. You cannot downplay it as not being a reason.
Sorry about some of what I said. Referring to people as “southern americans” is indeed very america-centered even if you are poking fun at them as it A) confuses the reader into thinking you are, in fact, talking about southern americans and B) I’ve only heard them refered to as southerners.
Sorry for going off on you. I do believe that states’ rights was a major issue (although I do not believe it to be the #1 issue. Had the secession occured in the 30s or 40s, yes, indeed that would have been the #1 issue, but considering that it occured after the election of Lincoln without carrying a slave state with a history of being against the spread of slavery, I find it hard to believe that slavery was not a major reason. But as I said, I am no expert on the civil war. I am more-so on earlier antebellum American History, but I find the 1850s and up through the Civil War dull.
Good luck with your next articles.
lost article lost me fast. i agree with everything bsd said.
btw i forgot, even your replies to your comments had serious grammatical errors. good ol razorbacks baby!
Oh okay It’s just when you hear most people say that slavery was an issue, they really mean that the civil war was started because Lincoln and the north wanted to free the slaves, which simply isn’t true. It was a couple years ago, so sort of tough to remember, but I’m pretty sure state’s rights were the leading cause, with slavery being the “right” the South was most concerned about (they wanted to expand it). So, if my memory’s correct, I guess you’re both sort of right (at least by my history teacher).
I agree bsd is right again. I agree with everything he said.