Book Review | Divided We Fall

​DIVIDED WE FALL: America’s succession threat and How to Restore our Nation |  David French, St. Martin’s Press, p260. 

French argues the looming national threat is an internal division based upon cultural trends that roughly correlate to geographic regions. We see regional and diametrically polar state groupings from TV viewing habits, voting patterns, and local laws. The conflict is sometimes intrastate but more often between states and the federal level; witness the rise of sanctuary cities on both the left and the right. 

The author argues no value or issue has the net advantage of pulling us together, overcoming the multifaceted forces pulling us apart. I fear he’s right. 

While I disagree with French often, I am a fan of his work. Aside from his career of defending religious liberty and freedom of consciousness, he was catapulted into notoriety when a group of reactionary theocrats at First Things termed all conservatives who don’t view the culture conflict as an actual zero-sum “war” as adherents of “Frenchism.” 

As a solution to our division, French advocates the virtue of American pluralism. He notes that the San Fransisco library should be allowed to have its Children’s Drag Hour, and the Colorado baker should not be able to bake a cake for a gay wedding. He makes a compelling argument. 

Given the tension between tax-funded activity (library) and private actors engaged in public accommodation (bakers), his application needs to be revised. As a lawyer, he should be more sensitive to these distinctions. 

As exercised by direct democracy, local control is an expression of association, but it can conflict with individual rights. When it does, it raises crucial questions about the limits a mob should have over a minority and why, presumably, our Founders adopted a Republic. 

But this exposes the fundamental challenges with federalism. The 10th Amendment is vital and far too abused, but the Bill of Rights adopted prior is arguably a priori. 

Regardless, we need to debate its application, at least. At present, radicals on both sides reject the notion of tolerance, difference, and individualization. David French’s smart small tome adds a vital conversation to this debate.