Modern American Civil War: Pick Your Side Collectivists vs Individualists


patriots vs antifa
Patriots vs Antifa or  “Individualists” vs “Collectivists”

New York – -( When looking at the Civil War* taking shape in this Country, it is useful to have a concise descriptor for the two sides, or factions in this conflict.

How do we describe each side? When, for comparative purposes, we look at the American Civil War of the Nineteenth Century, there were several colloquial, informal descriptors: ‘The North’ versus The South;’ ‘The Union’ versus ‘The Confederacy;’ and ‘Yankee’ versus ‘Rebel.’

However, there is one formal descriptor—‘The United States of America’ versus ‘The Confederate States of America.’ This latter formal description of the two sides is, arguably, the best, as we can clearly see the central issue of the conflict framed in those descriptors: namely, whether the Country would continue to exist as one independent sovereign Nation, with one central federal Government, where federal authority emanates from Washington, D.C., or, whether the Country would henceforth exist as two independent sovereign Nations, each with its own central Government.

But, when looking at the present Civil War, we have not seen apt descriptors for the two sides, and, in the absence of one or more accurate descriptors, the nature of the conflict itself may seem hazy, which may cause one to wonder whether there truly is a civil war brewing at all. In fact, there is.

What Expressions Best Describe The Two Factions?

In describing the two factions, the two combatants, we have considered various terminology and rejected that terminology because we considered the verbiage as, one, either vague and ambiguous, and therefore likely to create confusion; or, two, too narrow in scope or range, and therefore deficient; or, three, demonstrating unacceptable overlap in meaning.

We have seen employed and we have, ourselves, employed, heretofore, one or more of the following expressions to describe or intimate the two sides to the conflict: ‘Democrat,’ ‘Leftist’, ‘Progressive,’ ‘Liberal,’ and ‘Radical,’ ‘The Left,’ to describe one faction; and, ‘Republican,’ ‘Conservative,’ and ‘Populist’, and ‘The Right’ or ‘Alt Right’ to describe the other. As to the words, ‘Republican’ and ‘Democrat,’ most people, undoubtedly, would hesitate to call Democrats and Republicans as representing two sides to a major civil conflict. This would, indeed, seem, at first glance, to be singularly bizarre. Yet, when we see some Congressional Democrats essentially and effectively calling for violence against those espousing another dissimilar view and when we see the Democratic Party Leadership either remaining silent or—as we are also beginning to see from Hillary Clinton & Eric Holder—espousing violence, as well—then it is NOT completely off the wall to consider that, in Congress, as a microcosm of the Country, two distinct factions do exist there as much as outside the U.S. Capitol.

Some of the expressions as commonly used are, as well, simply essentially, empty and vacuous vessels, through overuse; and, so, serve no useful, functional purpose as descriptors for the two factions that have lined up.

We have also considered use of the expressions, ‘Globalist’ or ‘Internationalist’ or ‘Transnationalist’ to describe one faction and we have considered the expression,‘Nationalist’ to describe the other faction. But these expressions come up short as apt descriptors, too, because they are nebulous. Moreover, the term, ‘Nationalist,’is all too often used as a term of disparagement by the mainstream media, when writing or talking about President Trump, or anyone who supports him. The mainstream media erroneously identifies the President’s nationalist fervor with fascism, even though President Trump clearly is not a fascist and the term‘nationalism’ does not denote ‘fascism’, and should not be construed as synonymous with ‘fascism.’ However, the allusions are there, just the same, operating as a meme in the public’s consciousness. This is all by design, to attack the legitimacy of Donald Trump as the Nation’s President.

So, where does that leave us in coming up with a suitable label to describe each faction?

Collectivists vs Individualists

A well-learned attorney, and legal scholar with whom we have discussed the matter, suggested that the expressions, ‘Collectivist,’ and ‘Individualist,’ are the best terms to describe each respective faction. And we concur. These two expressions are precise; carry no connotation of disparagement; have not heretofore been used by anyone, to our knowledge, to describe the two factions; and broadly embrace all beliefs, precepts, presuppositions and aims of each of the two sides facing off in this modern American Civil War. Furthermore, there is no danger of overlap in what each term connotes. Mutual exclusivity in both the connotation and denotation of the expressions, as applied to each of the respective groups, is therefore faithfully maintained. The expressions, ‘Collectivist’ and ‘Individualist,’ are, then, the two expressions we will use here as referrers or descriptors for each of the two factions in this conflict.

We thus have before us two distinct, mutually exclusive visions of the Country and of the world; two distinct notions of law and government, and of the relationship of man to government and to each other—two distinct visions, only one of which can be realized; and two ever diverging paths, only one of which our Nation can take. Our Nation is at a crossroads.

In our next segment we will lay out the basic belief systems, precepts, and ultimate goal and logical outcome of the Collectivist and Individualist philosophies, the motivations of which can be readily discerned from those beliefs, precepts, and aims. We will see in this delineated list two competing visions for our Country, one of which, taken to its logical conclusion, results in the ultimate dissolution of the Country as an independent, Sovereign Nation State, along with the dissolution of the Nation’s Constitution and system of laws. The other faction seeks to preserve the Country as an independent, Sovereign Nation State, in accordance with the intention of the founders of the Nation; and with the Nation’s Constitution and laws intact and supreme, never to be subordinated to foreign law or foreign jurisprudential system.

*Some people may interject, arguing that the situation at present does not rise to the level of Civil War. Referring to a typical definition in Black’s Law Dictionary, they might exclaim that the expression, ‘Civil War,’ means an internal armed conflict between persons of the same country, and that, at this moment in time, armed conflict does not exist. Well, we would argue that this legal definition is unduly restrictive. Clearly, our Nation is in deep crisis, whether armed conflict exists or not. For, the survival of the Country as an independent Sovereign Nation State, is visibly threatened by a specifically defined internal faction, even in the absence of a gunshot fired.

Consider the circumstances under which the EU was created. Ruthless, powerful, inordinately wealthy interests convinced European Nations to relinquish economic control to one central authority, unconnected to any Nation. Now, it is apparent, that those Nations sacrificed much of their political power as well. Relinquishing economic control was merely a ruse. As a result, now aware of the loss of their Countries to globalist interests, “Nationalist” elements in each Country seek to regain control of their own Countries and their own destiny; and curiously, and oddly, the mainstream media suggests that these Nationalists are the insurrectionists, rather than those forces that have effectively destroyed the independence and sovereignty of the individual Countries, comprising the EU. Citizens (Nationalists) are battling those Governmental Officials who willingly acquiesce to the dictators in Brussels. Is it any wonder that authority in Brussels is attempting to vanquish resistance through an insidious attempt to destroy the history and culture of each Nation?

One writer of the Eighteenth Century, Emmerich Vattel, views conflicts on a scale of increasing intensity: commotion, sedition, insurrection, and finally rebellion or civil war. See Emmerich de Vattel, The Law of Nations §§289-90, at 421 (Joseph Chitty ed., Philadelphia, T. & J. W. Johnson 1844) (1758). The problem with the use of a sliding scale is that it is often difficult to discern at what point we move from one level of conflict to another. The Arbalest Quarrel argues that, where two mutually exclusive visions of a Country exist, and one side seeks to impose its vision on the other by either disregarding the legal mechanisms that constrain imposition of one faction’s will or through clear and tortuous misuse of the legal mechanisms that are designed to constrain imposition of one faction’s will on another, then a state of civil conflict exists. That is clearly the case we see occurring now.

Those who espouse Collectivism seek to impose their vision on those who espouse Individualism. To impose their will on the Nation, Collectivists seek to topple the President of the United States, Donald Trump. They seek to open the Nation’s borders to essentially any alien who seeks to reside here. They see in this policy a useful tool that serves to weaken the Nation. Collectivists essentially enlist the aid of illegal aliens as insurrectionists—which is not difficult to do since illegal aliens are essentially a mercenary force that does not belong here but seeks, nonetheless, to remain in our Country. Collectivists disavow the Nation’s history and seek to revise it. They ignore and debase the Bill of Rights and the first three salient Articles of the U.S. Constitution, essentially disavowing the foundation of our Nation. They do all these things to fracture the very sanctity of the Country as an independent Sovereign Nation State. Their goal is to subsume our Nation into a broader global world order. This goal was moving along in the last three decades, gaining appreciable speed in Barack Obama’s Administration. Barack Obama is a Collectivist. The direction toward which Obama was moving our Country—dissolution of our Nation as an independent, Sovereign Nation State, and dissolution of the Nation’s Constitution—would have continued under the Administration of Hillary Clinton, another Collectivist. Americans would have been blind to the loss of their Nation and to their Nation’s Constitution, much as Europeans have lost their Countries, through subsumption of their political power and authority into a broader European Union (the EU). But, enough Americans could see what was happening. They did not want their Country to go the way of those nations that have been integrated into the EU; their populations cowed.

Americans elected Donald Trump to turn the tide on the Collectivists. Now the Collectivists have been forced out of the shadows. Americans will see an escalation of violence in the weeks and months ahead, as the Collectivists become ever more determined to impose their will on other Americans, the Individualists. The Country is therefore very much in the throes of Civil War.

Arbalest Quarrel

About The Arbalest Quarrel:

Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel’ website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.

For more information, visit:

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

China and Russia? Ha, that’s funny. The threat is within, and has been for a long time. China and Russia are doing what any sane nation would do and building up defenses because they see a demonically insane US deep state on the precipace of usurping total power in this country.


the division is as simple as it is stark….

one side wants every person to be free

the other side wants every thing to be free


@xtron the only correction I can see is that “the other side wants everything to be free” except the freedom of the people. They want us to become subjects. That only works while the people that have money and it falls into a heap when the people with money runs out of money. Proven by history over and over.

Mark Zanghetti

Correction to the last line:
“the other side wants everything to be free” but it’s subjects

That is closer to what I think you were trying to say.

Scotty Gunn

It isn’t collectivists vs individuals. It is communists, Marxists and socialists combining with the gay, lesbian, transgender, environmentalists, pro-abortion, feminists ,atheists, leftists, media,social justice warriors, progressives trying to take over the country and government. Individualists will not survive. (United we stand,etc). The right, conservatives, Christians, Catholics, etc. need to band together with the patriots, vets, constitutionalists, etc. or this country is lost.

Miles M Schreiner

I disagree; I belive collectivists and individuals nails it. Why? The factions you named are simply being used to advance the progressive “collectivist” agenda. Creating victim classes based upon emotional views versus logical ones ensures disunity and confusion. Once the “useful Idiots” are no longer useful, there is little doubt the progressives in power will stamp them out more effectively than Orkin does a temite problem.

John Dunlap

I agree with the author, but will point out that this conflict is different from previous periods of civil unrest that our nation has faced. The escalating violence we’re seeing now is the result of desperation on the part of collectivists (I guess that’s as good a name as any for this collection of hyper-wealthy families with a God complex and their thousands of useful idiots), because Americans have awakened and begun pushing back, hard. They’ve been engaged in a largely successful, slow, soft coup that began in 1914, with the creation of the Federal Reserve that allowed them to… Read more »

Wild Bill

Why did they arrest the peaceful ones? How can the police find out who is behind it all, by not arresting and interrogating the thugs?


this has been building for years,8 years of obama pushed the country over the edge,it’s going to take all our strength and willpower to get back on even ground,don’t give in!!


Need to pop a few anarchists to see how brave they are.


This is all a “mind game”. Their are powers working against one another. Think, good and evil. It was God ALL MIGHTY who said, “not yet”. Prepare yourselves. Accept Jesus in your hearts. Repent of your sins. Forgive others and show mercy. Make no mistake, there is war raging this very moment. Prepare. Defend yourselves any means necessary. Dawn the body armor of Christ. Prepare physically. Can you go days without food? Do you have enough ammo? Can you carry all this? Have you integrated yourself in a community of prepared people? Yes, no, maybe. Can you “eliminate” a “forceful… Read more »

M Miller

Ah the good old days, American history, if only we had a time machine? Could of won, kept everything in place! Seen how the liberals began and stop their spread across this free land, before it ever happens! Saw the Clinton, the Obamas and made sure that never happens!


How’s about this one: “they had a mind to tell us how we should live, and we had a mind that they wouldn’t” ? that’s a quote from one of the men who stood on the commons at Lexington that April morning when that hotheaded Irish commander Jesse Adair stood against the gathered Patriots under Captain John Parker of Lexington’s Militia. He said that forty years later, upon being asked to ex[plain WHY they were out well before dawn that morning. I have never seen such a concise and accurate description of the root of that conflict. We are back… Read more »


Much like the civil war this should be labeled: The U.S.A. against the Leftists.

Because much like the earlier war this will determine if the nation will continue or will it become another third world socialist experiament.


Much like the civil war this should be labeled: The U.S.A. against the Leftists.


Remember Kent State………….


I was a freshman the year of the shootings. I WAS THERE witnessing many things never reported in the media. My good friend’s father, a geology professor, saved many lives that day after the initial shooting. He started the first geological forensics course in the country the following year. He also wrote a still unpublished manuscript on the events of that day from FOIA’s he obtained from the government. Guess what? The shootings were a planned event to stop the student movements around the country, especially ones against the Vietnam War – it worked too. I had the manuscript for… Read more »

M Miller

This country needs to straighten its ass out! We need to stop fighting, and worry about China ,and Russia! I no liberals have their heads up their ass, but the only way to defeat these to communism, dictatorship country’s is to stand together! But that’s a long shot, and we will lose!

Herb T

Civil War between “GOOD” (those that want the Constitution and rule of law to survive and govern) versus “EVIL” (Those that want to eliminate or emasculate the Constitution and rule of law for their own benefit). Democrats / socialists / progressives / Evil are clearly on the side if eliminating or emasculating the Constitution and changing the rule of law to whatever the dictator says it is on any given day. Democrats are clearly on the side of more taxes, open borders, racial / identity politics and feathering their own nests while keeping the population under their thumb – witness… Read more »


Labeling an individual or group with a name helps describe to the rest of us, to some degree, the beliefs and consequential actions they will probably perform based on their beliefs. In the end however, it comes down to this: Freedom or Slavery. Freedom implies those people who hold themselves accountable and take responsibility for their actions in every aspect of their life. They accept the consequences because they understand their choices lead to consequences. Slavery implies two (or more) groups of people within a country (system); one group who consider themselves better and above the other group(s). The former… Read more »

Jim K

Agree! Round them up and put them in a “District 9” encampment. No Firearms allowed and let them fend for themselves in their own third world. No one to step in and protect them. Let them have at it, at each others throats to deal Collectively with no outside support or supplies. Let them go without toilet paper and see how long their socialist third world utopia lasts!


VERY LONG Winded article….. What we have to REMEMBER is that Democrat Politicians have SUPPORTED the below Leftist HATE Groups… OWS ( Occupy Wall Street ) crowd that destroyed property, raped women, openly did drugs, had sex in the open, littering, urinating everywhere, leaving feces everywhere ( including on top of cop cars ), and threatening to fire bomb Macey’s. These people acted like animals….. Then Workers in HASMAT suites in Oakland having to clean up the estimate 30 TONS of TRASH that was left by the OWS crowd………. ……….. BLM ( Black Lives Matter ) that shouted “Pigs in… Read more »


Country Boy I agree with what you say but I don’t understand why our government allows these thugs to destroy and pillage whenever and wherever they want. Maybe if we had a Atty. General he may be able to stop some of this or is it the responsibility of the states to police their own. If the FBI labeled them as a terrorist group it seems the feds could take command of the situation. If something isn’t done it will only get worse and more often.


It may also be worth mentioning the role the media plays in this stage of the process. I believe the term used by the old Soviet Communists was “agiprop” or agitation propaganda. The main stream media constantly portrays the “individualist” side, to use your term, as racist, homophobic, bigoted ect. To dehumanize. It’s easier to hate someone who is “untermench” beneath human. It is all very troubling for those of us paying attention.