...is also far from correct. The US political system subsequently basically mirrored the conflict, and it continued until both major political parties underwent profound changes in the 1970s.
In much the same way (but more pronounced) Ireland had a civil war in 1922-23 and the two largest political parties today are the two opposing sides of that war. They really don't differ on any substantive matters of policy but each party loathes the other.
The difference between war and politics is trivial from certain theoretical points of view but very important to real people who have to live through one or the other.
Besides, even the hatred between Democrats and Republicans is tame by most standards. Democrats and Republicans normally engage in fair, peaceful commerce with each other, and a Democrat plaintiff arguing in front of a Republican judge isn't doomed to lose -- in fact, the judge will not consider it essential to figure out the plaintiff's politics if the case has no personal political implications for himself. James Carville and Mary Matalin is just a cute story, not a shocking breach of loyalty. Hell, go on Match.com and see how many people describe themselves as "very conservative" or "very liberal" but are willing to meet someone from the other end of the spectrum. Street brawls? Violence? The most-publicized violence from the last election was imaginary -- the loony McCain worker who carved a "B" in her face and claimed an Obama supporter did it.
Hutus and Tutsis it ain't, nor Northern Ireland or the Balkans. The biggest problems people have with partisanship in the United States is that it's embarrassingly stupid and it probably results in a lot of bad policy. Maybe it's inferior to multi-party coalition politics, or maybe it isn't, but the difference between two styles of peaceful democratic government is bupkus compared to the difference between peace and violence.
> "When it was over, it was over"
> > ...is also far from correct
Political grudges are one thing. But I think we were extremely fortunate that the American Civil war did not devolve into a protracted guerrilla war. I have always heard that Lee's leadership was a major factor that prevented that from happening.
...is also far from correct. The US political system subsequently basically mirrored the conflict, and it continued until both major political parties underwent profound changes in the 1970s.
In much the same way (but more pronounced) Ireland had a civil war in 1922-23 and the two largest political parties today are the two opposing sides of that war. They really don't differ on any substantive matters of policy but each party loathes the other.
Ring any bells?