IDEOLOGCIAL TRAFFIC JAM

JANUARY 27, 2026 – What happens next in Minnesota; in the United States of America? Our speculations are driven by a combination of hope, fear, knowledge, ignorance, wishful thinking, and in many cases, deep-seated attachments to ideology and religious beliefs. The influence of these factors is no less than at any other juncture along the byways of civilization.

I submit, however, that for our state, as well as our country, the current junction involves a messy political and ideological traffic jam. It also happens to be a round-about, and how we navigate our exit for a suitable destination depends on factors beyond the control of foot pedals and steering.

At the heart of the traffic jam are irreconcilable contradictions not only between “liberal” and “conservative,” but gear-stripping inconsistencies within each of these broad categories. I’m not talking shades of gray—or “red” or “blue”—here. I’m focused on fundamental fissures in long-standing doctrines on the political left, as well as the political right.

These ruptures have been starkly revealed in the wake of recent ICE operations in Minnesota. Scrambled in the process are articles of faith among ideologues on both sides of the divide. Take for example, contradictions regarding gun rights. In the case of the death of Alex Pretti, strong advocates of gun rights have pinned outright “blame,” if not “but for” causation, on the victim himself because he carried a gun. The implication is that that was a numbskull thing to do around ICE agents, despite the gun rightists’ generations-old message that God gave us the Second Amendment to allow us to protect ourselves against the gov’mnt! People who support much stricter gun control, however, are just as quick to remind us that his possession of a firearm was entirely legal, and thus vindicated him (given the absence of evidence that he “brandished” his gun in any fashion). But there the discussion ends. On the left, where’s the call for stricter gun control?

Doctrine is further scrambled around the freedom and liberty defining First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments. On rightwing radio, I hear an endless stream of “conservative” commentators refer to Minnesota protesters as “paid agitators,” who insist on “interfering with” law enforcement. Anyone who peacefully takes to the streets to exercise their right of free speech and assembly is excoriated as an anti-American troublemaker, an “enemy of the people” and so on. And yet in the very next talk show segment, these “conservatives” (and their guests) who condemn demonstrations against ICE and Trump will praise the demonstrators in Iran and urge Trump to bomb the crap out of the ayatollahs. When it comes to unlawful searches and seizures, conservative supporters of ICE and Trump see no contradiction between that support and the conservative doctrine that the Bill of Rights are sacrosanct. Ditto the Fifth Amendment (due process) and the Fourteenth Amendment (application of rights to “people,” not merely “citizens”).

The central aspect of the doctrinal traffic jam, however, is the age-old clash between federal supremacy and states rights. People who heretofore opposed expanded powers residing with the central government, now find themselves in bed with the vociferous defenders of “big government” in its most extreme form: masked federal agents operating with little distinction from hitmen in the employ of dictators, all rights be damned. We who are left of center, on the other hand, who traditionally favor federal power over states rights are now taking to the streets in opposition to the heavy handed methods and policies of “big government.” Our unifying slogan is, “ICE OUT!” which, readily translates to, “FEDS OUT!”

I myself am rather conflicted between federal power and states rights. During Covid, for example, I favored federally mandated testing, masking and vaccination policies. With such a deadly endemic that by its very scientific nature didn’t observe state or national boundaries, I found no rationality in each state “going it alone.” I wanted a cogent federally-managed system. But now with the anti-science, anti-vaccine RFK, Jr. in command of HHS . . .

With the onslaught of ICE goon squads disturbing the peace, ignoring the law and up-ending lives here in Minnesota, I’m vehemently opposed to the abusive federal power. I’ve become a vociferous member of the “ICE OUT!” chorus, dominated as it is, by people on the center-left political spectrum. Not so long ago—January 6, 2021, to be exact—this ground was held tenaciously by people flying the Gadsden flag, people who are now working for ICE. Yet today, the Gadsden flag could just as well be waved at anti-ICE demonstrations.

Looking at the political landscape beyond ICE and Trump, will we “liberals” ever again have confidence in federal power? Will “conservatives” in Minnesota who detest our Democratic governor and legislature abandon their affinity for “states rights”? Where will political ideologues—left and right, Democrat and Republican—steer us over the next several years?

If I were behind the wheel, I might make a mad dash to the outside lane of the roundabout, drive straight past both the “Washington” and “St. Paul” exits and aim for “Restructure”—a dissolution of the United States and formation of a confederacy of regions (replacing states), where the central government manages only the central bank, military affairs and foreign policy.

I hardly have the credentials for such a controlled revolution: I lack the brains, the connections, the experience, the ambition, the PhD in political science, and perhaps most important, the faculties of youth. Nevertheless, my friends, I’ll enjoy the scenery, because, we’re all in for quite a ride one way or another.

Fasten your seatbelts.

Subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

© 2026 by Eric Nilsson