The liberal coalition

I'd like to say a little more about the ups and downs of the culture wars. The liberal coalition is fragile. Liberal activists are fairly successful when they are united by a common cause, united by a common aim, and united behind a common foe.

Ironically, however, their success can be their very undoing. For instance, as long as they can focus on Christians as "the enemy," that's a galvanizing influence. 

To the extent, however, that they succeed in disenfranchising Christians, Christians cease to be as threatening to them. At that point they begin to turn on each other. 

For instance, feminism is a driving force in liberalism. That also requires an enemy: men. Liberal policies are increasingly anti-male. Take California's recent "affirmative consent" law. Not surprisingly, Harvard has followed suit. Or take liberal animosity towards male-oriented sports.

Problem is, this strategy requires liberals to antagonize about one half of the population. And not just white men or social conservatives. But men en masse–including men who are otherwise disposed to be liberal. What happens when men get fed up with being pushed around?

Another example is the civil warfare within organized atheism. Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins v. the feminists and apologists for Islam. 

In this respect, liberals are like Muslims. Muslims have two perceived enemies: the infidel, and fellow Muslims. To some extent, killing the infidel is a temporary distraction from their favorite pastime: killing each other. Islam is so factionalized, with murderous tribal and theological animosities. 

That's also an occupational hazard for liberals. Liberals are never safe from fellow liberals, for liberal orthodoxy can change on a dime.