How would a new civil war play out?

[Swammerdami]

The Civil War of the 1860's was over the issue of slavery. There was much resistance in the 1930's about the transfer of economic and political power to the lower classes. During the late 1960's there was great strife over civil rights and the Vietnam War.

But what is the present civil war about anyway? According to this Politico opinion, it's because "we just don’t like each other"!

Perhaps the squalor of modern politics flows from ancient truths of human nature. People are easily manipulated with appeals to prejudice and paranoia, never more so than when technology has led to massive growth in the industry of commercialized contempt. A country that can have a civil war with no one really knowing what the conflict is about is one in which the muscles of governance are pitifully atrophied.

 

[Jarhyn]

The Civil War of the 1860's was over the issue of slavery. There was much resistance in the 1930's about the transfer of economic and political power to the lower classes. During the late 1960's there was great strife over civil rights and the Vietnam War.

But was is the present civil war about anyway? According to this Politico opinion, it's because "we just don’t like each other"!

Perhaps the squalor of modern politics flows from ancient truths of human nature. People are easily manipulated with appeals to prejudice and paranoia, never more so than when technology has led to massive growth in the industry of commercialized contempt. A country that can have a civil war with no one really knowing what the conflict is about is one in which the muscles of governance are pitifully atrophied.

So, there are a lot of people who live in good faith that don't like it when people wield bad faith against them.

I'm allowed to not like bad faith. I'm allowed to call it out and exile it from my existence.

The issue comes in where those who engage in bad faith, leverage games, and shortsighted, ignorant selfishness are put out by the fact that we as a society no longer let them get away with such shiftiness.

Eventually they are going to get together as much as they can and decide to try something because this is not about how much "people like each other". It is about the death throes of bad faith.

If there is a civil war coming it is coming on the backs not of people who "just don't like each other very much" but rather on the backs of people who are just actively installing fascism into government, and using tactics such as playing peek-a-boo lies to make it seem normal, acceptable or to reverse rhetoric.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Barbara Walter is a Professor who serves on a CIA task force assessing the likelihood a country will fall into civil war. They're not allowed to study the U.S.A. but if they did, Prof. Walter would put it in the civil-war likely group.

People have a false impression that it is the most down-trodden, the poorest, the most discriminated against who tend to start civil wars. In reality, that’s not true. The people who tend to start civil wars are what experts call ‘sons of the soil.’ These are citizens who had either been dominant politically and culturally but were now in decline, or who had once had power and had lost it. This group believes that the country belongs to them, that they have the right to be in power, and when they lose it, they find it incredibly disconcerting. They’re very resentful of groups that are ascendant, and they’re the ones who tend to mobilize and fight to try and re-establish control.

She has a new book coming out.

It will be interesting to read BW’s solutions. I think one would be a moratorium on immigration. Not fully. Not those who have helped the US (Afghans) or pilfering smart people from other countries, but refugees. This is what so many have heartache about. As ugly as this is. Letting people into your country because they are destitute does not sit well with the general population.
For all the bluster about Trump’s wall, I never heard a good argument against it. I would even go so far as to say if Joe Biden found a reason to continue building it, his polling numbers would rise.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It will be interesting to read BW’s solutions. I think one would be a moratorium on immigration. Not fully. Not those who have helped the US (Afghans) or pilfering smart people from other countries, but refugees. This is what so many have heartache about. As ugly as this is. Letting people into your country because they are destitute does not sit well with the general population.
For all the bluster about Trump’s wall, I never heard a good argument against it. I would even go so far as to say if Joe Biden found a reason to continue building it, his polling numbers would rise.

As a political ploy you may be correct. As a practical solution walls seem to have always failed, even walls intended to keep people in as opposed to keeping people out.

 

[Gospel]

It would play out the same way January 6th did with a zerg at the start then pointless meandering due to the lack of any real strategy. However, instead of folks going home and getting hunted down by the FBI later, they'd be shot and killed on site.

 

[marc]

It would play out the same way January 6th did with a zerg at the start then pointless meandering due to the lack of any real strategy. However, instead of folks going home and getting hunted down by the FBI later, they'd be shot and killed on site.

Or like the take over of the Oregon wildlife refuge building. Yea, they take it over... then just kind of hang around and trash the place waiting for a big shoot-out, while the police just wait until they can be taken down without much trouble.

If they actually took over a state capitol building, unless they actually captured the governor and staff, the state would just be run out of somewhere else until they were removed. Like the people that felt they 'took over' a school board by being assholes in the building where the board usually meets.

 

[Gospel]

War is an armed conflict, not a wait until they calm down and arrest them later conflict.

 

[marc]

Yes, but without someone in front of them to fight they would end up like you said, in pointless meandering. Kind of like what happened in the examples I gave.

If it is a full fledged war, then they would be pointlessly holding some federal property until the military felt like taking them out.

 

[marc]

My question at this point is if a civil war broke out, who would be the leadership of the new confederacy?

The most obvious one for a while was Trump. (can you imagine the disaster of a civil war with Trump as commander of one side?) But he has been loosing support among the MAGAts. Some would likely look to Tucker Carlson, but I don't know if he is interested in leading an insurrection instead of just profiting from it. Might end up with a bunch of small groups with no coordination and possible infighting (It's Judean People's Front!) That would actually be the hardest to deal with since no central leadership to take down or communications to monitor. Taking out one group would inspire other nut cases to form new groups.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

My question at this point is if a civil war broke out, who would be the leadership of the new confederacy?

One issue with the current political climate in America, McConnell is the major power of the normal GOP. Trump is kind of in charge of the alt-right movement, but the alt-right is somewhat fractured and moving forward like a large gelatinous blob... that'll get attracted to any shiny and bright alt-right spouter it sees.

Christ, these idiots were jacking off to images of Sarah Palin for months. This generally leaderless movement, created by three decades of misinformation, lacks rationality and praises cult of personality, spite, and second generation KKK mentality. No leader, no rudder, all they know is they hate communist liberals.

Which kind of sends us to issue two of Civil War... they have absolutely no goals except only elect the GOP. So Trump was good for this... as he had no goals, just the spite and second gen KKK stuff going for him.

 

[marc]

At this point, some of the alt-right groups might make their highest priority attacking and taking over the CDC, in search of the documents to show their conspiracies true.

 

[Gospel]

One thing for certain that would happen during & after a "new civil war" is a lot of freedoms will be lost. If you think 911 changed things just imagine what war between states &/or citizens would do to our democracy. I can't imagine what sort of patriot act would be put in place and never go away after the war.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

One thing for certain that would happen during & after a "new civil war" is a lot of freedoms will be lost. If you think 911 changed things just imagine what war between states &/or citizens would do to our democracy. I can't imagine what sort of patriot act would be put in place and never go away after the war.

This ignores that the Civil War was officially underway when the GOP won huge majorities in 2010 in a backlash over health care legislation. There they controlled the states and heavily gerrymandered and began rolling back voting protections as well as enshrining the right to discriminate (based on sincerely held religious beliefs). One of the last battles was when McConnell got Trump three SCOTUS picks. To be clear, the war is almost over, from the far right wing side of things.

 

[Elixir]

My question at this point is if a civil war broke out, who would be the leadership of the new confederacy?

GREAT question!
El Cheato is a coward, and would never place himself in the firing line, where any prospective head of the New Confederacy would be.
McConnell is doing very well thank you WITHOUT any civil war, so he's sure not going to step up.
You could probably look forward to President Greene or Gaetz, either of which probably would send 'Murka's enemies into paroxysms of mirth, ensuring their victory.

 

[Gospel]

One thing for certain that would happen during & after a "new civil war" is a lot of freedoms will be lost. If you think 911 changed things just imagine what war between states &/or citizens would do to our democracy. I can't imagine what sort of patriot act would be put in place and never go away after the war.

This ignores that the Civil War was officially underway when the GOP won huge majorities in 2010 in a backlash over health care legislation. There they controlled the states and heavily gerrymandered and began rolling back voting protections as well as enshrining the right to discriminate (based on sincerely held religious beliefs). One of the last battles was when McConnell got Trump three SCOTUS picks. To be clear, the war is almost over, from the far right wing side of things.

I love it when a forum member understands "" without being apprised. It's so refreshing.

 

[Gospel]

My question at this point is if a civil war broke out, who would be the leadership of the new confederacy?

GREAT question!
El Cheato is a coward, and would never place himself in the firing line, where any prospective head of the New Confederacy would be.
McConnell is doing very well thank you WITHOUT any civil war, so he's sure not going to step up.
You could probably look forward to President Greene or Gaetz, either of which probably would send 'Murka's enemies into paroxysms of mirth, ensuring their victory.

My guess is it would be some Australian chick we haven't heard of until all of a sudden she's all over our media. Either that or some other not-so-American person.

 

[SLD]

I think Trump would be the leader by default. The problem is, I’m not sure he could handle it. It really would be too much for him. Maybe then it will be short lived and not quite as violent as the last one. I just don’t see anyone filling his shoes once he’s gone.

the problem is geography. The country isn’t geographically divided like the first time. The states them selves are divided. Even though North Carolina went for Trump, it was barely so. Georgia barely went for Biden. Same for Michigan and Wisconsin. Wyoming is overwhelingly for Trump, but Colorado has voted Democrat closely for the past few cycles. Virginia voted for Biden but turned around and voted Republicans in a year later.

Thus how does it happen? Just a general free for all melee? Death squads hunting people down?

 

[Elixir]

I just don’t see anyone filling his shoes once he’s gone.

I agree.
Now if only someone would make him “gone”…

 

[Swammerdami]

It will be interesting to read BW’s solutions. I think one would be a moratorium on immigration. Not fully. Not those who have helped the US (Afghans) or pilfering smart people from other countries, but refugees. This is what so many have heartache about. As ugly as this is. Letting people into your country because they are destitute does not sit well with the general population.
For all the bluster about Trump’s wall, I never heard a good argument against it. I would even go so far as to say if Joe Biden found a reason to continue building it, his polling numbers would rise.

As a political ploy you may be correct. As a practical solution walls seem to have always failed, even walls intended to keep people in as opposed to keeping people out.

Why do we build the Wall?

 

[ZiprHead]

I don't see anything so major as an actual civil war.

I can see several semi coordinated groups using guerilla/terror tactics.