Edit: There’s a lot of people in the comment section who clearly didn’t read the article so let me clarify that no, this is not about Judge Aileen Cannon. Read. The. Damn. Article.

  • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    There won’t be a civil war unless\until the prospect of a civil war starts to look profitable to the .1%.

    • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      8 months ago

      Used to agree with that, now it’s a maybe. The US elite created the seeds of MAGA and the christian right back in the days of Reagan, and they’ve fully lost control of it, Trump has at least some measure of control on the group, but I feel it’s only because he’s pretending to do what they want.

      Just as with the actual US revolution, the movement was started by the 1% for their own interests. Which they gaslit and orchestrated for their own gain until they lost control of it.

      For the uninitiated: they started riots to pressure lawmakers to not pass a new tax on them, not the working class, and new laws preventing them from defrauding London based banks with what amounts to wire fraud by regular mail by creating shell companies in different colonies, getting loans for exploration and land use, and then closing the “company” and repeating.in a different colony.

      • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I have no doubt gaggles of these goons will start some shit here and there, but a Civil War would mean the US military has either fractured or someone raised a domestic army capable of fighting the US military, which is so crazy I don’t even know why I mentioned it.

        You have to remember the ‘state-of-the-art’ of war in 1861 was that men, munitions, and information moved at the maximum speed of a train, but more likely horse. And the distance between the most technologically advanced weapons available and a farmer’s rifle was within an order of magnitude of technological progress. Today the distance between civilian and military communications, field intelligence, and weaponry might as well be to another star system. And before anyone references past insurgent success against modern US military- they didn’t get their weapons at WalMart- they’re supplied by other national militaries. A Civil War starting with a civilian uprisings just isn’t a military possibility.

        And I really don’t see any scenario by which the US military starts fighting itself. I’d be curious what scenarios others think might lead to that but I just don’t see anything on the table that could make a US military commander accept an order to attack other US military assets. I think something like a military coup would be far more likely than a civil war at this point.

        • z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          8 months ago

          Exactly. Anyone who starts a Civil War in the US, unless it’s the US military itself, is going to lose. This rhetoric just puts targets on the backs of these Nazis, and that’s a good thing. None of the absolute shit they spew will fair well for them and society has been and will continue to (rightly) ostracize them.

          I look forward to the day the Guinness book of world record for the largest human dung pile is awarded to the massive mile high pile of shit that will undoubtedly accumulate over Donald Trump’s grave and his entire family is nothing but a distant memory of a pathetic attempt at an American oligarchy.

          Fuck Trump, fuck his family, fuck his supporters, fuck anyone who ever benefited even one iota from his policies. I’d personally forego the Pearly Gates of Heaven and choose Hell if it meant I got to watch him burn for eternity. That is preferable, that is Heaven to me.

        • Ashyr@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          8 months ago

          Agreed but Telegraph was definitely a thing during the civil war, so information could move at lightning speed.

          • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            8 months ago

            True- I’ve usually made the point about technological distance between civilian and military when people bring up ‘Revolution’ so I had to kind of adapt it for the US Civil war to include trains and forgot about telegraphs.

            Kind of crazy to think the Revolution and Civil War were about as far apart as the Civil War and WWII, but then think about the difference between the advancements in military technology between each.

        • chaogomu@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          A modern civil war will not be fought on battle fields. That shit was pointless and stupid in the first civil war (which is a large reason why the South lost, they wanted glorious battles, and the north just burned cities)

          No, a modern civil war will look like the mess in Syria or Haiti. It will be disorganized, chaotic, and there will be far too much pointless bloodshed, with no battle lines. Just a bunch of assholes killing people who they disagree with.

      • freshcow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        Fascinated to learn more about that, if you have any good resources. That’s not the typical framing we get in our US high school level interpretation of events.

        • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          I would highly recommend “Crucible of War” by Fred Anderson. It’s a bit dry at first, but picks up.

          Very briefly, it’s about the lead up to the seven years war(aka French-Indian war), the war itself, the post-war and lead up to the revolution. The author states that he feels you can’t look at the revolution as its own thing without all of the pieces that led to it.

      • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Potentially the first time: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyal_Nine

        Although Wikipedia is wrong. They didn’t get organic crowds of people. They hired gangs to artificially riot and create the illusion of angry commoners. Source: Crucible of War, Fred Anderson.

        It wasn’t until New York (sons of liberty) also tried fake riots that actual commoners got involved, mostly about rich and wealthy merchants claiming huge tracts of land.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      How do they know when they won, who do they fight? Is it over when the rich destroy all small businesses and own everything and we have a dictatorship? Do they just start attacking their fellow working class…? Do they shoot their kids and family members and make it so they have no social security or ability to retire or ever stop working? Surely they have to realize at some point they would fighting themselves.