Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Civil War in America?
#1
The level of political tension in the U.S. is such that it isn't uncommon to hear predictions of an internal war.
That this is even true must seem insane to Australians, among others.

As our own Di has often expressed, the American level of drama is hard to relate to, and blown out of proportion...and she is correct in those feelings. But that doesn't change the reality of the growing background noise in this country. There are many thousands of Americans that not only expect this, they have been preparing for it. (I will offer a few links later, to give some credence to this crazy conjecture.)

For the non-Americans, or urban young folks that have little handle on our history or the mindset of the rural South, I offer this reminder of how crazy we have become in the past:

The U.S. Civil War, in the 1860's, was a seriously bloody battle between white American men with slightly different political ideologies.
Back then, it was a given that most of these soldiers weren't in conflict over issues like abortion or immigration policies, or gay marriage, or health care, or the minimum wage, or the death penalty, or the right to vote, or environmental regulation, or climate change and energy policies, or the 2nd amendment, or the border wall, of almost anything that constitutes our modern right/left divisiveness...

Back then, it mostly came down to a single issue of human rights...at least, technically.
In truth, there were other issues at play, including the ever-present war profiteers and arms manufacturers and dealers.
That war made some people very wealthy and powerful. That fact plays heavily in wondering if the war couldn't have been avoided through diplomacy.

The young, poor, white males that entered the fray, North and South, were likely united in their feelings that the Negro was inferior to the white, and should not be allowed to vote; own guns; marry a white, or shit in the same outhouse as you. Neither side owned any slaves, of course, because they were poor. Slaves, surprisingly, weren't cheap. I've done some crude economic analyses on this, and come up with an analogy for modern times:

A slave, in 1860, cost the equivalent to a medium size backhoe today. Most rural rednecks can't afford one. They would all love to have one of course. A backhoe can save your own back a lot of pain.

(Need to break this post in two, for politeness.) 
Reply
#2
It is a pity that the very people that have possibly vacated these premises are the ones that could most benefit from this thread.
Perhaps they are lurking. Perhaps there are unknown lurkers?

Anyway, to get a handle on the emotional forces at work in U.S. politics, and how easily poor young males without the advantages of higher education can be manipulated, and to what degree, consider this:

In our Civil War, there were an estimated 750,000 casualties. That's a lot. Keep in mind, back then, much of this carnage was brutal hand to hand combat. Even the guns of the times were poor enough that you really needed to see the face of the other poor, young white guy you were killing. Also keep in mind that civilian casualties in the 'olden' days were almost unheard of. In Gettysburg, the bloodiest of all those battles, there was one civilian casualty..and that was an unfortunate accident. A stray bullet killed a woman in town. There's a museum with her name in that tourist town.

Let's look at 750,000 casualties in the 1860's with some modern translation:
At the time of that conflict, the population of the U.S. was 31 million people. Today, it is 10 times that number.
To put the number of dead into context today, it would be 7.5 million casualties....far more than all the dead American heroes from all other of our wars put together.
Reply
#3
Let's not forget how many times Texas (or some fool in Texas, more appropriately) suggests Texas secede from the Union. To which I respond: Let 'em! Take Mississippi and Louisiana with you please!
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply
#4
(10-29-2017, 03:34 PM)sparks Wrote:  Let's not forget how many times Texas (or some fool in Texas, more appropriately) suggests Texas secede from the Union. To which I respond: Let 'em! Take Mississippi and Louisiana with you please!

https://www.cheatsheet.com/culture/states-that-could-not-survive-secession.html/?a=viewall
"(my grunge is true)" - stanky
Reply
#5
crap. just lost a post due to my evil computer and my possibly more evil lack lack of computer know-how.

I'll risk another shot at it, because it feels significant to me:

The easy path is to see how stupid these rednecks are.
And yeah...they are stupid as fuck.

My hopeless intent is to raise that bar and illuminate the underlying manipulative skills of the sociopaths that run the world today.
The enemy has never been the easy idiots that want to kick your liberal faggot educated ass...it's the sociopaths behind this easy manipulation of emotions that they don't have.

As it has been, even long before the civil war in the U.S.

and more significantly, what can be done about it?

It's important (imho) to not fall into this trap that ha been laid out for you.

And it isn't the stupid rednecks in Texas.
It's the smart sociopaths that managed to create this state of conflict, for their own petty gains.

Consider this tidbit,as per grasping the depth of the sociopathic mind:

Trump considered a run, years ago, as a liberal democrat.
He even worked Jesse Ventura as a running mate.

(Say what you will about Jesse...he's absolutely a social democrat; endorsed Bernie; voted for Jill Stein.)

But it does say something about the flavor of raw ambition...it doesn't care what it represents.
It will say and do what is necessary, as the moment necessitates.

We are putty in those hands.

Barrack Obama was one of those guys, in my opinion.
That is a really hard pill to swallow.
I fell for it.

But he was actually the champ of deportation and surveillance and drone strikes...and like the rest, left office perversely wealthy.
He actually paved the way for most of the right wing agendas we're so appalled by today. Obama was a shameless pawn of wall street.
But we liberals (I voted for him twice) couldn't see past the glitz.

Pretty strange brew...the neo-nazi idiots see Obama as the monster communist liberal, when in fact, he was a run of the mill fascist.

I'm not sure we'll ever be able to digest that fact.
Reply
#6
A champion of deportation? I'll give you the drone strikes and surveillance. But he left office perversely wealthy?

You'll have to provide some unambiguous evidences for those allegations there stank.
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply
#7
Non-extraordinary claims don't require extraordinary evidence.
It's public record stuff, Sparky.
You can look it up.

Meanwhile, greyman's link is interesting stuff.

I wouldn't mind seeing the United States being broken up into smaller, less threatening regions.
My angle on this is likely the opposite of the angle of the people that promote this stuff.

I could see Texas becoming part of Mexico again. Redneck Texans would choke on the concept because they remember the Alamo.
(Actually, they don't remember their ass from a hole in the ground...but pride is pride, and Texas is big.)

Vermont and New Hampshire would do well to become part of Canada. But that isn't part of the thinking in these secessionist fantasies.
The Pacific Northwest, teamed up with Vancouver, would likely do very well, and become much like a Scandinavian nation...although southern California should go its own way and rejoin Mexico, along with Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico.

The old Confederate States should have been allowed to split from the nation. They would now be a 3rd world country if they had, and the North would be exploiting the shit out of them, for labor and resources. They would share the same sort of pride as Puerto Rico, Cuba, Haiti and Central America shares. They'd be encouraged to wave whatever flag made them feel good at the moment. (Bless their hearts.)

American patriot types hate to hear this news, but the world at large sees the U.S. as the biggest threat (by far, actually) to global peace and security. and who could blame them. We're the bombiest country ever, with the biggest, meanest military machine in history, with bases spread around the globe. If we busted this country into smaller chunks, we wouldn't be able to maintain such a threatening strangle hold on the world.

(for anyone here that insists on maintaining the myth of America as the global savior, well, there are meds for that.)
Reply
#8
Here we go again: "Non-extraordinary claims don't require extraordinary evidence. It's public record stuff, Sparky. You can look it up."

You made the claim either extraordinary or not and you will provide the evidence and until you do, I call you out on this.



It's how debate works. Sorry. Smile
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply
#9
that's more like it, Sparky.

I must ask:

Why did you give me the drone strikes and surveillance stuff?
Why didn't you demand evidence for that?

Anyway, yeah...Obama was the champ of deportations.

He also championed the fraudulent banking practices that shifted enormous wealth from the middle class to the 1 %.
He was also a champion of fossil fuels and new pipe lines.
Across the board, he sided with his corporate pimps.
He didn't even challenge Gitmo in 8 years, despite campaign promises. And that's something he actually could have shut down.
I guess he forgot.

He couldn't endorse Bernie, of course. Bernie was all about removing corruption from elections.
Obama was all about the opposite. same like Hilary.

Fuck, i forget what the evidence was Sparky was lacking.

Oh yeah...deportations:

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/immigration/article122715474.html

i just picked one of the 100's of links that appeared from a simple googling.

If that source doesn't suit you, do I need to link the other 100?

(You know, you could have done this yourself. Was a time we got to call people lazy that refused to do any research.)
Reply
#10
(10-29-2017, 08:55 PM)stanky Wrote:  (You know, you could have done this yourself. Was a time we got to call people lazy that refused to do any research.)

Nope, that was never a time. The point has always been: you make a statement, you provide the evidence.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)