Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Max™]

Hair dye warps the matrix in which we perceive the universe by messaging aposematic information between human to human behavioural dialogue. Nothing speaks danger like the green hairs curled beneath armpits to declare a quick retreat to higher ground being in order. Maybe one day dyed hair will get its aesthetic back with future wave camofleur or something, but until that becomes mainstream, it remains the realm of poison toads and problematics

Ha ha, I beat you to the aposematic reference by a couple minutes!

Glory to the Democratic Republic of the United People's States of the Ultra Socially Aware(?)

[Loud Whispers]

Ha ha, I beat you to the aposematic reference by a couple minutes!

Glory to the Democratic Republic of the United People's States of the Ultra Socially Aware(?)

Democratic Republic of the United People's Sates of the United States of America

It's the best grasp of nth dimensional American geography without getting excessive

[PTTG??]

:v that doesn't matter

In context of "who can purge each other easier", yes it does matter that people on the right are vastly better prepared to actually carry it out.

You're missing a key thing: Factionalism. If things started to break down, the first thing that most of those militias are going to do is declare war on each other. Liberals aren't monolithic, but we'll be far more able to form collations. And yes, we do use guns.

[Max™]

Ha ha, I beat you to the aposematic reference by a couple minutes!

Glory to the Democratic Republic of the United People's States of the Ultra Socially Aware(?)

Democratic Republic of the United People's Sates of the United States of America

It's the best grasp of nth dimensional American geography without getting excessive

Ah, GNU is Not Unix. It's so meta even the acronym.

[Flying Dice]

And if I were arsed, I'm sure I could find a bunch of left-wing bomb plots and shootings. :V

Hah, no. No you wouldn't, because those don't exist. At least, with the "left-wing" defined in its modern definition. The old left-wing - sure, but old left-wing was also the worker's party, and workers are the kind of people that will arrive at your house at 2 A.M. just to punch you in the face for fun. Really rowdy folk.

Some hardliners still around. But yeah, for the most part modern far-left types are the sort to rant on social media about how people should be killed, bombed, &c. but would faint if someone put a pistol in their hand and pointed them at a politician.

Even the anarcho-syndies and antifa types are mostly poseur kids, at least in the U.S. Setting off legal fireworks, mobbing cars, and dragging around oversized flags is about the limit of their guts. Plenty of soccer teams have hooligans who do more damage than them. Even the black bloc in the U.S. can't really take credit for the worst of the violence in race riots, since that's mostly people with no particular political motivation taking the opportunity to even grudges and lift merchandise (and goodness knows that that's about as old a story as the human race).

The Right in the 'states has spent the last forty years systematically breaking the unions, and it shows.

[Sergarr]

You're missing a key thing: Factionalism. If things started to break down, the first thing that most of those militias are going to do is declare war on each other. Liberals aren't monolithic, but we'll be far more able to form collations. And yes, we do use guns.

The militias, in case of things breaking down, will most likely be absorbed by local police departments (who, btw, nearly all lean Republican) as "volunteers". And one thing about police - it never goes against itself.

Sure, some of the liberals use guns. But there's far more to it than that. Discipline, order, strict hierarchy and willingness to abandon conventional civilian morality are the key to winning a contest of violence. And all of these things are the things that liberals have learned to really dislike.

[redwallzyl]

You're missing a key thing: Factionalism. If things started to break down, the first thing that most of those militias are going to do is declare war on each other. Liberals aren't monolithic, but we'll be far more able to form collations. And yes, we do use guns.

The militias, in case of things breaking down, will most likely be absorbed by local police departments (who, btw, nearly all lean Republican) as "volunteers". And one thing about police - it never goes against itself.

Sure, some of the liberals use guns. But there's far more to it than that. Discipline, order, strict hierarchy and willingness to abandon conventional civilian morality are the key to winning a contest of violence. And all of these things are the things that liberals have learned to really dislike.

I'm a liberal and I'd kill the shit out of some dam dirty traitors too America if they got rebellious. also we get all the scientists. *starts playing Union marching songs

[ChairmanPoo]

You're missing a key thing: Factionalism. If things started to break down, the first thing that most of those militias are going to do is declare war on each other. Liberals aren't monolithic, but we'll be far more able to form collations. And yes, we do use guns.

The militias, in case of things breaking down, will most likely be absorbed by local police departments (who, btw, nearly all lean Republican) as "volunteers". And one thing about police - it never goes against itself.

Sure, some of the liberals use guns. But there's far more to it than that. Discipline, order, strict hierarchy and willingness to abandon conventional civilian morality are the key to winning a contest of violence. And all of these things are the things that liberals have learned to really dislike.

Your countryman Lev Bronstein begs to disagree

[Sergarr]

Your countryman Lev Bronstein begs to disagree

See, this is where the limitations of American two-party-based political language comes. Trotsky is not a liberal person, by any modern meaning. Like, no. Communist party has won the civil war precisely because it put discipline, order, etc. first and foremost!

[Frumple]

To sum it up, in the event of an apocalypse/civil war scenario, the Right are gonna be all 'lol wtf does the left even lift?'.

Probably not, tbh. People keep forgetting that a lot of the left in the US are just as familiar with firearms et al as the right. Plus they're more likely to be urban, and the sorts of violence that go on 'round those parts tend to be a fair bit different than the ones out here. Add on the differences in technical distribution and what that means so far as explosives and whatnot go, and even being out here and familiar with the gun happy conservative folks, I wouldn't personally bet on 'em so far as the civilian conflict part of things go.

That said, the civvie part of a stateside civil war would mean precisely fuck all, and for all the military leans conservative fairly hard, they're also not terribly inclined towards being the sorts of folks that would do anything but roll over both sides of an armed insurrection attempt of actual size and tell 'em to sit down and shut the fuck up.

[EnigmaticHat]

The spearhead of any civilian-on-civilian civil war would be veterans.  Not only would they be the best fighters in an actual all out war situation, but they'd be necessary to train everyone and organize the whole thing.  Plus they would be the best chance either side has to use smuggling or force to obtain weapons from the actual military.  Red and blue states both have plenty of veterans...

[PTTG??]

Among other things, the armed forces would not be on Trump's side in any case. Their oath is to the constitution, not the President.

[Reelya]

I pledge allegiance to the Trump of the United Trumps of Trumerica, and to the Trump for which it stands, one Nation under Trump , indivisible, with liberty and justice for Trump.

[smjjames]

The problem with a civil war scenario is that there isn't a clear dividing line between groups as in the case of the Civil War and during the Civil War, it seemed like units were more loyal to their specific states rather than the US as a whole, which isn't the case today. So, there will be the problem of the armed forces staying with the legitimate government, unless of course, it really isn't clear who the legit government is.

And as LW said earlier, Revolution is a spectator sport, only something like 10% on each side actually fought, but that's the Revolutionary war, the Civil War participation was definetly higher.

[Flying Dice]

That's the difference between a revolution and civil war. Around 750,000 men died fighting the Civil War; that's roughly 55% of all American deaths in every war we've fought, combined. Our deaths in WWII barely broke half that.

The U.S. Civil War was incredibly bloody. It's said, quite accurately, that all U.S. history before the war led up to it, and all after the war flowed from it. That was over a period of around four years, between only two actors, and discounts civilian deaths and so forth. For reference, the Syrian civil war, which is at the forefront of peoples' minds as an atrocity, has lasted for longer than that and has killed a combined total of 300-470k people, military and civilian alike, from a dozen or more actors, using modern weaponry.

Know what's even worse? Of the dead soldiers in the U.S. Civil War, only ~ a third died in combat. Two thirds of those deaths were down to disease, infection, starvation, mistreatment in prison camps, &c. It's a scar on the national psyche which was allowed to fester when the ex-Confederate Right dismantled Reconstruction and nobody stopped them. There aren't enough words to describe how profoundly the Civil War and its aftermath affected this country.