Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

America’s Political Divisions Are Approaching an Irreparable State
IWB ^ | Robert Carbery

Posted on 05/26/2017 4:02:37 AM PDT by davikkm

A second civil war may very well be inevitable in the coming years if we keep this up.

The United States of America has not been united in some time. We have continued to separate ourselves by geography and political affiliation. New England is totally different from the Deep South. The West Coast has little in common with much of the Midwest. The city folk have different beliefs than those in the countryside. But we used to all get along just fine.

Things have changed.

Our common ground is eroding. People are yelling past each other and not understanding the commonality we all have as Americans. The rhetoric in the political arena has boiled over since the most recent presidential campaign to today. The war of words has become a physical altercation in many cases.

Daniel Lang’s SHTFplan.com article last month pointed to the Berkeley protest clashes in April as the most recent evidence of this political clash leading to a possible breakout of war. Trump supporters and protesters clashed for the third time in April. 21 were arrested and 11 injured in the most recent battle, with one person stabbed. These demonstrations in support of conservatism are turning more and more violent as the lovers of liberty on the Right are getting tired of restraining themselves and are fighting back in self defense. The increasingly militant Left is responding and increasing its level of force it brings to each one of these events.

What the hell is coming next?

(Excerpt) Read more at investmentwatchblog.com ...


TOPICS: Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: civilwar; coup; divisions; political
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 next last
To: x1stcav

HA. My friend actually lives in Arroyo Grande, I just couldn’t think of that name. There was a low of 34 degrees there during this past Christmas.


21 posted on 05/26/2017 5:27:26 AM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: cgbg

There can be no compromise with those who put themselves above the law. With Roe v Wade this began in earnest. Absent the outrage against reason and law and order that was R v W (I am not talking about the subject of the decision, abortion, I’m talking only about the legal justification in the decision) the 9th couldn’t have gone where it has gone ever since and now where it has gone with respect to Exe. Orders, nor could the SCOTUS (see the circle here?) go where they, DOUBTLESS will go, if they don’t try to punt. Wildly convoluted sentences aside we’re back where it all began...


22 posted on 05/26/2017 5:36:06 AM PDT by TalBlack (Evil doesn't have a day job....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

Another one.


23 posted on 05/26/2017 5:37:30 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nevergore
Some time ago I offered my contrary opinion to the often published post to the effect that the Second Amendment would prevail against the government in an insurrection. I believe that is both preposterous and dangerous to believe for the reasons outlined below.

We are not discussing a revolution against the government here but a Civil War. My belief is that the side which is aligned with the military, which probably means aligned with the national government, will almost certainly prevail. The reasons are stated in the following lengthy reply which was written in September 2014 when the national government was synonymous with Democrat control under Barack Obama.

Insurrections by the left against the national government headed by Donald Trump is an entirely different matter and I would not suppose that he would viciously violate human rights the way I anticipate would be done by the left if they were to be the legitimate government. But, no matter who is the president, the war would inevitably degenerate into a nightmare of terrorism and guerrilla fighting if it is not immediately suppressed by the national government.

The scenes of dystopia which I describe are indeed not far-fetched. One need consider only the plight of bleeding Kansas and the plight of Missouri both before, during and after the Civil War in which American turned against American and murdered without compunction.

The nature of the Civil War which is now mooted depends, I believe, almost entirely on whether the left is in or out of national power when it erupts.

Here is that reply from September 2014 which was written in response to the view that the Second Amendment would enable patriots with small arms to prevail over the government of Barack Obama:

-------------------------

What we are now considering is whether an insurrection, a guerrilla war, against the federal government by the people armed only with small arms can prevail and restore liberty against the government bent on imposing tyranny.

The tyranny we speak of will not be acknowledged by 100% of the people. We have a culture "war" being conducted right now in our midst and no one can say who has the upper hand. Are we going to have black against white? Black and brown against white? City against country? It is very unlikely to be a war of all the citizens against the regime but some of the citizens against other citizens and the regime.

Citizens on both sides will be armed and will be fighting each other. The regime could prevail by doing very little or nothing except perhaps turning off telephone, television, Internet, electricity, water, sewer, food deliveries, and shutting bridges, tunnels, highways, and hospitals. Under these circumstances how long do you think it will take for the mothers of babies to demand that their starving children be saved by surrendering? How long can their appeals be resisted by the insurrectionists? How can you reconcile the insurrectionists sacrificing their own children with the ideals of patriotism or basic humanity?

How will the insurrectionists communicate with one another? How will they detect infiltration by government agents? How will they prevent turncoats in their midst from betraying them and opening them to slaughter with modern weapons? How will they know that they have won, even if they can win? To the degree that information is vouchsafed to them it will be disseminated by the government which controls all the avenues of information and the propaganda flow will be all one way across the continent and the population of more than 300 million.

Citizens will not be fighting the same kind of war that was waged against the government in Afghanistan or Iraq because this government, bent as it is on tyranny, will probably be fanatical, it certainly will be ruthless, it will be entirely unencumbered by conscience or compassion. As you suggest, the rules of engagement from Iraq and Afghanistan will not apply. Rather the government will be able to behave as ruthlessly as they wish because there will be nobody to report their crimes because the means of public communication will be entirely in their control. Consider how Barack Obama would fight such a war and I think you might find that his ruthlessness against his own people would resemble Ho Chi Minh and Chairman Mao far more than it might resemble Abraham Lincoln.

The United States government in this scenario will not have lapsed into tyranny out of boredom but it will be energized by an ideology resembling militant Islam or communism. In other words, a government imposing tyranny on its people in America will have an ideological justification for doing so. It will not just have adherents, it will have fanatics. It will be able to pull along with it a substantial portion of the American population and the American armed force because it will be selling an idea attractive to a certain kind of person, who right now seem to make up something approaching 40% of our fellow citizens.

Armchair generals talk about strategy and tactics, professional military men talk about logistics. Logistics alone will decide the issue in favor of the government for the government will have virtually all of it under its control.

Furthermore, the question is one of a value judgment about the utility of waging such a war. Even presupposing that a citizens insurrection could prevail against all the might of the world's superpower, what will be won? Likely, tens of millions will starve or die of thirst when food is interdicted and water is cut off. You cannot assume that oil will be delivered, that the Internet will work, that electricity will still be available. Whole sections of the country will be cut off and starved into submission in a matter of a couple of weeks. Others will be frozen into submission. The government need not drop very many bombs at all to kill millions and demoralize survivors.

Before the government can be defeated it will have to be defeated by asymmetrical warfare. The world superpower is not going to be defeated by a gunfight at the OK corral. The only hope, remote as it is, is to defeat it by guerrilla tactics and, inevitably, by terrorism. Terrorism will generate reprisals.

If civil wars are the worst kind of strife for their unmitigated cruelty, Civil War marked by terrorism must be even worse. That is precisely why Robert E. Lee rejected a guerrilla campaign and instead surrendered at Appomattox. He was not alone in being aware of the history of Bleeding Kansas. Imagine the ghastly terror which must be visited upon so many innocent Americans in order for ill-equipped, ill armed, and isolated citizens to prevail. Lee was also aware of the ruthless suppression of the civilian population conducted by Sheridan in the Shenandoah Valley and by Sherman in his march to the sea. Assuming that somehow terrorism can defeat armor, air, communications, intelligence, and all the rest of the weapons available to modern superpower, what will be left when the citizens claim victory?

Warlords!

To commit the country to a bloodbath believing without evidence that the American military will not turn against its own people is to risk the deaths of millions on a hunch. Why should our military turn against the government on behalf of terrorists? One of the most professional militaries in the world, the German military of 1939 with its code of honor, it's record in conducting effective war, it's brilliant general staff of The Prussian School, could not bring itself to attempt to assassinate Hitler until too late. It could not decline to obey his orders beginning with the occupation of the Rhineland, continuing through the invasion of Russia, culminating in the defense of Berlin with children. It not only acquiesced but collaborated in the deaths of millions of German Jews, homosexuals, priests and Gypsies. There were questions of the oath to Hitler and there were questions of patriotism mixed together. There were questions of professionalism and professional advancement. These mixed sentiments will cloud the moral picture in America as it did within the German officer corps and not the least so because they will be the stuff of relentless propaganda conducted by the government.

We have seen how Stalin killed so many of his Generals and Colonels prior to World War II and yet we saw what was left of them fight desperately to save the motherland and Stalin as well. We see Obama right now thinning out the ranks of his generals and admirals whom he likely sees as rivals to his authority. Who will be left to oppose a new Stalin? It is easy to declare that the American military will not fire on Americans but in this new age no one can presume to say how the military will behave. That which they might shrink from doing on the ground face-to-face against Americans, they might be quite willing to do from a bunker directing a drone and, not incidentally, advancing their career. Nobody can tell how effective party control over a made-over military might be, in the age of cybernetics who can doubt that the control exercised through cyber bits would be more thorough and more effective than the control exercised by commissars on the Eastern front.

Before the government makes a move against citizens it will have thoroughly mined all the intelligence resources available to it which apparently includes all of our e-mails, all of our telephone conversations, all of our posts on FreeRepublic. It will have thoroughly spied on the officer corps to determine who is untrustworthy and who can be relied upon. The officers will be even less immune to being stripped naked of their privacy than ordinary citizen insurrectionists.

We have no idea how the officer class will divide its loyalties. Will issues of race enter into their thinking? For example, would they believe as so many voters did twice in America, that to support the first Black President was a matter of the highest moral endeavor? Perhaps not all of them, but enough? In any event, believing as I do that we will have not just a war of insurrectionists against the government but insurrectionists against government supported by at least some citizens, we should not be surprised if we find many members of the armed forces on either side, just as we saw in 1861.

We have seen how the Obama administration masks every intrusion of our liberties and trespass on the Constitution with claims of moral purpose including wealth redistribution, curing the sick, humanitarian amnesty for refugee children, and saving the world from global warming. This should extremely disconcerting to every conservative and especially to every man who believes that the government will be unsupported when the people revolt and he should consider how many Americans accept these lies which mask Obama's outrages. Even at his lowest rating Obama gets approval of 40% of the people. What percentage of the military would he get? The question is rhetorical, there is no simple answer. Those who presume to answer it are willing to risk their children, their grandchildren, and my children on nothing more than their own wishful thinking. A humbler man would instead seek to change the culture now while there is still time. He would advance the Article V movement while there is still time to change the culture, save the Republic and spare the children.

It is a pity that the NRA myopically undermines our best chance for securing our liberty through the Article V movement in in the vain hope of protecting the Second Amendment and in doing so encourages many dreamers to indulge the delusion that citizens can militarily defeat the United States government.

The insurrection by the people, even patriots, will be short-lived, brutal, bloody and it will fail.


24 posted on 05/26/2017 5:44:15 AM PDT by nathanbedford (attack, repeat, attack! Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

A standing army of 500,000 is NOT going to put down a general insurrection.


25 posted on 05/26/2017 5:48:26 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: blam

Is his name Richard by any chance. What are the odda there could be two of these goofballs there?


26 posted on 05/26/2017 5:52:22 AM PDT by x1stcav (White. Male. Unreconstructed. Never owned a slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

“Under these circumstances how long do you think it will take for the mothers of babies to demand that their starving children be saved by surrendering?”

The poorest are the most likely to be obese. It’s hard for me to imagine sustained civil unrest at least while those conditions exist, but maybe there is a first time for everything I guess.

Freegards


27 posted on 05/26/2017 5:55:23 AM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: nevergore

This time it won’t be North vs. South. It will break along ideological, not geographical, lines. And yes, the conservatives, wherever located, will win.


28 posted on 05/26/2017 5:55:27 AM PDT by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
This time it won’t be North vs. South. It will break along ideological, not geographical, lines. And yes, the conservatives, wherever located, will win.

It will be both. Whole states will secede and there will be intrastate strife in the mostly blue states.

29 posted on 05/26/2017 5:58:34 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: davikkm

Approaching?

We’re beyond irreparable. It’s only a matter of time at this point.


30 posted on 05/26/2017 6:04:20 AM PDT by Professional Engineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davikkm

Political parties differ, or is it just good vs evil?


31 posted on 05/26/2017 6:10:56 AM PDT by tired&retired (Blessings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tired&retired
Political parties differ, or is it just good vs evil?

Its evil vs more evil.

32 posted on 05/26/2017 6:13:33 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: IronJack

Look at the last election map.....It would reflect my view.....

Are there good conservatives in NY, NJ,CT etc....of course....

Just as there are liberals in the South....but the breakout by majority is still heavily geographical....


33 posted on 05/26/2017 6:14:27 AM PDT by nevergore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: davikkm
A second civil war may very well be inevitable in the coming years if we keep this up.

freedom & limited government vs statism + capitalism vs socialism + natural rights vs force = struggle

34 posted on 05/26/2017 6:16:49 AM PDT by mjp ((pro-{God, reality, reason, egoism, individualism, natural rights, limited government, capitalism}))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: central_va
A standing army of 500,000 is NOT going to put down a general insurrection.

It depends entirely on how ruthless the standing army of 500,000 operates. If it operates as the Soviets operated after they had won their Civil War, in their suppression of Ukraine for example, it would be done rapidly by deploying modern logistics and modern weapons while interdicting logistics, as described.

If, on the other hand, the standing army of only one half million attempted to occupy a continent of 300 million people the way we occupied Iraq, I agree, it would be an undertaking bedeviled by the same factors that frustrated the redcoats and 1775-1781 and the Americans in Vietnam.

I do not believe the situation in America is similar to the Nazi occupation of the vast reaches of the Soviet Union in 1941 and 1942 where armed resistance was a very real factor. Modern America lives on the grid, lives on the Internet, lives on supplied water, lives on petroleum, lives on food deliveries all of which could be quickly interdicted. That remedy was not available to the occupying Wehrmacht against an essentially agrarian economy.

Under these circumstances putting down an insurrection is not synonymous with occupation as we saw in Iraq but more like occupation that we saw in Japan.

The moral of this analysis: rebel only against a government of the right which is tethered to the Constitution and to morality. If this analysis describes the reality, it seems that the Second Amendment is valuable only to deter a leftist government, unmoored from either, from outrages against the people but not a means of victory in open warfare and effective but probably unnecessary against a conservative government both for deterrence and resistance.


35 posted on 05/26/2017 6:24:51 AM PDT by nathanbedford (attack, repeat, attack! Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

You are not doing the math correctly. Support troops to front line troop ratio is 7:1. So 1/2 million troops is really ~ 100,000 troops. But soldiers are not on duty 7x24. They sleep, eat, train etc. So at any given moment in time there are only 33,000 soldiers available to actual fight/patrol/occupy. That is assuming no defections to the other side and all are in CONUS. The NYC Police Dept (50,000)is larger than the effective strength of the current standing army.


36 posted on 05/26/2017 6:31:18 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: central_va
so what?


37 posted on 05/26/2017 6:36:07 AM PDT by nathanbedford (attack, repeat, attack! Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

33,000 troops to fight an insurrection? THAT IS A JOKE.


38 posted on 05/26/2017 6:38:04 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: central_va
I am not doing the math at all.

How many soldiers does it take to interdict the water to Los Angeles, San Francisco?

How many soldiers do you think MacArthur really needed to occupy Japan?


39 posted on 05/26/2017 6:44:31 AM PDT by nathanbedford (attack, repeat, attack! Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: davikkm

Approaching?


40 posted on 05/26/2017 6:45:14 AM PDT by Lurker (America burned the witch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson