[Roccus]

Whenever you have a war, or a civil war, there are usually significant minorities who find themselves on the "wrong" side. Even in rural or the outer suburbs, there are a good quarter who side with the parasitic class. And even in cities like SF, there are sizable chunks of normal people. But civil wars are not like pickup games of basketball, where everybody chooses a side.

This is EXACTLY why I used Sarajevo as an example of what a CWII would look like here. People WILL chose sides if/when the situation becomes untennable for them.

For example, if the parasitic class succeeds in impeaching Trump, state governments (not the people of that state) will be the ones responding by doing things like not recognizing the newly formed government. Once again: state lines matter.

You are assuming that the people of that state will go along with what that state government wants. I do not think that will happen.

[jjsheridan5]

I may have misunderstood what you are saying, because I agree with what you just posted. All I am really getting at is that in the ongoing escalation of tension (if there is such a thing), state governments will play a role. And that if tensions are well-short of all-out conflict, many people are just going to find themselves as impotent minorities within a state that is doing things that they don't agree with. As far as people "going along with what the state government wants"? I have no idea. But I think tensions would have to be quite high for there to be serious intra-state conflict. I think it is more likely that the 1/4 residents of WV, for example, will find themselves relegated to just screaming at the television set, and making snide comments at dinner parties.

Now if WV were to join a coalition of states rebelling against whatever government replaces Trump's (a very, VERY, unlikely scenario)? Then yes, these people would probably pull a Sarajevo and head for the hills.