I know Sen. Graham doesn’t get a lot of love on these threads, but he has a strong historical perspective on how revolutionaries eventually turn on each other.
Having done a fair amount of reading about both the French and Russian revolutions, I can see the parallels today. I fully expect internecine violence between now and the election. Apparently, we’re already seeing it in Seattle, Chicago, New York, and elsewhere.
We normals should keep our heads down for now. Our enemies might just save us the trouble of destroying them.
The real slaughter starts after the revolution. That’s when the issue of who to trust becomes paramount. All revolutionaries betrayed their country, so what’s to stop them from betraying the new regime?
Well, that didn’t really work in Russia...because the more powerful of the enemies destroyed the weaker (and more rational) one.
In fact, it’s never worked anywhere. The worst of the enemies always comes out on top, and because their target hasn’t done anything except keep its head down, there’s no resistance until it’s way, way too late.
This was true in the case of the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, the Communist takeover of Spain (which led to Franco’s rebellion and restoration of Spain), the Cuban Revolution, etc.
I think we need to read the handwriting on the wall and prepare to resist. But what we are lacking is a leader. The only good thing is that the other side, in whatever its manifestation, is also lacking a leader, in their case, an individual who will emerge as the dictator when they win. Because they will win unless they’re resisted and resisted now.