[Beren]

A Second Civil War Within The Next 20 Years Is Improbable.

So what would be the sides in this civil war?

North vs South, as usual.

[Code Rood]

Not sure how it's going to play out in the end, but there's no doubt that things like more diversity will lead to more conflict. Certainly in countries like the US, as they are a superpower where constant distraction is needed to keep those in power untouched.

Both sides of the political aisle basically preach the same message when it comes to things like diversity. They tell you that diversity is a strength. But what do they really mean by this slogan? That it is a tool for those in power? Just look at how the media is playing people against each other. Or how divisive groups are often being funded by fishy people and organizations.

[Hong Wu]

I don't think a civil war is probable because liberals literally cannot fight. What they can do is lie down in the middle of the road and refuse to move until the rest of the country lets them secede out of disgust.

[Red_Army]

[Zag Edit: Rule 2]

[anasawad]

Based on official data, around 15-16% of Americans are currently living in poverty, and over 40% of Americans are near the poverty line.
With the wealth and income gap expanding, and the fact that the US is currently in an economic bubble which will most likely burst within the upcoming years, as well as deregulation which is not only expanding the bubble and increasing reckless and risky behavior in the market, the US is most likely heading towards a major economic crisis; Which, considering all the factors and problems present, will most likely push a significant if not atleast a simple majority of Americans into poverty.
This will further the political divide in the US and increase crime and violence rates.

If we were to look at the US and compare it to all other empires that held its place in history and what happened to those empires under these conditions, we can say with high probability that the US will experience and wave of instability, civil unrest, riots and potentially large scale uprisings against the upper, ultra rich, ruling class.

Due to the aforementioned political and ideological divide present in the population, these uprisings will most likely have a significant level of violence in it and could potentially grow to be a series of brief civil conflicts, not a full fledged civil war though.

I would say, based on an outsider view, that all those people in the non-coastal states in the middle who all have high rates of poverty and lack of development in comparison to the major states on the coast will be doing most of the "rising" and will experience most of the violence.
This will most likely lead to a major shift in the political landscape of the US and would probably push it further down a path of isolationism and radicalism.

This, in my opinion, would be what leads the US towards an eventual civil war in the upcoming decades as these factors will prepare the atmosphere for it. Though not as close as 2 decades, probably 3 or 4 decades down the line.

Another factors that should be considered is the US global standing and power.
The US wealth came mainly from its dominance, most Americans don't appear to understand how much their economy is based on imperialistic practices around the world, but it is.
The US gains a huge economic advantage from being able to push smaller nations around into accepting trade deals and contracts favoring the US on their own expense.
With the world moving rapidly towards a G0 political mode, and the US economy back home fracturing due to repeated regulatory and market failures over the years, the US will have less and less economic influence around the world as other powers, mainly China and soon India in Asia and Africa, and Brazil in south America, etc, take more and more of its previously held share of influence both economic and political; This will play role in accelerating the decline of the US economy and; Which will contribute massively in limiting the US pace of recovery after the upcoming crisis.


Now, considering that when in hardship, societies generally tend to move more towards the extreme ends of the political spectrum, it is highly probably we'll be seeing an actual communist and fascist movements rising up and gaining momentum in the US in the upcoming decades, not in the same way people usually imagen these movements though (not the European style communism and fascism that is), as the US is different from Europe in that it is much more diverse.
Nontheless, when those start growing, a civil war will become inevitable.

[Rancid]

You could argue that the election of Trump was a kind of civil war won by morons.

[Hong Wu]

It looks like the NYT has at least a few people who are fantasizing about a civil war. The most likely response here is that they are working on something new after the Mueller thing blows over. Which is of course going to go really bad for them as only 1% of Americans think the "situation with Russia" is the most important issue facing the country according to some poll I read.

[Crantag]

I don't think a civil war is probable because liberals literally cannot fight. What they can do is lie down in the middle of the road and refuse to move until the rest of the country lets them secede out of disgust.

I am no liberal. I would accept being called a leftist radical.

But I don't think you would want to stair me down in a dark ally, when I was in a bad mood.

Not sure if that counts or not.

I have stated previously though why this is all a bullshit premise, to begin with.

[Hong Wu]

I think we all know how this goes, a majority of the military and gun-lovers in the US are politically conservative and statistically, those who are physically fit are more likely to have right-wing views. The claimed toughness or virility of individual, anonymous internet leftists does not matter at all here.

[Crantag]

I think we all know how this goes, a majority of the military and gun-lovers in the US are politically conservative and statistically, those who are physically fit are more likely to have right-wing views. The claimed toughness or virility of individual, anonymous internet leftists does not matter at all here.

Even though you seem like a wack job, we'd probably get along okay in real life.

I reject the entire premise of this thread. So if you are trying to draw battle lines in conjunction with essentially Democats vs Republicans, you are speaking of fantasy for me and so it's difficult to bring a rational response into it.

Most physically fIt people being Republican is phony. It's true that more gun owners are Republicans.

In a real war, arms would be acquired by either side, and people would be taught to handle them. But in the actual Civil War, the South did have superiority with respect to skills in the use of firearms. This served them.

It is a factor indeed.

I'm a pretty good shot with a rifle. Not as good with a pistol. But I don't speak for all leftists.

I'm not an ideologue either, and I have a few 'right wing' views. I thought VS and SC made mince meat of that PoD in the gender thread. For once, they both seemed rational.

I even oppose the extension of Civil Rights legal code onto gays, and I secretly oppose Obama-care (though I support medicare for all, at least in principal. I do think healthcare is like a utility and should be a right).

In fantasy land, a civil war would be like other civil wars, and noone knows what would happen. But I don't see it happening.

[MistyTiger]

Probable.

There's so much anger and fear out there. I can feel the restlessness and frustration out there. I don't want to see a war happen but I think it is possible that a war could arise. Weapons are easy to get and people are hoarding them. Whenever people want to overthrow the government, a revolution occurs as we've seen with the French Revolution.

[Drlee]

A civil war? No. That would be asking Americans to take up arms against their own armed forces. We don't do that, left or right. Our government is altogether to prone to accepting the vote of the people for that to be likely. Besides. In 20 years we are going to be trying to figure out where our intelligence fits in the war with artificial intelligence. That is a much bigger threat.

Civil wars require secrecy to work. We no longer have the luxury of secrecy. There is no hiding. So the notion, as Redbarn said, of a bunch of pituitary cases taking to the woods to stand off the US Army is an absurdity.

Now ask me about a military coup. That is another thing entirely. Just the other day we had the retired head of Special Operations calling out the president over revoking of Brennins security clearance. We have generals essentially running the cabinet. Once we start mixing active military with our constitutional civilian rule, we are in a dark place. I, for one, am glad that McMaster is where he is. I had hopes for Kelly in which I have been sadly let down. Nevertheless, I could see them acting to prevent a catastrophe. Would that be a coup? It depends on what method they used. If the do-nothing republican drones failed to act and these patriots seized the government and forced them to do their job, that would be a coup. It might not even be obvious to the rest of us if done with subtlety.

The irony of this scenario is that it would be essentially a centrist coup perpetrated by the military as they would quickly reestablish democratic government to the country. It is, after all, the think they have spent their entire lives serving.

The US military is conservative but not radically right. And it is populated with a large number of minorities.

No civil war. But stay tuned.

[Rich]

The US seems further away from Civil war than any point in its history. Compare the resistance of the Conservatives to civil rights compared to the resistance to gay marriage. Two and half thousand years of Judaeo-Christian sexual morality flushed down the toilet with barley a whimper. No if you want civil war in America you need to start importing a lot more Muslims.

Just to be clear, when I predict civil war in Europe I don't mean between Muslims and Infidels, or no we're far too pathetic for that. No the civil war will be between the Muslims fighting over the spoils.

[Hong Wu]

Oh my God the fucking robots though. Thanks PoFo

It's not just that sometimes, one line is enough. Sometimes, only one line can do the job...

[Red_Army]

@Hong Wu If you could guarantee that you will only post one line I think the rule should be amended for you. Only one line would be an amazing improvement on every one of your posts.

[Hong Wu]

@Hong Wu If you could guarantee that you will only post one line I think the rule should be amended for you. Only one line would be an amazing improvement on every one of your posts.

Thanks guy who can kick my ass. I think they should change a lot of rules for me. Having the same rules for different people is stupid anyway. First of all, they never apply it fairly anyway which is why people like you get to post about how you can kick my ass but I am the one with the yellow card. This probably brings a grin to your face even though you have seemingly dedicated your life to complaining about how there isn't enough equality.

Let's be honest, I am not just smarter, more articulate and richer than you, I also regularly exercise far more restraint in my daily life, which makes me a better person than you too. And even though you cry about inequality, you are given all sorts of privileges I don't get within the context of our relationship but you're still salty as fuck. I treat you with the kid gloves after you claim you can beat my ass and get away with it and you're still a salty little fucker. I really don't know what to do. I tell you off, you're salty. I put up with your shit, you're salty. I ignore you, you're salty. What the fuck am I supposed to do, it's not like you're better off without your superiors in your life. We all know what happens when communists get their way. Is that what you really want, to shoot a doctor, rape a nun and then starve to death with a stomach full of mud? You pathetic, delusional little drunk. Sorry but a line has to be drawn somewhere when it comes to appeasing you little beasts.

[Red_Army]

k

edit: I don't know which option is more pathetic: that you have so little going for you that your professed "emphasis on restraint" is your criteria for a good person or that your imagined best person is the one who shows restraint the most. This is literally the lamest thing I've ever seen someone proud about. @Hong Wu I think you just beat out @Albert for most pathetic member of PoFo.

[Albert]

@Hong Wu I agree, you are a much better person then RA.

He spends his free time tricking people into peeing on them, for crying out loud. If you have the chance, just ignore him.

As for the OP. The lefties hate is boiling over. I fear they might do something drastic for attention.

[Red_Army]

If my criteria for being a good person was opposition to the two most moronic posters on PoFo I would esteem myself very highly right now

[Missus V. Spolia.]

War is coming and is already here in some ways. Sure there are losers on both sides who are too fat or too soy to fight, but there are also lots of young people who are more than ready to do it.

Plus, the military will split (no one is talking about this), you would have conservative generals and soldiers who would support a right wing government against a liberal coup that would likewise have its own generals and soldiers. Thats how it starts, and red states will have their own factories etc., to make arms and so will the blue states, and existing arms will be taken by whatever side had control of them. Its not hard to imagine.