America's Uncertain Future

[Mystic Warriors]

Friendly reminder that political polarization in the United States has been and continues to be asymmetric.

So if anyone is going to spark a civil war, it's probably going to be the far righties, just as soon as they are done running concentration camps for children and running people over with their cars like Muslim extremists.

Lmfao this is so stupid. While I do prefer the 40s-early 80s in terms of political moderacy, I think its delusional to say that this article says anything about the far-right or Islam.

While far-right activity is limited to a few isolated real-life incidents, and repeated usage of racial slurs on twitter, the far-left is out there rioting and taking over streets

That is one group that is small. Stop acting like the left as a whole does this.

[Loben]

Lmfao this is so stupid. While I do prefer the 40s-early 80s in terms of political moderacy, I think its delusional to say that this article says anything about the far-right or Islam.

While far-right activity is limited to a few isolated real-life incidents, and repeated usage of racial slurs on twitter, the far-left is out there rioting and taking over streets

That is one group that is small. Stop acting like the left ad a whole does this.

in multiple cities?

[Olerand]

First, I didn't say it absolutely would happen. Nonzero doesn't mean 100% or even 50%, I think 15% in the worst case, but it's just depressing that anything above zero is feasible IMO. Though I'll gladly agree that we're far more stable than we were in some of our other periods.

Second, as I said, it wouldn't be successor states, it would be a general left vs. right with a couple of states that might try to get off the boat in the process.

California, Texas and New England might get cocky and attempt to scamper off, but it wouldn't last very long since whatever side would win would prioritize bringing back any former US lands back into its fold.

That said, even those three potential breakaways are unlikely, since California is a Democrat bastion, Texas a Republican fortress, and New England would most likely just attempt to wait out the storm (maybe by aligning with Canada if it isn't also suffering instability from the loss of its largest trading partner, and the guaranteed inability of its tiny army to handle the uncontrolled fires of civil war raging across the largest land border in the world).

New England aligning with Canada might sound like something straight out of Kaiserreich, but it just seems like a logical conclusion due to New England having particularly strong bonds with Canada (especially Quebec and the Atlantic provinces).

We do sell most of our hydroelectricity to the northeastern portion of the US, for example.

This Canadian imperialism... I don't know if I see New England joining Canada. Moderates as they are, the New Englanders still have an affinity for their country.

Pew Research says that Democrats have been worse in public surveys compared to the Republicans in being consistently polarised.

You link to an article saying "Don't trust Pew Research, look at this <proceeds to give House of Representatives coalition figures since 1940s"

Then you proceed to say these people are going to spark a civil war. I doubt 200 people will do a lot.

If you want to talk about more than 200 people, it's inevitably going to have to be the 60+ million plus liberals who, according to Pew Research, have been worse at polarisation. House votes don't matter. The thread is clearly not about the US Congress, but about the public at large. So you're either ignorant or deliberately misleading. Given your post history, it's likely a combination of both.

There's a key reason why the right would be the most likely. Liberals have very low gun ownership rates when compared to the GOP base. It's not that the left lacks the desire, but they lack the access to weapons that makes a Civil War highly unlikely to come from them.

If a war were to happen, the right would almost surely win. Not only due to their already large possession of weaponry, but also due to the fact that they are more conditioned to accepting a total war.

I honestly think that the people who celebrate the idea of America falling into some kind of ideological civil war are revealing just how spoiled they are.

These people do not realize just how vital our democratic institutions are to keeping the peace and preventing the kind of people who would simply have us put against the wall and shot from coming into power.
The people calling for blood make the stupid assumption that not only will 'their side' win but that they'll be lucky enough to escape the purges when the dust settles.

A regime founded in blood is maintained by blood.

Though one should never wish for war, anywhere; there are some benefits for those of us living in the American hegemony. Not worth supporting the general American massacre (mostly of the left), that this war will surely be, but still.

THings are no different in the USA than they are in the UK or France these days; anywhere one can still express an opinion has similar side-taking

and in places like Turkey and Saudi Arabia and China where such things are frowned upon, they still go on, under wraps.

One positive trend is voters saying "a pox on both your houses" and turning to outsiders like Bernie and Trump to stand up to the globalists,

The media uses those two guys as symbols of opposing values, but the established interests realize that they both represent a very similar threat.

No, what America is experiencing right now is unthinkable in France, and even in Brexit Britain.

And Sanders and Trump being the same threat... Well...

At least the advantage is that they're an ocean away: we won't be exposed as much to Chinese culture (outside of Vancouver and its surrounding environs) compared to how much we're being exposed to American culture.

But realistically, I imagine that if America collapses, Canada probably will do so soon enough.

Hopefully not...if the UK goes to a People's Vote(and that's all I'll say on that subject), Canada can look to Europe for hope as can the rest of the world.

And you wouldn't be alone, doubtless the Chinese will carve up large parts of the West Coast as spheres of influence if all things go downhill....I don't know if it would be as soon as 2021, only if Trump was to refuse to leave and a chunk of the army stood by him.

The only way Europe can be a force of its own is if Britain is out. If Britain revotes remain, and we reaccept it, Europe's fate as a power of any significance is definitively lost.

Also, this fantasizing of China creating a colony across the ocean, inhabited by non-Chinese... I don't know if Beijing really wants that.

When you look at the fact people can accuse someone like Kavanaugh of rape, with no evidence, but actually believe it, and then think they are justified in harassing him, other politicians and violent individuals... we are in for a big problem.

Just like accusing people of being a nazi, with no evidence, these people actually will believe a baseless allegation, and from there use that to justify violence or political attacks of some kind. As long as people keep making shit up, and believing it, they can make up anything, and therefore justify murdering another person based on literally nothing. As long as this continues, there will inevitably be a inclination towards violence.

Ford didn't accuse him of rape. And I think it's funny that America's biggest problems right now are... accusations.

...Now, before I end up making this a blog, the question I have to ask you, good NSG, is simple: Are you among those or not? Do you think that the situation is so intense that the USA could devolve into ideological conflict in the near future?...

America is founded on objective ideals by which each generation has had to strive. Each generation of Americans have had the good fortune to fight evil in its time. Some evils were more pressing to end than others and sometimes we have failed spectacularly at recognizing the evil in our midst. At times it skips a generation and the grandchildren or great-grandchildren have to take up the slack.

We are an experiment on whether duly constituted Classical Liberalism in Republican form rooted in Western Civilization can endure as a lasting form of government. To the extent that it is adhered it has not only endured but thrived. We have gone from a 3rd world group of exploited Colonies by an imperial world power to within 150 years ending slavery, enacting suffrage, ending childhood labor, creating the sociological phenomena of "teenager," to by its Bicentennial landing a man on the moon and growing enough food to feed the world. Not to mention the intellectual and technological innovation that comes with limited governance, a Protestant work ethic and adequate schooling in education and morality. Liberty, equal justice under law, and self-ownership of one's person and one's very own means of production (should one choose) historically is the rare exception not the rule and we are always ever one generation away from loosing this.

This is the heritage of living in a (since the 21st Century a relatively) free country. Each American is free to live his life as he sees fit. This means that they are free to make mistakes, learn from them and become better people than they were yesterday. Some to excellence and some to harm. We have been and are in a Cultural Civil War wherein some want to perfect the Union, and some want to fundamentally change and replace it.

This is the heritage for the next generation. Can a we remain a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, or will we relent to a governing political class that seeks to rule us as the European Powers historically have done to their subjects and colonists? Can we retain life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; or will we continue to revert back to some form of despotism? I think the American People will rise to the occasion to eventually do the right thing even if those promoting insurrection and rebellion in either party against Liberty and Equality precipitate another Civil or Revolutionary War.

You were never 3rd world. As if conditions in 18th century Europe were better...

Anyway, this manichean view of history is... interesting.

Also, if right-wing extremism is not a threat to "Western civilisation", that should give you pause. Because that means that "Western civilisation" has a greater capacity to tolerate a policy of murder, assault and harrassment against minorities, and could also tolerate various forms of ethnic cleansing. If your civilisation can tolerate that without having its identity put into question, without such atrocities presenting a direct contradiction to it, then your civilisation is shit.

Racism is not automatically conservative or right-wing, like for example the neo-nazi bernie sanders supporter.

Nazis are national socialists, and thus also generally not right wing either. It's in the automatic assumption that all things bad, or all things racist are automatically right-wing where yours and a lot of other people's problem lies.

Nazis are as socialist as the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea is Democratic, a People's State, and a Republic.

Nazism is the far-right. The linking of private property protecting Nazis and socialists is... very cute. Very wrong; but very cute.

this is what happens when you abandon the classically liberal pinnacle of politics

Who is this pinnacle?

[Bakery Hill]

The far right has innocent blood on its hands. The far left doesn't. People with far left ideas didn't run over protestors or shoot up schools. People with far right ideas did.

Actually they did, many on the far left have shot innocent people, be it police officers, innocent people in riots and so on. Name the the last conservative riot? Even the charloestville thing didn't kill anyone in the riot itself, and even if you want to consider it a riot, that's one single one compared to the dozens by people on the left. The idea that anyone the far left goes after is bad, that all police are racist or all of antifa's victims are actually fascist, just due to their name, is quite frankly absurd. And while the "far-right's" views don't actually line up with mainstream conservative viewpoints, many on the left, including Hillary clinton, really do believe that most conservatives are nazi fascist, racist monsters who need to be killed an attacked. Maxine waters calls for harassment of all conservatives, along with others, that is actual sitting politicians, which is mainstream left; various media websites call for or downplay violence, that is members of the mainstream left, not fringe groups with nothing in common with the average conservative.

Clearly the far left goes after innocent people, be it harassing congressmen, anyone vaguely associated with trump like kavanaugh, or outright trying to kill them, like with Steve Scalise, a congressmen. I mean the idea that the far left never goes after innocent people... no, just no. You are living in a fantasy world if you think that's true.

> 1992 LA Riots

lol

[Mystic Warriors]

The far right has innocent blood on its hands. The far left doesn't. People with far left ideas didn't run over protestors or shoot up schools. People with far right ideas did.

Actually they did, many on the far left have shot innocent people, be it police officers, innocent people in riots and so on. Name the the last conservative riot? Even the charloestville thing didn't kill anyone in the riot itself, and even if you want to consider it a riot, that's one single one compared to the dozens by people on the left. The idea that anyone the far left goes after is bad, that all police are racist or all of antifa's victims are actually fascist, just due to their name, is quite frankly absurd. And while the "far-right's" views don't actually line up with mainstream conservative viewpoints, many on the left, including Hillary clinton, really do believe that most conservatives are nazi fascist, racist monsters who need to be killed an attacked. Maxine waters calls for harassment of all conservatives, along with others, that is actual sitting politicians, which is mainstream left; various media websites call for or downplay violence, that is members of the mainstream left, not fringe groups with nothing in common with the average conservative.

Clearly the far left goes after innocent people, be it harassing congressmen, anyone vaguely associated with trump like kavanaugh, or outright trying to kill them, like with Steve Scalise, a congressmen. I mean the idea that the far left never goes after innocent people... no, just no. You are living in a fantasy world if you think that's true.

You have no idea what the LA riots were about and the rest is either you assuming they were liberals or by 1 person or a very small group. Enough with the fear mongering. The left on average is peaceful.

[Bakery Hill]

The left just means black people apparently. What a country.

[Mystic Warriors]

The left just means black people apparently. What a country.

Sad. Even more sad is how the left gets blamed for everything, even when they weren't involved. This is why this nation is divided.

[Bakery Hill]

The left just means black people apparently. What a country.

Sad. Even more sad is how the left gets blamed for everything, even when they weren't involved. This us why this nation is divided.

It's because the socialist left is fundamentally failing at its task.

[Mystic Warriors]

Sad. Even more sad is how the left gets blamed for everything, even when they weren't involved. This us why this nation is divided.

It's because the socialist left is fundamentally failing at its task.

How is it doing that?

[Bakery Hill]

It's because the socialist left is fundamentally failing at its task.

How is it doing that?

It is not uniting and energising the working class to make positive change.

[Mystic Warriors]

How is it doing that?

It is not uniting and energising the working class to make positive change.

Good point.

[The New California Republic]

I honestly think that the people who celebrate the idea of America falling into some kind of ideological civil war are revealing just how spoiled they are.

These people do not realize just how vital our democratic institutions are to keeping the peace and preventing the kind of people who would simply have us put against the wall and shot from coming into power.
The people calling for blood make the stupid assumption that not only will 'their side' win but that they'll be lucky enough to escape the purges when the dust settles.

A regime founded in blood is maintained by blood.

History has repeatedly shown that the people who wish for that kind of thing are the first to get rounded up and taken to off-the-map prisons where they are either psychologically broken or simply killed. Even being on the "same side" is no guarantee against that kind of fate. On the contrary; many of the worst atrocities in revolutions have been purges against the regime's own supporters and regime rank and file. Human rights are usually the first thing to disappear in ideological civil wars.

[Olerand]

I honestly think that the people who celebrate the idea of America falling into some kind of ideological civil war are revealing just how spoiled they are.

These people do not realize just how vital our democratic institutions are to keeping the peace and preventing the kind of people who would simply have us put against the wall and shot from coming into power.
The people calling for blood make the stupid assumption that not only will 'their side' win but that they'll be lucky enough to escape the purges when the dust settles.

A regime founded in blood is maintained by blood.

History has repeatedly shown that the people who wish for that kind of thing are the first to get rounded up and taken to off-the-map prisons where they are either psychologically broken or simply killed. Even being on the "same side" is no guarantee against that kind of fate. On the contrary; many of the worst atrocities in revolutions have been purges against the regime's own supporters and regime rank and file. Human rights are usually the first thing to disappear in ideological civil wars.

I would think there are more people outside of the United States, particularly in countries not traditionally friendly to it (Russia, the Muslim world, etc.) that want this more than there are Americans that do.

[Manokan Republic]

Actually they did, many on the far left have shot innocent people, be it police officers, innocent people in riots and so on. Name the the last conservative riot? Even the charloestville thing didn't kill anyone in the riot itself, and even if you want to consider it a riot, that's one single one compared to the dozens by people on the left. The idea that anyone the far left goes after is bad, that all police are racist or all of antifa's victims are actually fascist, just due to their name, is quite frankly absurd. And while the "far-right's" views don't actually line up with mainstream conservative viewpoints, many on the left, including Hillary clinton, really do believe that most conservatives are nazi fascist, racist monsters who need to be killed an attacked. Maxine waters calls for harassment of all conservatives, along with others, that is actual sitting politicians, which is mainstream left; various media websites call for or downplay violence, that is members of the mainstream left, not fringe groups with nothing in common with the average conservative.

Clearly the far left goes after innocent people, be it harassing congressmen, anyone vaguely associated with trump like kavanaugh, or outright trying to kill them, like with Steve Scalise, a congressmen. I mean the idea that the far left never goes after innocent people... no, just no. You are living in a fantasy world if you think that's true.

> 1992 LA Riots

lol

Yes, it goes back that far. Isn't that far more worrisome than one event one time?

[Bakery Hill]

> 1992 LA Riots

lol

Yes, it goes back that far. Isn't that far more worrisome than one event one time?

Yes that was a coordinated left event and everything. There was black people there after all.

[Manokan Republic]

Actually they did, many on the far left have shot innocent people, be it police officers, innocent people in riots and so on. Name the the last conservative riot? Even the charloestville thing didn't kill anyone in the riot itself, and even if you want to consider it a riot, that's one single one compared to the dozens by people on the left. The idea that anyone the far left goes after is bad, that all police are racist or all of antifa's victims are actually fascist, just due to their name, is quite frankly absurd. And while the "far-right's" views don't actually line up with mainstream conservative viewpoints, many on the left, including Hillary clinton, really do believe that most conservatives are nazi fascist, racist monsters who need to be killed an attacked. Maxine waters calls for harassment of all conservatives, along with others, that is actual sitting politicians, which is mainstream left; various media websites call for or downplay violence, that is members of the mainstream left, not fringe groups with nothing in common with the average conservative.

Clearly the far left goes after innocent people, be it harassing congressmen, anyone vaguely associated with trump like kavanaugh, or outright trying to kill them, like with Steve Scalise, a congressmen. I mean the idea that the far left never goes after innocent people... no, just no. You are living in a fantasy world if you think that's true.

You have no idea what the LA riots were about and the rest is either you assuming they were liberals or by 1 person or a very small group. Enough with the fear mongering. The left on average is peaceful.

No-one said the majority on the left are violent, just as I said the majority on the right are not violent. I just said it's more mainstream, it's by people's who's political viewpoints line up with mainstream thought. It's justified by major media corporations and sitting congressmen. That's sort of the difference I'm pointing out, not that the entire left is violent. In fact, not even the majority of nazis were violent. Not even every soldier killed someone during the war, let alone the fact most people weren't in the war.

The point is not everyone and it never was, it was just that it is more mainstream for the left. Also the riots were about the same thing BLM riots are about today, a supposed cop doing a bad thing, so go and kill 10 young more black men to make up for it in a riot.

[Manokan Republic]

Yes, it goes back that far. Isn't that far more worrisome than one event one time?

Yes that was a coordinated left event and everything. There was black people there after all.

It's the same left-wing viewpoints as today, it fits perfectly in line with BLM and other such group's mentalities today. Unless your argument is that they were not left-wing? I mean, it's not excessive police brutality is a left-wing idea and most right-wingers do not believe it, right? There are more than just black people in the BLM and in the LA riots, as well. It wasn't a black thing, it wasn't only black people that participated, it was left-wing ideologues who riot over every tiny little thing.

[Bakery Hill]

Yes that was a coordinated left event and everything. There was black people there after all.

It's the same left-wing viewpoints as today, it fits perfectly in line with BLM and other such group's mentalities today. Unless your argument is that they were not left-wing? I mean, it's not excessive police brutality is a left-wing idea and most right-wingers do not believe it, right?

You've expanded left and right out to the point that they make no real sense anymore.

[Manokan Republic]

It's the same left-wing viewpoints as today, it fits perfectly in line with BLM and other such group's mentalities today. Unless your argument is that they were not left-wing? I mean, it's not excessive police brutality is a left-wing idea and most right-wingers do not believe it, right?

You've expanded left and right out to the point that they make no real sense anymore.

How? How are these individuals not left-wing? The mainstream left supports the idea that police brutality is too far and that police are generally in the wrong, and the mainstream right does not support it. Many on the left even justify the riots, which I have yet to see mainstream right-wing organizations do. It's clearly a left-leaning idea.

When we're talking about what the mainstream left and right usually think in comparison, in the U.S., it's usually the left that is against the police and even pro-riot.

[Mystic Warriors]

You've expanded left and right out to the point that they make no real sense anymore.

How? How are these individuals not left-wing? The mainstream left supports the idea that police brutality is too far and that police are generally in the wrong, and the mainstream right does not support it. Many on the left even justify the riots, which I have yet to see mainstream right-wing organizations do. It's clearly a left-leaning idea.

When we're talking about what the mainstream left and right usually think in comparison, in the U.S., it's usually the left that is against the police and even pro-riot.

How do you know they were all left wing? Did you assume it because they were mostly black?

[Manokan Republic]

How? How are these individuals not left-wing? The mainstream left supports the idea that police brutality is too far and that police are generally in the wrong, and the mainstream right does not support it. Many on the left even justify the riots, which I have yet to see mainstream right-wing organizations do. It's clearly a left-leaning idea.

When we're talking about what the mainstream left and right usually think in comparison, in the U.S., it's usually the left that is against the police and even pro-riot.

How do you know they were all left wing? Did you assume it because they were mostly black?

No I assumed the majority were left-wing because it's a left-wing idea; I didn't think nor say all were left-wing. To be fair though something like the majority of black people vote democrat, but that wasn't why I assumed it.

[Page]

The point is not everyone and it never was, it was just that it is more mainstream for the left. Also the riots were about the same thing BLM riots are about today, a supposed cop doing a bad thing, so go and kill 10 young more black men to make up for it in a riot.

Sounds like you are trying to link personal crimes against people and property committed during riots to politics. I don't think you quite understand how riots work. They are not organized actions. A political protest can contribute to the climate that leads to a riot, but when the riot starts and someone decides "this is a great opportunity to steal the TV I always wanted from the store around the corner", that has nothing to do with protest or politics. That is opportunism.

[The South Falls]

Yes that was a coordinated left event and everything. There was black people there after all.

It's the same left-wing viewpoints as today, it fits perfectly in line with BLM and other such group's mentalities today. Unless your argument is that they were not left-wing? I mean, it's not excessive police brutality is a left-wing idea and most right-wingers do not believe it, right? There are more than just black people in the BLM and in the LA riots, as well. It wasn't a black thing, it wasn't only black people that participated, it was left-wing ideologues who riot over every tiny little thing.

Oh hi, black dude here. We're not radical. The 99% of us want peace with everyone, and trying to advance in society. The LA riots were everybody. People from all over South Central LA came out to protest, which turned into riots and looting.

[Mystic Warriors]

How do you know they were all left wing? Did you assume it because they were mostly black?

No I assumed the majority were left-wing because it's a left-wing idea; I didn't think nor say all were left-wing. To be fair though something like the majority of black people vote democrat, but that wasn't why I assumed it.

Then you were wrong on both accounts. It is not a left wing idea and not all were liberals, if you can even prove something like that.

[Manokan Republic]

It's the same left-wing viewpoints as today, it fits perfectly in line with BLM and other such group's mentalities today. Unless your argument is that they were not left-wing? I mean, it's not excessive police brutality is a left-wing idea and most right-wingers do not believe it, right? There are more than just black people in the BLM and in the LA riots, as well. It wasn't a black thing, it wasn't only black people that participated, it was left-wing ideologues who riot over every tiny little thing.

Oh hi, black dude here. We're not radical. The 99% of us want peace with everyone, and trying to advance in society. The LA riots were everybody. People from all over South Central LA came out to protest, which turned into riots and looting.

Yes I know, in fact most of the insane progressive types are rich white people. They try to argue on behalf of black people without actually, really arguing on behalf of them. In a way, it's as if it's racist. A lot of the Ferguson rioters were not even from Ferguson, in fact most were not. That's what makes these sorts of defenses by mainstream news outlets like the New York times all the more absurd.