Another American Civil War?

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Mt. Vesuvius is a faulty comparison, because it could erupt with far less prior warning. USAmerican political apathy is a far more directly-observable and predictable dormancy. The USAmerican majority tendency in crisis has not displayed any tendency in recent history for blowing our top into rebellion against authority. We've regressed instead into predictable authoritarians, who naïvely wait as vassals for answers from on high, as if the President of our Republic is a temporary King, and our Congress a higher class.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's why most USAmericans don't maintain adult awareness of, and don't participate in political life. It's also why our nation can be run completely into the ditch without political resistance. There's no fire in our belly, and no imminent eruption.

 

I vote NO. The Americans are fed up with wars and blood shed. They want to love their lives and clean their houses when the economy, the policies and the future of the nation are in turnmoil .

 

For that metaphor to fit, we would have to see a populace that is so politically divided, that one more insult would break the nation in two. But it just isn't that way these days.

The overwhelming majority of USAmericans aren't attentive to the issues, and don't give a shit about real personal involvement in societal change. We look for rulers and scapegoats (and make scapegoats of rulers) in willful avoidance of responsibility for the future of our country. We're not a generation that challenges authority- especially not during a crisis. That's why power and authority are concentrating in the USA- not by some insidious conspiracy, but through popular neglect. There's no vibrant reformist (not to mention revolutionary or secessionist) sentiment in the USA. We're still stuck in a national mood of self-entitlement and apathy.

 

So much for.

"And where we are met with cynicism and despair
We say "Yes we can"

 

That's still my hope for my country, in full recognition of the important meaning of all 3 words- and I'm confident that the breakup of our nation will not be what we rally to.

 

:bravo::bravo:
Most People do NOT participate in the political process from voting to donating to candidates....etc . The senate and the congress are full of elderly folks who can not even stay awake for debates . The same faces again, again and again in some of the highest offices of the land.....etc . Every person ought to participate in politics and seeks the changes he or she wants .

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

.

 

I sincerely share your hope, but thus far do not see any reason to believe those three words. So far, so bad.

 

I don't know, Hype, with gun control and the new Obama socialism underway, there just might be enough to pull some of thos apathetic people together.

I think even you would agree that the nation seems to be more and more divided on more and more issues ...than ever before. At some point, those issues are going to start adding up and ....well, will it be enough to take us over the top into civil war? Civil strife? Civil conflict?

Look at some of the other nations of the world ....many of them had far less to divide them than we do, yet they went through civil wars. Look at Yugoslavia? They broke up into, what, three or four distinct nations.

Baron Max

 

An extraordinarily poor example.

The state of Yugoslavia was figment of political imagination, forced together after the First World War. The constituent peoples (consisting of Bosnian Muslims, Albanian Muslims, Croat Catholics, Slovenian Catholics, Hungarian Catholics, Serbian Orthodox and Macedonian Orthodox) had been already warring and infighting for the better part of a millennium over language, culture, religion and politics. The people had no history of cooperation except when it was forced on them by a foreign power (see: Austrio-Hungarian Empire, Ottoman Empire, Napoleonic Empire).

Were it not for an oppressive monarch in the beginning or the powerful personality of Marshal Tito, the people would have gone their separate ways directly after the Great War.

~String

 

...LOL! Oh, I agree ....just couldn't think of another one that might have worked as an example.

Perhaps Pakistan and India? Some of the nations in Africa? I can't keep up with those places now, but African natiions divide now at the drop of hat, don't they?

String, if you can think of a better example, I'd appreciate it. And perhaps the old USA would be a better example? Instead of slavery and states' rights, it could be gun rights and anti-Obama-socialism.

Baron Max

 

I consider myself to be an amateur student of history and I can tell you with some security that the USA is at one of its more mellow points (judging from one 25 year cycle to the next) in the division of public opinion on political matters. The 85 years leading up to the civil war were about as divisive as you get in American politics. Even the next 40-or-so years were pretty rough. Presidents battled over the supposed whoring of their wives and for serving strawberries in the White House. The 1950's and 60's saw more division in the American culture (the obvious issues being Viet Nam and segregation).

What are the issues now? Are they geographic? No.

As conservative as Texas and Utah are; as liberal as California and Massachusetts are-- there is still essentially very little difference between the states beyond weather and funny accents.

~String

 

Yeah, I have to agree with that. But are we looking at it through to large a lens? Taking it as an overall situation, I'd have to agree with you. But on a local level, the differences can be and are quite distinct and fervent. How much further would they have to go to make it violent?

And if civil war broke out in the DFW area, what would the rest of the nation do? Would people start taking sides on the issue(s)? And if they did? Would civil war break out in Cleveland? Would things snowball?

Baron Max

 

"And if civil war broke out in the DFW area, what would the rest of the nation do? Would people start taking sides on the issue(s)? And if they did? Would civil war break out in Cleveland? Would things snowball?"

No. Well, only on fascist talk radio.

 

I hope the civil war will be nuclear so that only texas will remain.

 

I'd just like it to be civil.