Are you locked and loaded for our no win situation?

[Gdjjr]

Yes, We Are Headed for Violent Civil War


On October 1st, with little fanfare, Politico published an extraordinary opinion piece that may be the most important thing I’ve read all year. Titled “Americans Increasingly Believe Violence is Justified if the Other Side Wins,” the essay was penned by three “senior fellows” at the Hoover Institution, New America, and the Hudson Institute, as well as a professor of “political communication” at Louisiana State University and a professor of government at the University of Maryland (that’s five authors, in case you lost count).


The major takeaway is presented in the graph that appears below:



A snippet from the comments section


The “civil war” in the 1860s was not a civil war, it was an attack by the central govt in the North against States which refused to acquiesce to its abnegation of the federalist Constitutional system.
Until now the federal govt hasn’t yet exercised all the power it had acquired 150 years ago, which it has continued to accrue since then, and much of which is not restricted to employees or contractors of the federal govt, or even residents in the US.
There’s a virtually unlimited supply of people from other countries who would be happy to come to the US and work for the federal govt to quash any resistance. If this isn’t obvious to everybody now, it will be soon after somebody tries to resist the exercise of central power.
Although this isn’t to say the corporate media won’t portray the elimination of any resistance as a “civil war’, just like they’re happy to say that any actions taken by NATO and its affiliates to overthrow elected governments are “civil war”.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Hmmmmm? Democrats at war in order to usher in their fascist state with Republicans warring against it?

I can't see it happening, but I certainly hope to stay out of it if it comes to pass.

 

[night_son]

Yes, We Are Headed for Violent Civil War


On October 1st, with little fanfare, Politico published an extraordinary opinion piece that may be the most important thing I’ve read all year. Titled “Americans Increasingly Believe Violence is Justified if the Other Side Wins,” the essay was penned by three “senior fellows” at the Hoover Institution, New America, and the Hudson Institute, as well as a professor of “political communication” at Louisiana State University and a professor of government at the University of Maryland (that’s five authors, in case you lost count).


The major takeaway is presented in the graph that appears below:



A snippet from the comments section


The “civil war” in the 1860s was not a civil war, it was an attack by the central govt in the North against States which refused to acquiesce to its abnegation of the federalist Constitutional system.
Until now the federal govt hasn’t yet exercised all the power it had acquired 150 years ago, which it has continued to accrue since then, and much of which is not restricted to employees or contractors of the federal govt, or even residents in the US.
There’s a virtually unlimited supply of people from other countries who would be happy to come to the US and work for the federal govt to quash any resistance. If this isn’t obvious to everybody now, it will be soon after somebody tries to resist the exercise of central power.
Although this isn’t to say the corporate media won’t portray the elimination of any resistance as a “civil war’, just like they’re happy to say that any actions taken by NATO and its affiliates to overthrow elected governments are “civil war”.

An internal second civil war is not what we anticipate or fear even at this late hour. What concerns us most is the overt support of local and state governments for riots and the potential for nationwide COVID-19 lockdowns complete with city, county and state line checkpoints. Beyond that, we are also quite on high alert over the possibility of the democrats, in collusion with some republican blue bellies, detonating a low-yield nuke or nukes in one or more major US cities. Yes, all of these possible outcomes are directly related to the elections and early November, possibly even sooner.

 

[Doc7505]

Yes, We Are Headed for Violent Civil War


On October 1st, with little fanfare, Politico published an extraordinary opinion piece that may be the most important thing I’ve read all year. Titled “Americans Increasingly Believe Violence is Justified if the Other Side Wins,” the essay was penned by three “senior fellows” at the Hoover Institution, New America, and the Hudson Institute, as well as a professor of “political communication” at Louisiana State University and a professor of government at the University of Maryland (that’s five authors, in case you lost count).


The major takeaway is presented in the graph that appears below:



A snippet from the comments section


The “civil war” in the 1860s was not a civil war, it was an attack by the central govt in the North against States which refused to acquiesce to its abnegation of the federalist Constitutional system.
Until now the federal govt hasn’t yet exercised all the power it had acquired 150 years ago, which it has continued to accrue since then, and much of which is not restricted to employees or contractors of the federal govt, or even residents in the US.
There’s a virtually unlimited supply of people from other countries who would be happy to come to the US and work for the federal govt to quash any resistance. If this isn’t obvious to everybody now, it will be soon after somebody tries to resist the exercise of central power.
Although this isn’t to say the corporate media won’t portray the elimination of any resistance as a “civil war’, just like they’re happy to say that any actions taken by NATO and its affiliates to overthrow elected governments are “civil war”.

~~~~~~
It's obvious that the Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat Left will upon losing the November election will increase their violence and attacks.
We have no other choice than to protect our families and ourselves against these comminist terrorists. Pesronally, I've begun once again to carry my sidearm, in fact I recently purchased a Sig Sauer 365....

 

[Doc7505]

Hmmmmm? Democrats at war in order to usher in their fascist state with Republicans warring against it?

I can't see it happening, but I certainly hope to stay out of it if it comes to pass.

So what will happen if you or your family is attacked? Seems that is what BLM and Antifa is now doing...

 

[Dogmaphobe]

So what will happen if you or your family is attacked? Seems that is what BLM and Antifa is now doing...

I do find the liklihood remote considering where I live, but I do believe that if the situation did intensify to the point of actuall warring and I felt threatened, I would defend myself with my old 12 guage I haven't used in many a decade.

 

[night_son]

Might I just add that from a sound strategic and tactical point of view standing and fighting, against mobs of rioters, roving bands of raiders or volunteer civil war units, is a certain path to immediate death for both the prepared citizen and their families. While immediate resistance in the event of an attack on the old homestead would be necessary, it is much better to not be there in the first place when attacks/raids are looking imminent. Better to get the family out—to a safe location. Live to fight another day . . . unless you've got some kind of several hundred man civil defense force on your side.

 

[linux07]

 

[linux07]

The country is deeply divided. The political system is polarized. Bizarre conspiracy theories have entered mainstream political discourse. There seem to be messaging efforts designed to delegitimize next month's elections. The president refuses to say that he will abide by the results. One official talked on social media about buying ammunition and preparing for violence. Some pundits are warning of civil war. The nation's anxiety is palpable and understandable.

Older Americans have a slight advantage in avoiding alarm. They personally recall the turbulent late '60s and early '70s with the country at war abroad and at war with itself at home. It was a violent period that witnessed lynchings, church bombings, open defiance of the federal government, assassinations, riots, the unprecedented resignation of a president, political conventions under siege, and an openly segregationist political campaign aimed at throwing the election into the House of Representatives, where its proponents could determine the next president. It is curiously reassuring to recall that we have been here before—and come through it.

American institutions held then, but can they do so again now? What are the prospects for domestic terrorism in the context of U.S. elections?

Will There Be Domestic Terrorism During Election Season?

The COVID-19 pandemic has roiled the elections. The United States is deeply divided and the political system is polarized. Under these fraught circumstances, even a minor event can have far-reaching repercussions. What are the prospects for domestic terrorism in the context of U.S. elections?

www.rand.org

 

[Likkmee]

War is a "civil" way of protesting.....

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Dumb Unz article, playing to all the rightwing hysteria ...

There’s a virtually unlimited supply of people from other countries who would be happy to come to the US and work for the federal govt to quash any resistance.

This is just one example of distorted thinking. As if there weren’t enough “red-blooded Americans” armed to the teeth and ready to kill their fellow citizens!

Does anybody think our ruling elites need to import killers? Who was it (Andrew Carnegie?) who quipped he could always pay one half of the working class to kill the other half? Today, many dumb Americans are being ginned up to do it — for free!

Besides the military and militarized cops, always ready to step in to save capitalism and the propertied classes, now millions of ordinary Americans are being primed to see enemies, Communists, demons and vampires everywhere. We normally expect our soldiers (“cops of the world”) to kill them overseas, but now that our economy is stumbling, we are psychologically being prepared to kill even each other. Pathetic how even @Gdjir — who is presumably some kind of anti-statist “anti-partisan” libertarian — unthinkingly spreads this madness.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

The left every day now in this country show us that many are willing to not only get violent, but to

The country is deeply divided. The political system is polarized. Bizarre conspiracy theories have entered mainstream political discourse. There seem to be messaging efforts designed to delegitimize next month's elections. The president refuses to say that he will abide by the results. One official talked on social media about buying ammunition and preparing for violence. Some pundits are warning of civil war. The nation's anxiety is palpable and understandable.

Older Americans have a slight advantage in avoiding alarm. They personally recall the turbulent late '60s and early '70s with the country at war abroad and at war with itself at home. It was a violent period that witnessed lynchings, church bombings, open defiance of the federal government, assassinations, riots, the unprecedented resignation of a president, political conventions under siege, and an openly segregationist political campaign aimed at throwing the election into the House of Representatives, where its proponents could determine the next president. It is curiously reassuring to recall that we have been here before—and come through it.

American institutions held then, but can they do so again now? What are the prospects for domestic terrorism in the context of U.S. elections?

Will There Be Domestic Terrorism During Election Season?

The COVID-19 pandemic has roiled the elections. The United States is deeply divided and the political system is polarized. Under these fraught circumstances, even a minor event can have far-reaching repercussions. What are the prospects for domestic terrorism in the context of U.S. elections?

www.rand.org

The 60's and 70's was nothing like the atmosphere in America today. Back then, the country was 90% white, and mostly Christian, no way did we hate each other to the degree we do today.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Yes, We Are Headed for Violent Civil War


On October 1st, with little fanfare, Politico published an extraordinary opinion piece that may be the most important thing I’ve read all year. Titled “Americans Increasingly Believe Violence is Justified if the Other Side Wins,” the essay was penned by three “senior fellows” at the Hoover Institution, New America, and the Hudson Institute, as well as a professor of “political communication” at Louisiana State University and a professor of government at the University of Maryland (that’s five authors, in case you lost count).


The major takeaway is presented in the graph that appears below:



A snippet from the comments section


The “civil war” in the 1860s was not a civil war, it was an attack by the central govt in the North against States which refused to acquiesce to its abnegation of the federalist Constitutional system.
Until now the federal govt hasn’t yet exercised all the power it had acquired 150 years ago, which it has continued to accrue since then, and much of which is not restricted to employees or contractors of the federal govt, or even residents in the US.
There’s a virtually unlimited supply of people from other countries who would be happy to come to the US and work for the federal govt to quash any resistance. If this isn’t obvious to everybody now, it will be soon after somebody tries to resist the exercise of central power.
Although this isn’t to say the corporate media won’t portray the elimination of any resistance as a “civil war’, just like they’re happy to say that any actions taken by NATO and its affiliates to overthrow elected governments are “civil war”.

“We were slow to consider violence an option. Unlike liberals, after all, we really do have principles, and we did not want to be like them. But they have pushed us to this point, and it’s difficult to see how there can be any debate about that. Months of watching our cities burn. Months of our history being torn down. Months of draconian lockdowns and arbitrary rules imposed by Democrat governors and mayors. Months of being told that we had to shelter in place, while BLM was given free rein to loot and burn. Months of being told we have no right to defend ourselves; that if you are white, you are automatically guilty. Countless lives and businesses destroyed. Given all of this, and more, it’s surprising that the number isn’t 56% — or 76% or 86%. But since many conservatives are probably afraid to say they might condone violence, I think we can round that 36% up a bit. Quite a bit.” ibid

This is why conservatives are hated – and appropriately so; rightists are clearly devoid of principles.

It’s lies such as this, this sort of idiotic, hateful rhetoric from the right seeking to divide the American people that is responsible for needless conflict and political dysfunction.

If conservatives engage in unwarranted, lawless acts of violence it will be solely the consequence of their own fear, ignorance, and hate – not because anyone ‘pushed’ them into doing so.

 

[there4eyeM]

America is so rich and fat that talk of civil war in any historical context where one has taken place is totally absurd. There is no justification to think such a thing would happen and it is only in the interests of very malintentioned persons to suggest it. It could easily be regarded as sedition.

 

[JGalt]

Yes, We Are Headed for Violent Civil War


On October 1st, with little fanfare, Politico published an extraordinary opinion piece that may be the most important thing I’ve read all year. Titled “Americans Increasingly Believe Violence is Justified if the Other Side Wins,” the essay was penned by three “senior fellows” at the Hoover Institution, New America, and the Hudson Institute, as well as a professor of “political communication” at Louisiana State University and a professor of government at the University of Maryland (that’s five authors, in case you lost count).


The major takeaway is presented in the graph that appears below:



A snippet from the comments section


The “civil war” in the 1860s was not a civil war, it was an attack by the central govt in the North against States which refused to acquiesce to its abnegation of the federalist Constitutional system.
Until now the federal govt hasn’t yet exercised all the power it had acquired 150 years ago, which it has continued to accrue since then, and much of which is not restricted to employees or contractors of the federal govt, or even residents in the US.
There’s a virtually unlimited supply of people from other countries who would be happy to come to the US and work for the federal govt to quash any resistance. If this isn’t obvious to everybody now, it will be soon after somebody tries to resist the exercise of central power.
Although this isn’t to say the corporate media won’t portray the elimination of any resistance as a “civil war’, just like they’re happy to say that any actions taken by NATO and its affiliates to overthrow elected governments are “civil war”.

I've passed the point of giving away how "locked and loaded" we are.

Operations security - Wikipedia

 

[Gdjjr]

The author had some pretty salient points -

I vaguely remember the 70's and 60's- I vividly remember there was no internet too- or smart phones- no instant access only instant coffee and tea- and I noticed a couple of erudite posters don't like when an opinion, backed with salient points is posted- so instead of addressing a point ridicule becomes the order of the day, expressed with an audacity that is, to me, unconscionable, by a poster whose screen name impled mentor relied on common sense by addressing grievances of the time-


Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not yet sufficiently fashionable to procure them general Favor; a long Habit of not thinking a Thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defence of Custom. But the Tumult soon subsides. Time makes more Converts than Reason.

As a long and violent abuse of power is generally the means of calling the right of it in question, (and in matters too which might never have been thought of, had not the sufferers been aggravated into the inquiry,) and as the King of England hath undertaken in his own right, to support the Parliament in what he calls Theirs, and as the good People of this Country are grievously oppressed by the Combination, they have an undoubted privilege to enquire into the Pretensions of both, and equally to reject the Usurpation of either.

1776: Paine, Common Sense (Pamphlet)

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Lefties are so programmed by MSM propaganda that 10 minutes of cell phone news pronouncing the end of Wuhan virus and systemic racism and they will have all completely forgotten there was ever any problem.

 

[NoNukes]

Yes, We Are Headed for Violent Civil War


On October 1st, with little fanfare, Politico published an extraordinary opinion piece that may be the most important thing I’ve read all year. Titled “Americans Increasingly Believe Violence is Justified if the Other Side Wins,” the essay was penned by three “senior fellows” at the Hoover Institution, New America, and the Hudson Institute, as well as a professor of “political communication” at Louisiana State University and a professor of government at the University of Maryland (that’s five authors, in case you lost count).


The major takeaway is presented in the graph that appears below:



A snippet from the comments section


The “civil war” in the 1860s was not a civil war, it was an attack by the central govt in the North against States which refused to acquiesce to its abnegation of the federalist Constitutional system.
Until now the federal govt hasn’t yet exercised all the power it had acquired 150 years ago, which it has continued to accrue since then, and much of which is not restricted to employees or contractors of the federal govt, or even residents in the US.
There’s a virtually unlimited supply of people from other countries who would be happy to come to the US and work for the federal govt to quash any resistance. If this isn’t obvious to everybody now, it will be soon after somebody tries to resist the exercise of central power.
Although this isn’t to say the corporate media won’t portray the elimination of any resistance as a “civil war’, just like they’re happy to say that any actions taken by NATO and its affiliates to overthrow elected governments are “civil war”.

“We were slow to consider violence an option. Unlike liberals, after all, we really do have principles, and we did not want to be like them. But they have pushed us to this point, and it’s difficult to see how there can be any debate about that. Months of watching our cities burn. Months of our history being torn down. Months of draconian lockdowns and arbitrary rules imposed by Democrat governors and mayors. Months of being told that we had to shelter in place, while BLM was given free rein to loot and burn. Months of being told we have no right to defend ourselves; that if you are white, you are automatically guilty. Countless lives and businesses destroyed. Given all of this, and more, it’s surprising that the number isn’t 56% — or 76% or 86%. But since many conservatives are probably afraid to say they might condone violence, I think we can round that 36% up a bit. Quite a bit.” ibid

This is why conservatives are hated – and appropriately so; rightists are clearly devoid of principles.

It’s lies such as this, this sort of idiotic, hateful rhetoric from the right seeking to divide the American people that is responsible for needless conflict and political dysfunction.

If conservatives engage in unwarranted, lawless acts of violence it will be solely the consequence of their own fear, ignorance, and hate – not because anyone ‘pushed’ them into doing so.

Is it coming from the right or from Russia.

 

[Gdjjr]

Is it coming from the right or from Russia.

Stop being stupid-

 

[miketx]

I don't think violence is justified just because the other side wins. Violence is justified by criminal actions against you.