Civil War 2.0

[Stevicus]

That's absurd. Don't buy into Maga propaganda
that the economy is terrible. It's doing very well.
It's still hard here to find workers. Pay is up.
Inflation is down. All we need to do is cut the
tax burden, particularly on lower level wage earners.
The Magas who rage & roil, portending more
violent conflict aren't poor. Their problem is
succumbing to Trump's cult.

What MAGA propaganda are you talking about? I'm just looking at the long-term data. Real wages have been stagnant for more than 50 years. The trade deficit has skyrocketed over the past 30-40 years. Our budget deficits have increased. Our national debt is higher. Our nation's credit rating has been downgraded more than once.

Our once-vibrant industries paid their workers enough (including medical bills) to support a family in the suburbs, but they found it was much cheaper to outsource to other countries. 70 years ago, the country was solvent enough to build great public works projects, such as the Interstate Highway System, but now, we can't even afford to repair the potholes all over the streets. Many cities are facing crisis, and there hasn't been this much visible homelessness since the days of the Hoovervilles during the Great Depression.

The Democrats were the ones who warned against the perils of voodoo economics, although I guess their warnings weren't strong enough or loud enough. Meanwhile, the Republicans kept pushing this "all is right with the world" attitude. ("Don't worry, be happy.") You seem to be arguing from the same viewpoint, that "everything is great."

Granted, things haven't fallen apart completely yet, but if everything is/was going so well, why should anyone be worried about Trump or the possibility of a civil war? Seriously, what is this political divide about, if times are good and everything is going so well in America right now? What is there to fight about?

 

[Father Heathen]

It's kind of like how so many people talk big about "wishing I was there with my gun" when there's a mass shooting but mass shooters are never (that I've heard of) taken out by a good guy with a gun.

In an active shooter situation where you would have arm civilians intervening, how are people going to differentiate the perpetrators from the well-meaning would-be heroes? I can see the wrong people getting shot in the chaos and confusion.

 

[Father Heathen]

Not gonna happen. Soon Trump will be gone, and the criminal igmoramuses that are trying to mimick him to gain and hold onto power are not appealing to the vast majority of Americans. This whole obsession will soon be behind us and forgotten and the oligarchs will go on robbing us all blind with impunity, as always.

The danger is not from civil war, it's from a civil collapse brought on by the unlimited greed of capitalism and the poverty and suffering it's causing within the population. When that reaches a critical point, the current system is going to collapse and things will get very bad.

Not civil war, civil collapse.

Even after Trump's gone, the cultural malady that allowed for his rise will still remain.

 

[PureX]

Even after Trump's gone, the cultural malady that allowed for his rise will still remain.

Some people will always turn to authoritarianism when they feel their power in society and position in life, slipping. It's part of that social collapse that's happening because of capitalist greed going unchecked and turning the "American dream" into an American nightmare for more and more people. That cultural malady is called capitalism. And it's driving us into a total social collapse if we don't find a way to stop it. Trump is just a warning sign as we continue down the spiral into that abyss.

 

[Revoltingest]

What MAGA propaganda are you talking about? I'm just looking at the long-term data. Real wages have been stagnant for more than 50 years. The trade deficit has skyrocketed over the past 30-40 years. Our budget deficits have increased. Our national debt is higher. Our nation's credit rating has been downgraded more than once.

The current politicial hostilities have happened during
a time of plenty. Trump has even wished for economic
collapse, hoping it would boost his political power.
Alas, things are going to well to suit him.

Our once-vibrant industries paid their workers enough (including medical bills) to support a family in the suburbs, but they found it was much cheaper to outsource to other countries. 70 years ago, the country was solvent enough to build great public works projects, such as the Interstate Highway System, but now, we can't even afford to repair the potholes all over the streets. Many cities are facing crisis, and there hasn't been this much visible homelessness since the days of the Hoovervilles during the Great Depression.

The Democrats were the ones who warned against the perils of voodoo economics, although I guess their warnings weren't strong enough or loud enough. Meanwhile, the Republicans kept pushing this "all is right with the world" attitude. ("Don't worry, be happy.") You seem to be arguing from the same viewpoint, that "everything is great."

Granted, things haven't fallen apart completely yet, but if everything is/was going so well, why should anyone be worried about Trump or the possibility of a civil war? Seriously, what is this political divide about, if times are good and everything is going so well in America right now? What is there to fight about?

We have new vibrant industries. And the
trades are booming. Try to find a plumber,
electrician, & especially carpenter. Everyone
is booked solid far in advance, & unable
to find enuf skilled help.

 

[Stevicus]

Not gonna happen. Soon Trump will be gone, and the criminal igmoramuses that are trying to mimick him to gain and hold onto power are not appealing to the vast majority of Americans. This whole obsession will soon be behind us and forgotten and the oligarchs will go on robbing us all blind with impunity, as always.

The danger is not from civil war, it's from a civil collapse brought on by the unlimited greed of capitalism and the poverty and suffering it's causing within the population. When that reaches a critical point, the current system is going to collapse and things will get very bad.

Not civil war, civil collapse.

I agree that Trump will probably go soon enough, so the issue isn't really about Trump. (In my view, it never really was about Trump, as I view him as a symptom of a deeper problem.)

I don't think there will be a civil war either, at least not like the Civil War we faced 160 years ago. But if there is civil collapse, then it will be quite chaotic just the same, which would require military intervention. The monied interests will want the state to use whatever force is necessary to enforce and protect their property rights. They will want law and order to be restored. No doubt the military will prevail over the gravy SEALs and whatnot that may be out there, but what then? Will they stop there, or keep going?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Some people will always turn to authoritarianism when they feel their power in society and position in life, slipping. It's part of that social collapse that's happening because of capitalist greed going unchecked and turning the "American dream" into an American nightmare for more and more people. That cultural malady is called capitalism. And it's driving us into a total social collapse if we don't find a way to stop it. Trump is just a warning sign as we continue down the spiral into that abyss.

Lol.

 

[F1fan]

Federal government: There is no right to abortion.
Michigan government: There is a right to abortion.

And if republicans get a majority back in congress Michigan's rights are gone. They don't respect state's rights.

And with some states denyling this right it is a messy patchwork, and forcing women to travel (if they can afford it) to seek medical care. But even some republicans in anti-abortion rights states are suggesting they will make it illegal for their citizens to travel for medical care. How do you feel about that double limitation on women? No right for abortion care, and no right to travel for it. It's not an issue of state's rights being superior, it's a matter of who is deciding the rights, whether it's a state or the whole USA.

What is so awesome about the states that are limiting rights when before all women had the right in the whole USA? How is it better for women? those states when rights are taken away?

If you want to get really crazy about, who say a state has the last say on rights, maybe it should be at the county level. Can a county ignore a state's limitation on rights if it says so? Or how about a city rejecting a state or county authority? Or a neighborhood ignoring a city code? Or some guy locked in his house insisting he is a sovereign ctizen?

At some point we need uniform laws and stability, not a patchwork to such a degree that the Supreme Court has no authority at all.

Look at Texas and thier defying a Supreme Court ruling. How do you think this will play out? What if all states started ignoring federal authority, a good thing? Republican governors have sided with Abbott, no doubt for political reasons, not due to some pracitical purpose.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/27/politics/texas-border-supreme-court-what-matters/index.html

Here is how another conflict happens

Some Republicans call for Texas to ignore Supreme Court border ruling: ‘Let’s see them enforce it’

Abbott has not outlined the state’s next step, but he wrote on social media that he would continue to fight the Biden administration in court.

www.houstonchronicle.com

This illustrates how the state's rights idealism can lead to disruption, chaos, conflict, and even violence. And for what?

 

[F1fan]

In an active shooter situation where you would have arm civilians intervening, how are people going to differentiate the perpetrators from the well-meaning would-be heroes? I can see the wrong people getting shot in the chaos and confusion.

And what I point out no one can shoot back at an active shooter UNTIL they start stooting at victims. So how many victims fall before a "good guy with a gun" can get the gun out and loaded, and aim (assuming they can be in the clear and not be shot themselves) and shoot? Conservatives make it sound as if citizens don't mind being caught in a shootout. Jeez, even citizens in the 1870's wild west didn't want that and many towns banned guns.

 

[Revoltingest]

And if republicans get a majority back in congress Michigan's rights are gone. They don't respect state's rights.

Rights are always threatened by this or that
political party. This doesn't mean that having
the state guarantee rights denied by the fed
isn't useful.

And with some states denyling this right it is a messy patchwork, and forcing women to travel (if they can afford it) to seek medical care. But even some republicans in anti-abortion rights states are suggesting they will make it illegal for their citizens to travel for medical care.

If a state denies a constitutionally guaranteed
right, then the fed can force it to comply.

If this isn't clear yet, then I've nothing to add.

 

[F1fan]

Rights are always threatened by this or that
political party. This doesn't mean that having
the state guarantee rights denied by the fed
isn't useful.

If a state denies a constitutionally guaranteed
right, then the fed can force it to comply.

If this isn't clear yet, then I've nothing to add.

My point is what is better about a state granting a right over the federal government? The law and social fabric is better for rights to be extended across the whole of a nation rather than bits and pieces.

 

[Revoltingest]

My point is what is better about a state granting a right over the federal government?

It isn't.
States granting rights is Plan B when
the fed fails, which it regularly does.

 

[Stevicus]

The current politicial hostilities have happened during
a time of plenty. Trump has even wished for economic
collapse, hoping it would boost his political power.
Alas, things are going to well to suit him.

Many of the current political hostilities have roots which go way back and have existed through good and bad times, though with varying degrees of intensity. Most of the time, things have remained relatively stable, even despite the Civil War. Even during the Depression, we still managed to hold together. We held together during the 50s, 60s, and 70s. Some of the violence was bad; I won't minimize it. But it wasn't anything like the Civil War or any kind of "revolution" that some people hoped for. That was never going to happen.

I don't care what Trump wishes for. I'm just saying that much of this could have been avoided with better foresight.

We have new vibrant industries. And the
trades are booming. Try to find a plumber,
electrician, & especially carpenter. Everyone
is booked solid far in advance, & unable
to find enuf skilled help.

Well, a shortage of skilled tradesmen doesn't seem an indicator of economic boom. In fact, it seems just the opposite. That seems to be a problem in some of the more impoverished and underdeveloped areas of the world, where they can't find enough skilled tradesmen who know how to build and fix stuff. There are also shortages of doctors and nurses which are predicted to get worse in the years to come. The need is certainly there. But why isn't it getting filled?

 

[Revoltingest]

Many of the current political hostilities have roots which go way back and have existed through good and bad times, though with varying degrees of intensity. Most of the time, things have remained relatively stable, even despite the Civil War. Even during the Depression, we still managed to hold together. We held together during the 50s, 60s, and 70s. Some of the violence was bad; I won't minimize it. But it wasn't anything like the Civil War or any kind of "revolution" that some people hoped for. That was never going to happen.

I don't care what Trump wishes for. I'm just saying that much of this could have been avoided with better foresight.



Well, a shortage of skilled tradesmen doesn't seem an indicator of economic boom. In fact, it seems just the opposite. That seems to be a problem in some of the more impoverished and underdeveloped areas of the world, where they can't find enough skilled tradesmen who know how to build and fix stuff. There are also shortages of doctors and nurses which are predicted to get worse in the years to come. The need is certainly there. But why isn't it getting filled?

This post reminds me of a word I learned today.
Quibbledick.

 

[Stevicus]

This post reminds me of a word I learned today.
Quibbledick.

And now I've learned it. You're a veritable fountain of information. Fortunate are we, who are the recipients of great wisdom.

 

[Valjean]

It's not that the left could not compete against Rush Limbaugh and others on the right-wing radio circuit. It's just that they chose not to do so.

No, they tried, with presenters like Thom Hartmann, Amy Goodman, and the the failed Air America radio network. Progressive shows still air, but their markets are limited and few are able to access their broadcasts directly.

Reagan's popularity may have frightened the left into moving further right to the point where they started supported corporatism and militarism again. The media became far too wimpy, vacuous, and wishy-washy to be able to stand up to the right wing. As a result, Reagan became the Teflon President, while what passed for "left" back then was too busy mesmerized by rampant consumerism, cocaine, and Madonna videos.

It's true that the Democrats have been moving steadily to the right since the Reagan revolution 40 years ago. They thought they could increase support by abandoning their working and middle class base and targeting the professional class. This clearly failed. They have legitimate grievances, but, in the absence of Democratic support, the Republicans have managed to convince them that their woes stem from he left, and that their economic salvation will come from their actual oppressors, the Republicans.

The Republicans continue to hammer away at the "radical, left-wing extremists" ignoring the fact that they'd be considered moderate Republicans on the political spectrum of Reagan or Nixon's time.

 

[Treasure Hunter]

There has been a lot of talk about a potential "civil war" resulting from the political and cultural divide in the U.S.

How do people envision this actually unfolding and playing out, realistically?

How about we not envision it.

 

[Revoltingest]

No, they tried, with presenters like Thom Hartmann, Amy Goodman, and the the failed Air America radio network. Progressive shows still air, but their markets are limited and few are able to access their broadcasts directly.

It's true that the Democrats have been moving steadily to the right since the Reagan revolution 40 years ago. They thought they could increase support by abandoning their working and middle class base and targeting the professional class. This clearly failed. They have legitimate grievances, but, in the absence of Democratic support, the Republicans have managed to convince them that their woes stem from he left, and that their economic salvation will come from their actual oppressors, the Republicans.

The Republicans continue to hammer away at the "radical, left-wing extremists" ignoring the fact that they'd be considered moderate Republicans on the political spectrum of Reagan or Nixon's time.

Why do you say Dems have moved to the right?
They've reversed their opposition to gay marriage.
Some now oppose the War On Drugs.
And some even oppose civil forfeiture abuse
(in opposition to Biden, who created it).

 

[Valjean]

How about we not envision it.

Yes, hiding our heads in the sand and ignoring the politics affecting us will surely result in prosperity and good government.

 

[Treasure Hunter]

Yes, hiding our heads in the sand and ignoring the politics affecting us will surely result in prosperity and good government.

Is not envisioning a catastrophic civil war the same as ignoring politics? Are you sure you’re not putting words in my mouth?