So is the US slipping into Civil War?
People keep talking about "Federalizing the National Guard" and now you've got other States pledging their NG to Texas in defiance of the Supreme Court (see image).
So is this what CW2 looks like?
P.S. I'm a Brit
Highly unlikely this is what the civil war would be like. It's not a state v state thing necessarily although that might be a small part of it. In the first civil war, the south unified and its people largely supported the war, except their slaves. It's unlikely something like that will happen again. It's not impossible but unlikely.
What is much more likely is rural v city. Even in red states, cities are blue and will often vote for blue policies. Rural areas are where things get dicey. They've been largely left behind by the surge in industry and general expansion of the capitalist economy we currently have (they've had a lot of businesses (including grocery stores) close because more people are leaving, and their rural towns are frequently having their hospitals close leaving large swaths of areas where the nearest hospital is an hour away). As such, they've got a grudge against the cities. What's likely to happen is rural counties and their local governments trying to cut off their food supply, starving the cities to win the battle. There's tons more possibilities, but this one I think is the one that's got the highest likelihood.
Another possibility that is scary, but is highly dependent on the party of the people in power, is the government using their power to actually strike the cities, like in Syria where Assad bombed and used chemical weapons on his own people. Syria is actually a pretty good example of what more modern civil wars are like, or can be like. Governments v rebels and militias, and cities v rural (although there's much less rural land in Syria).
If you're interested, the podcast It Could Happen Here has a great first season where they go over possible disasters including a civil war and a pandemic (it was actually made in 2019 so before covid). It's really helpful and can teach a lot, especially for an outsider from across the pond. It also does a lot better job giving an explanation and actual sources.
Hope this helps since it didn't seem like you were getting a real answer.
The geographical separation of slave states by an actual border allowed the first Civil War to take place on a stage perfectly suited for traditional warfare. North/South division and the formal joining of the Confederacy by state governments kept it all straightforward. Point South and tell the generals "Go."
It definitely won't be that simple again.
I also recommend It Could Happen Here
I had to stop listening to ICHH it gave me way too much anxiety and was just too stressed back when i listened in 2020. I've since taken up to instead listen to BTB and cool people who did cool stuff off the same network. Monsters that are usually dead and people who kick ass make me feel better.
Another thing the world ought to know is that the folks who are identified by âredâ and ârightâ in America are in the minority.
Significantly so.
However our voting system uses geography / land as a modifier so while there are less of them they occupy a larger land mass and have an outsized vote strength because of that.
When total votes in a state can be split 45-55 but the delegates go 90-10 there is a problem
Another fun thing about that is that most folks who identify "red" or "right" actually aren't paying enough attention to know that. Go ask them, they think people like them make up 70% or more of the country. If they do try to activate their little civil war they are going to find themselves very quickly surrounded by folks who do not like them at all, as their expected 200-million strong army ends up actually only being 1.5 million people spread out over 30,000+ square miles. Watching the realization dawn on them might actually even be fun if it weren't a herald of Troubles for America.
This isn't accurate. In 2020, 29% of voters identified as Republican, 33% as Democrat, and 34% as independent. There certainly were more Democrats, but only by a 5% margin.
Playing up exaggerated differences between the number of Democrats and Republicans and emphasizing the "we outnumber you" rhetoric is extremist and should be avoided. It makes you a part of the problem.
Itâs not a totally unreasonable impression, but no, this will not turn into a second civil war. The Guard units of each state can be called up for federal duty. The National Guard is part of the US Department of Defense and thus ultimately answers to the DoD and the US president as commander in chief. The US military has multiple components, including regular services (eg the full time Army), reserve components (eg US Army Reserve) and National Guard components. The latter two are part-time military with one weekend per month training duty plus an annual training. Guards members and Reservists hold regular full time jobs.
The Guard units are deployable by the governors of their respective states, and so can be used in emergency situations like natural disasters. They have also been deployed against what have been perceived as riots that threaten lives and properties of the individual states.
However, they are subject to activation by order of the US president and they fall under the national command authority. Guard personnel take the same oath to the constitution as other military personnel, and cannot legally refuse federal activation. Guards personnel would be subject to courts martial and face potentially extreme penalties including being discharged from service under criminal conditions, being stripped of rank and benefits, and jail time in federal prison. This would be what we call a career limiting rule.
So, if push comes to shove, Biden can activate the NG and order them to stand down or to implement policies to maintain order. Thinking the NG units and in particular their commanders would disobey a presidential order because they just love their state governor and hate the president so much is getting into Turner Diaries levels of right wing apocalyptic fantasy.
All of which misses a critical point:
The forming of the Confederacy wasn't "legal" either.
We can handwave away concerns about mounting threats of violence by citing regulation and law, but none of that actually addresses the underlying issue that if these people want to start shit, they will find an avenue.
And let's also not sit here, in 2024, and assume the institutions, norms, checks, and intended safeguards in our system will always work when they need to. We've seen far, far too many breakdowns and failures in our system over the last decade to believe otherwise.
You have to understand that the US military today is a very different organization than it was in the 1860s. I know - I served and majored in military history for my first undergraduate degree, and studied the civil war in particular. I also come from a military family with a father, grandfather, and uncle who served as officers until retirement age.
Far right domestic terrorism is a real and developing threat coming from both former military personnel and from civilians. The election of a far right government that shreds the constitution is also a major threat to American democracy. But if the shit does come down, itâs not going to be because some Guardsmen decide that theyâd follow DeSantis over Biden.
Military justice is no joke. Falling on the wrong side of it can end people. The military is also very integrated and has political as well as ethnic diversity. Iâm not saying you couldnât find an Army colonel who wouldnât want to engage in an armed rebellion, but the country today is very, very different than it was mid-19th century, and so is the military.
Please do note that I do see the rise of American fascism as a real threat. Itâs just not going to manifest because state Guard orgs decide to disobey orders.
Thank you for sharing this insight! It's frustrating to hear everyone everywhere speculate about how easily the active military would turn, not considering...well, everything you wrote.
Yeah, ex-military of course is part of the brainwashed; nowhere else in the civilian world (outside of mercenary work) is warfare conducting knowledge of direct use.
Add that our Government has not always done even the bare minimum for our vets, and you got a recipe for the radicalization of the "disenfranchised warriors" (quotation because I don't consider oathbreakers worthy of any title).
They're gonna fall and listen to the honeyed words of Fascism in a different, harder way than your average civilian. That's a call to something they amongst the rest of their group are genuinely and tangibly valuable for--until they aren't.
Same, and I do still worry for the death tolls. That "theirs" (the civilians, who can be said to not know better) would be orders of magnitude higher than any on the military's side doesn't mean I'd like to see deaths on either side.
Thatâs what frustrates me so much about the framing of the situation weâre in right now: most people - and the vast majority of major media organizations - are fully intent on presenting this as ânormalâ, but itâs very fucking clearly not. Itâs assumed by so many that the rules will simply be followed⌠and then they turn around and cover Trump, whose whole bit is to not follow the rules because he doesnât feel like it and wants to stay in power forever. Itâs like being unconcerned about standing 3 feet away from an uncaged, unleashed siberian tiger because someone once told you at one point that it had been âtrainedâ.
I hope you are right. I am sure there are some Guardsmen who see themselves as Texas soldiers over US, and I am concerned that the number is growing. After all, someone voted in these state politicians who are laying deadly traps intending to kill brown people.
Robert E Lee famously didn't want to fight the North but didn't think of himself as a traitor for doing so, because his loyalty was to his state first, to the US second. And that was a common mindset at the time.
I think itâs possible that there will be resentment, but those with rank would be risking everything for zero gain. It would be determined by the people who wear the birds and the stars, and although there have certainly been high ranking officers who have engaged in conduct we might consider treasonous, itâs simply not going to be a common enough occurrence.
A Handmaidâs Tale scenario, where the US goes down the path of a Christian theocracy, is a possibility that concerns me,
Yeah, like when they got called up against random citizens in Minneapolis...
Unlikely, but if those ng declined federal call up, then all bets are off
"Fuck yeah, secession!" Says the Texan from the comfort of their lounge chair, beer in hand.
These people are too comfortable to ever be willing to die for their stupid ideals. All it took was one MAGA idiot to get blasted on Jan 6th and then they all scattered like roaches. As soon as their lives were on the line, it was no longer a matter of grave importance. They all firmly believed that democracy was at stake, but were unwilling to fight for it to the death because they somehow must have known that it was bullshit, somewhere in the back of their pea-sized brains, they knew.
By the time Texas starts asking people to show up to mustering fields, rifle in hand, the facade will fall apart. Biden doesn't need to do anything. This sideshow of bluster and saber-rattling will fall apart on it's own.
Also, millions of people living in Texas are not originally from Texas and have no particular allegiance to Texas.
Also millions of people in Texas and are FROM Texas don't want this.
Also, as a native Texan that still lives here because it's not feasible to leave, I feel no particular allegiance to Texas. This government doesn't represent anything I stand for â it's infuriating. Fuck Texas, and fuck proud Texans.
And the economic powerhouses of the state (Dallas, Houston, Austin) all lean democratic. This will just make skilled, educated people leave the state and accelerate the brain drain thatâs been happening since the 40s.
You're thinking first civil war. This civil war is going to be about bombing and terror. And it will be MAGA idiots bombing govt facilities. But they'll start first with places like gay bars and libraries.
THEN the federal govt will get involved and it will devolve into a shit show from there.
The federal government is already involved. The FBI has been a thing for decades. Are we really going to compare the pathetic levels we have now to the 1950s with the KKK?
Here is the truth to any wannabe terrorist: none of you have gotten smarter but the federal government has. You are one guy, the government is a whole mess of guys spending decades studying ways to stop you. No company has any incentive to help you and has a big incentive to report you. Everyone is tracked now, every transaction recorded, every internet post, heck our very movements.
Random acts are going to happen and it is awful but any kinda coordinated resistance will fail.
Plus you know we are all fat now. Successful resistance movements are led by poor people who can live off the land. That Bundy Ranch ordering takeout thing really illustrated it well. Who do you know in your life that is capable of living in the woods as a revolutionary? Do you really see someone like Hannity or Ted Cruz sitting in a cave somewhere to lead his forces?
I said this in another thread-
Most Americans aren't interested or even capable of fighting in a civil war. When you live paycheck-to-paycheck, you're not going to abandon your family to fight on the front lines.
And a huge percentage of Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck.
Texas would have to have a draft.
Good luck with that.
The only kind of draft they'd take is the beer kind.
Not to mention states themselves are never more than 60%/40% leaning either way. It's not like the more homogeneous populations of the 1800s.
Bingo. If Texas tried to leave, a HUGE chunk of the population would revolt against the State of Texas. Many more would just leave. Very little good would remain.
Not to mention that most of them are probably too unfit to even be a soldier xd
The tech bros in Austin are not going to the front lines. Front line at airport, maybe.
A lot of you all must be too young to remember. This isn't a new thing for Texas to do. They threatened to secede at least once (maybe twice) while Obama was president. Once it was straight out of the North Korean playbook, claiming a training exercise the military was conducting was a cover for a military invasion of Texas.
The older I get the more I eyeroll at the political posturing. It's definitely worse than when I was younger, but also it's all happened before. It's just loud people trying to be loud to keep us all afraid and obediently going to work, then every 4 years it gets loud again so we vote for who they want us to.
Real convenient the border is such a huge issue a few months before the election.
Of course we still have to take it seriously, the minute we let our guard down they start implementing stuff, look at roe v wade, but even then they didn't know what to do after that. It's all about staying in power for them
I get what you're saying, but at some point we have to admit that there really aren't any adults at the table. A direct example is the governments covid response and another more recent is the emergence of the so-called freedom caucus. Basically I subscribe to the depressing notion that all these fuck head fascists that came before have sewn their seeds and now there is an alarmingly large amount of the populace who have drank the koolaid, made from those seeds, and even worse is a lot of the original sewers (heh), have lost the thread and are drinking their own koolaid....
Ok, but we also haven't had such extreme right wingers in mainstream government before.
And also, what about the National Guard thing?
When was it worse, why?
So much this.
And thats why I'm not worried about them doing anything other than what they're already doing. They know they would be fucked if they leave.
And if they do? Well then we deal with it when that time comes. Hopefully a bunch of left leaning people leave, including my brother and his wife, and a bunch of MAGAts can go there and talk about how much they love America while also leaving it.
They'd have no issue, they already consider everything outside of their small town to be Fake America.
Texas has made an issue over their independence and God-given right to be Texas, in defense of
theirthe right to own chattel slavery since their first secession. From Mexico. In 1836.Texas reconfirmed their desire to die on the hill of their divine right to own people, by seceding from the US in 1861.
After the civil war, Texas was a haven for the Confederates - and their ideology has been fomenting ever since
They've been talking of secession openly since at least the 1990s.
I think this is the first time since the civil war that other states have involved their national guards in support of a hotbed issue that could lead to a secession.
Edit: correction to grammatical error.
The Dollop did a podcast on Jade Helm as it was happening. Definitely recommend listening to that one if you like American history podcasts. It's episode 100 I believe
At current, this is all posturing. If Biden does engage the military to stop them. Perhaps lock up the governors for treason, maybe it could escalate somewhat. If something did happen that was in the line of being more serious, it wouldn't be a long incursion as long as the military obeyed the commander in chief. The national guard is absolutely no match for even a small slice of the might of the US military.
If something does happen, hopefully they'll shut it down quickly and bloodlessly, maybe finally gather enough strength to enable some Germany type of anti-fascism laws.
We need to fix gerrymandering, we need to fix people screwing with elections. We need to put some strong protections against the propaganda and opinion pieces flowing out of all the news outlets. We need to force free non-political basic education to the entire f****** country so people can make some informed decisions about s***.
I'm tired of everybody looking at politics like it's a f****** football game.
And if Trump gets in again? All the people not crazy going to along with him, or will he be to deploying the army? At what point does the apparatus of state start to split as people within it don't all go with crazy orders?
If I was Putin, or CCP, helping the crazies is the best money spent.
What are the chances of China attacking us during the civil war? Or taking Taiwan (we NEED Taiwan for our silicon production)
Us, never. Just like with China you can't win a land war over here, and a home attack has a greater risk of uniting is against a common enemy.
Taiwan possibly. Though I don't think so. Taiwan is much more useful as a political chess piece that China can beat their chests about. They can invoke the island and be offended about support for it whenever they need leverage right now.
Not to mention it isn't just the US alone that needs Taiwan and movement there risks a global response.
Something tells me this one is a non-starter, as any new laws will slam up against the Constitution, over and over again.
Having said that, I would love to at least seen a real-time label, in a large font size, on any monitor/tv that specifies that what's being shown is an opinion piece, and not a factual article/show.
The first amendment states that congress shall not abridge freedom of the press. In reality it needs to be strengthened because speech and press isn't free anymore, it's overwhelmingly controlled by interest with huge amounts of economic power. The reason for freedom fo speech and press is that dissenting ideas and thoughts are heard in order to have accountability. Which the current interpretation is doing the opposite of.
For example you could pass laws that any journalist has the right to voice his own opinion and not be fired or discriminated against by his employer (as long as he doesn't discriminate himself or uses hate speech). That would not abridge the freedom of the press. Basically give the journalists more freedom from their owners.
Or you could make a law that forces owners to sell their media empires into trusts that are democratically controlled by the journalists / workers, and finance it through a bank. This would not abridge the freedom of the press (which is not the same as the owner).
Of course this is unthinkable and the current supreme court would never allow it. But we shouldn't accept the degenerate view that freedom of the press is the same as turning speech and news into a commodity that is owned by the elite. And especially in a plutocracy that basically is state owned media.
You could appoint a 100 young people as new supreme court judges and then pass these modern laws and election reform also limiting the future excesses of the supreme court. There isn't really anything stopping the Democrats from doing that.
If we go into a civil war, the Constitution's going to slam up against a lot of changes.
GOP is ignoring the shit out of the Constitution already why should it protect them? They already tried to dismantle the executive branch and turn the presidency into a dictatorship. Now they're going after the judicial branch. Nah, they're going to game the Constitution until the US is forced to change it. It's either going to happen slowly over time, or quickly after a pretty substantial bloodbath.
We can't just sit here and go oh look It's Hitler incarnate, but you know first amendment, oh damn, they ignored some laws and found some loopholes I guess we had just better conform to oppression by the minority. We better all get some swastikas.
This country isn't going to go quietly into dictatorship for fear of failing to make everyone happy. The Democrats are weak because they try to follow the rules, They try to give breaks to the people that f*** them over because they don't want to hurt the other people, but like everything else there's a line. When Americans are shooting each other over propaganda, The propaganda's going to have to f****** go.
Can we just have a normal, boring year for once, please? I'm so tired...
Better yet, can we have a government that doesn't pretend things are fine and actually doe something about the fucking fascists?
I think you'd have to relocate for that.
What planet do you recommend?
Closest would be the Moon. I heard it's pretty boring. Aside from the occasional rover visits.
With the Trump? NO WAY!
I'm right there with you.
But at least you can think of this to console you: You're not actually fighting in a world/civil war, down in some troops trench somewhere, reading this (at least that's my hope for you).
Other generations have had to go through major wars, but so far we've been dodging that bullet, for the most part.
Things could be a lot worse.
My take on it is that the Republicans will do their best to drag this out until the election. No compromising or middle ground. Just make it out to be the crazy Democrats fault. This stuff gets to be very predictable after all these years.
This is exactly why DeSantis wants to revive the Florida State Guard.
Biden should ignore Abbott right until the point he signs an order to interfere with Federal agents on duty. Then it's a conspiracy & the Insurrection Act can be brought into play to clean house.
Oh goody goody gooooody!!! đż
I had to search for that and it sounds kinda bad for states to have their own armies. I mean it's practically the definition of raising an army in opposition to the Federal government. Looking at Wikipedia it was first activated in WWII to make up for the national guard going to war.
That bit makes sense.
But you're not at war and you just reactivated it in 2020. Why? Why would Florida need it's own army? That'd be like the Wales FM creating it's own guard. By it's nature it's in direct opposition to the national (British) military. There's no other way of looking at it.
That feels like a major thing. Am I taking crazy pills - why is no one screaming? This is bad!!
This dog stays barking every single year and hasn't bit anyone yet. Getting tired of hearing about it. Either they're going to do something or they won't, if they don't, then they can shut the fuck up and life goes back to normal. If they do decide to finally do something about it, Texas gets razed to the ground and we rebuild NASA somewhere else. There is no situation here in which any significant percentage of people, except Texans, are going to be in danger. They will not take on the greater federal US and win, it's not gonna happen. If they secede, they die, after losing all federal safety nets and trade agreements and then getting invaded by cartels. If they attempt an actual shooting war, they die, as 25,000 cowpokes show up with surplus AR's just in time for Lockheed Martin to put a warhead on their foreheads.
I want to be clear that I'm not in any way looking forward to this. It's going to be rough and innocent people will die. But there is no legitimate path forward in which Texas doesn't, at best, eat its hat. However that won't stop them from threatening secession constantly. Any time something doesn't go their way - "oh, oh, but I'll leave the union! What then??? What'll you do without Texas??" Fuck off Texas. Either shit or get off the pot but I'm tired of hearing about it. Texas brings nothing irreplaceable to the table and while I definitely do not think that turning Texas into glass is the good ending, it sure is one ending, and might be the one Texas chooses. Regardless I'm not that worried about it. The Gravy Seals wouldn't stand up to an actual well-regulated militia let alone the full force and might of the United States Army. And there are a lot more leftists with guns than the Gravies think there are.
Edit: just realized this was intended in the context of the Florida State Guard - that I know almost nothing about. But Florida is perhaps even less threatening than Texas, and since DeSantis has been in charge they've been doing a lot of nearly identical toothless posturing. All arguments also apply to Florida, except that at least 21% of their population is retirement age or older so they don't even have that many fresh bodies to call on when their state guard gets turned into burger meat within two days of declaration of war.
I hate how people casually write about glassing innocent Americans as an acceptable outcome since it isnât themselves and their families up for annihilation. âLetâs just get this killing over with itâs just too tedious for me to read about.â
Honestly I hate it too. This isn't the America I saw coming when I was younger. But it's also not like these are unforeseen consequences. Greg Abbott has fucked around and it has now come time to find out. It hurts my heart that innocent people are going to be caught up in the consequences of his actions, but such is the way of war. And Abbott is going to turn this into a war, make no mistake.
Poor men dying for the mistakes of rich men is a tale as old as time and we haven't left that era yet. I wish no harm on the common folk of Texas. But the unfortunate truth is that I'd expect the same in my state, if my state governor decried federal law in favor of murdering migrant children and then threatened secession from the union over it. Abbott is dangerously unstable and is taking Texas down with him. Texas can either rid themselves of this problem, through vote or otherwise, or they can go down with the sinking ship.
I'd much rather just remove and relocate the sensible folks until all that's left in Texas are the treasonous officials and their pet army, and solve this problem without collateral damage. But we all know very well that that isn't going to happen. They can and will use the lives of innocents to shield their own, just like terrorists always have, the world over. And to those people I say, I'm sorry. You don't deserve this. If your death does prove necessary I hope that it can help guide us to a brighter tomorrow, the same I'd hope for my own. But that's the reality of a terrorist warzone, is people will die, and the world keeps turning. There's no point trying to ignore it, in fact the more we actively ignore the situation the worse it's going to get before it gets any better. We need to cut the head from the snake before the snake poisons the rest of the country, or even world.
Yea youâre just as crazy as they are buddy.
It all seems quite a bit overblown to me. There's legal precedent for the President to take over a state's national guard and use federal troops to enforce a court order (see Brown v Board of Education):
"In September 1957, Arkansas governor Orval Faubus called out the Arkansas Army National Guard to block the entry of nine black students, later known as the "Little Rock Nine", after the desegregation of Little Rock Central High School. President Dwight D. Eisenhower responded by asserting federal control over the Arkansas National Guard and deploying troops from the U.S. Army's 101st Airborne Division stationed at Fort Campbell to ensure the black students could safely register for and attend classes. [...]" (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education)
The current wording of the Insurrection Act provision (which has been amended a few times since initial adoption), according to Wikipedia:
Just my $.02 but I'd guess either the feds back down or Texas does. Hopefully nobody gets trigger happy.
The reference to Little Rock Nine suddenly made me realize that Forest Gump was 38 at the time of Forest Gump.
Iâm 38 now. As tired as I am of Hollywood reimagining films from the nineties, I would appreciate a Forest Gump born in the 80s. The whole concept could really be repeated every 30 years or so.
Brother, your idea is commendable, but the weave of history will be incinerated if you give all of that malign power to the Bubba Gump Shrimp Company.
The aftermath of racial desegregation court victories are some of the most interesting things in recent US history. A law would be struck down and sort of left like that... and people would take it upon themselves to organize and challenge the new law, often in the face of violent opposition. Freedom Riders taking busses down to the south to challenge desegregation of public transit being met with mobs and put in jail.
No this is all Republican division. It's their only playbook to rally their base. The take home message for everyone is VOTE, VOTE, VOTE. Before the election started up we had a nice quiet 2-1/2 years. This kind of shit only appeals to those that love the chaos that Trump will bring back.
It's very tiresome. This also feels a lot more agro than interrogating a president about getting a BJ.
Why are your lunatics so energetic, crazy and numerous? They seem to be getting worse. Some BJ obsessions in the 90s. Then tea parties in the 00s. Now it's full-blown inssurection with Texas wanting to secede.
Now that all the crazies have joined their "god army" and trundled down to the border would it be a good time to nuke them? Just wipe out all the lunatics in one go. Problem solved.
Simple, Russian and Chinese bots on social media designed to foment division, anger, and the destruction of western democracy. It's the exact same thing that led to Brexit and the election of Trump. And it will get worse until we get a handle on blocking bad actors on social media.
Those states are going to be in a rude awakening when they realize they are broke because the blue states are by far the largest contributors to federal funding. When they cut that off, the welfare state will come crawling back quickly.
The welfare states regularly turn down federal funding because they do not care about the lower income portions of their state. Alabama will just have fewer people able to feed their selves.
Which they will blame on the blue states.
Texas gets $53,000,000,000 in federal funding every year. They'll cave.
No, itâs theatrics
An election is upcoming
At the same time, if we can get the 14th figured out the "pledging troops in opposition to the federal government" seems like the things insurrectionists do.
Its a meaningful and new escalation. This dismissive attitude is exactly why there will be a war. These governors should be removed and charged with sedition.
Just like every year
I don't think the conservatives are sufficiently unified to form a single opposition army. The problem with basing your appeals on hating "outsiders" is that you end up with a lot of internal hatred too. There's also a strong undercurrent of "no one can tell me what to do" that makes central control unlikely.
What seems more likely are terrorist incidents, carried out be individuals and small groups, without any overall communication or strategy. We're already seeing some of that. The lack of coordination won't prevent it from happeing, but will prevent it from achieving anything.
I don't think there are very many people within the MAGA movement who honestly want to resort to violence, whatever they tell themselves. The ones who are actually willing are the ones who wanted to hurt someone anyway. Politics provides them with an excuse, not a motivation.
I think we're going to have a nasty time for a while, but I don't think a right-wing takeover by violence has any chance of happening. I'm much more worried about a political takeover that then turns into an authoritarian coup. The left-wing has a much better chance of organizing as a whole, but I don't think there are that many people ready to fight from that side either, but that could change as conditions get worse.
The right has been used, and steadily intensifying stochastic terrorism for a while now. You're right, it's not a strategy for a military takeover of the US. It's just one step in the political takeover.
Seems to be a distinct possibility. Posturing prior to the election, rattling sabers, they're spoiling for a full-on shootin' war contingent on losing the election, in my opinion.
edit: I dare say, it might even be strategically advantageous for them to intentionally try lose, claim it was rigged, and use that to go live with the 4th riech.
It's not a new civil war reason. It's the same one as last time just packaged up a little different.
Racism
It's not even a new civil war. The last civil war only ended technically. In reality it went cold and has still been being waged all this time. It turned from a war of the rural South against the industrialised north. To a war on the industrialized from the rural.
I, for one, welcome the formation of the New California Republic. Washington and northern Oregon can join too if they'd like.
I mean, isn't this kind of keeping with the theme of US civil wars so far?
If I was creating a civil war bingo card based on history of civil wars in the US, "starts over how people with darker skin can be abused or not" would certainly have been on it.
There was a very real economic driver for slavery. Totally morally bankrupt, but it's a reason. This is pure malice for the sake of a culture war.
Theyâre just trying to âget out the voteâ by forcing Biden to do something that they can point to and say âSee! You were right all along! The federal government is going to invade and put you all in FEMA camps and make your children go to public school where they will be turned gay!!!â
I realize that that sounds absolutely stupid and it is. If I hadnât already watched exactly that happen with Jade Helm I would never have believed that people could be that incredibly stupid, but it did and they are. Sigh.
I really hope Biden doesnât take the bait and just deals with it after the election.
Same shit, different election:
â On April 28, Texas Governor Greg Abbott ordered the Texas State Guard to monitor the operation, writing: "During the training operation, it is important that Texans know [that] their safety, constitutional rights, private property rights and civil liberties will not be infringed", and requesting "regular updates on the progress and safety of the Operation".â
Wow wiki even has a whole section on conspiracy theories. I feel stupider even reading that. Only makes sense under projection; the far right wants to do exactly what they project onto others.
Mic dropped by Wikipedia editor
Dude even had a fucking citation.
I read how most experts agree that there will be some kind of "constitutional crisis" within the next decade. The impeachment 1, impeachment 2, and January 6 attacks already show the rumblings of what is to come.
Personally I find it doubtful that a full civil war would be the means though bc of the disparity b/t military resources at the federal vs. lower levels. Thus, probably something else, perhaps extremely mundane e.g. Trump runs for President, and bc of the Israeli conflict in Gaza and whatever else Russia manufactures between now and then Biden loses, then Trump simply declares himself Emperor.
Or maybe even that much paperwork will not happen and the government will simply never pass another federal budget again, thus ending the federal level by default of obstruction.
So probably not Civil War, at this time and over this event (no matter how much the clickbait media tries to get its clicks), but even so... something is coming indeed, down the road in some form.
Honestly, it'll probably wind up becoming an American version of The Troubles. Republicans are cowards, and I doubt there are very many who are truly willing to fight and die for their cause. However, there are plenty of people willing to commit terrorist bombings and acts of sabotage if they think they can get away with it, and the US is huge. There are still plenty of places to hide if that's the case.
And if Trump wins reelection, I can't imagine many blue states putting up with it, and the same thing will happen from the opposite direction.
If it does go down, it'll be rural people driving into cities to shoot them up, plant bombs, or drive people over with their trucks. That's what it'll look like.
"Will"? Check the news... it's been happening for awhile, just not terribly successfully. I think we get something like at least one such event every other month.
I don't know how liberals will react tbh. Usually they try to work within the system, but if that should ever prove to become impossible... I haven't studied enough history to get any kind of accurate impression, but it's worth noting that nothing like it has been needed (within the USA) in the last hundred years or so, so whatever might come seems hard to predict.
I should add that Democrats are also cowards too, as are most individuals - neither side holds a monopoly on that. That's what makes this all so dangerous: if something could be accomplished behind the scenes, then 99.9999% of Americans will simply go along with the flow. Exactly like within Russia, even the thinnest vernier of respectability would be enough to forestall a large-scale conflict. So the "constitutional crisis" might take the form of a fairly bloodless (in the wider sense) coup.
Or Republicans could just keep turning the ratchet, making steady gains wherever they can, then locking in those gains and turtling, obstructing as best they can whenever they do not hold a majority, as they have been doing for decades now. In one sense that's even entirely fair - a democracy should reflect the majority will of the people - except Republicans are aware that white people are becoming in the minority now and so have been changing more and more over time who gets to be counted as "people". e.g. gerrymandering, with the stacked Supreme Court members not opposing it so now it's "legal". Though even that is becoming not enough lately thus they are having to adjust the stakes higher, possibly doing away with voting altogether (yes they are literally talking about that, hence all this discussion about Civil War). They have already been allowed to push that far, which leaves fewer options for them to move forward with short of something drastic.
The trick is that to the uninitiated, much of it sounds reasonable at first - e.g. "states rights" means that we all get to choose our own paths, and what is wrong with that, isn't that "freedom" in the truest sense of the word? The trouble is how the lie is delivered along with the truth: for one, the means by which those gains were achieved has enormous implications, which feeds into two, it was actually always a lie bc they never stop there and always push forward after people accept the first push. i.e., if only appeasement would ever actually work! However, like that famous saying "first they came for...", where even if you don't care about those first few that were come for, eventually they will come for YOU too, and if you had been paying attention then there would be no need to be shocked, shocked I tell you, shocked! Leopards eat faces off, and just bc one hasn't eaten YOUR face off, yet, doesn't mean that it never will. They tend not to change their spots, only their current targets. Like Brexit, many people in the USA won't know what's happening anytime before, during, or somehow even after it has happened.:-(
And some are even joining in with the leopards, neither realizing nor seemingly caring that they are just being saved as future meals for those who are true predators. These "facilitators", together along with the much more numerous "collaborators", collectively are bringing literal (neo-)Nazis back into power.
I honestly don't think the active duty and national guard units would be willing to fight each other. A lot of guard guys are former AD and AD gets supplemented by guard all the time. Some missions they even work side by side with active guard positions.
The states leveraging their guard units like this strikes me as highly presumptuous.
NG units are usually paid from federal dollars, if NGB says knock it off the top brass at their state JFHQ will comply because most of them don't want to lose federal recognition. There may be a handful of extremists in the ranks but the vast majority of NG members aren't going to be insurrectionists, they just want to get their drill check, if the checks stop coming they will too. Most states are extremely reluctant to pay for state active duty so I bet this goes away once NGB pulls funds.
Guard units are also only under state control until they're not. By the book anyway the DoD(?) can say "okay you're activated under federal orders now, so you are now active duty, do this instead".
Texas governor: fire on US soliders to give me a political win
National Guard: no.
I'd love to think this is true but when I was active back in the day there were a LOT of right wing militant nuts. I can only assume that's skyrocketed in the years since.
What's AD? Army Division?
Active duty.
The feds
I don't know if anybody answered your question, lemmy is weird about replies deleted or not showing. AD is Active Duty, which is anyone in the federal component of the military i.e. not guardsmen. "Active" means full-time, and most guardsmen are one-weekend a month, so they are not active. It's a little fuzzy, because if a guardsman is on full time orders, depending on where the money is coming from, it could be called AGR, or Active Guard Reserve, but they are not technically Active Duty (AD).
All you really need to know is that AD is just the Big Army or Big Air Force, paid for and run by the federal government, and the national guard is distinct from AD because of split loyalty to state and federal govt, and they are usually paid by the state. Otherwise, same regulations, same uniforms, same bad leadership.
I was in the Army NG for 6 years. The president is still Ultimately the top of the chain of command and we swear the same oath to the constitution.
I just want to throw out there that itâs just not really like that. There is no chance of civil war from inside the army in this manner. The big green weenie gets everybody in the end.
Edit: like for example, we all wear the same unfiroms, they both do US Army on the front. They have the same MOS (military occupational specialty) We receive the same training, at the same places, and both go to overseas for deployments as well.
Usually, you get deployed twice during a 6 year contract for the National Guard. When they arenât deployed the NG trains at home bases in their states and sometimes in large Active Military Bases for Various reasons. So itâs all very much intertwined.
Not only that, but a lot of the NG equipment comes from federal contracts. Good luck getting tank parts and missiles once yours are all gone.
These would be 'rebel' states are among the poorest and most heavily dependent on federal subsidies. They need the US more than the US needs them.
i keep seeing comments like this. i want to point out texas has a LOT of poor and uninsured people, but the state economy is pretty decently sized with a lot of business investment.
that's not really a bad thing for preventing secession. you think those with energy and tech money want their shit fucked up by Abbott and MAGA?
edit - speeling
Minnesota looking across our western border like
Please hurry, I think our state needs help
IKR? Laughing my ass off at the Dakotas and Montana. Bruhs, you have a population of less than a million apiece, sit down.
The Governors are unserious idiots playing with fire hoping they won't get burned by a rando of their idiot base taking it too far.
The real risk for Americans remains a situation like The Troubles, not armed conflict between states and the federal government.
More people need to track to your point about The Troubles. It's where I'd think things progress.
Hm... I should get a gun. And a passport.
Skip the gun. No civilized country will let you have it.
Need something for on the way to the airport
A car is probably better to go to the airport.
yes but they can shoot behind them the whole time offering small but important time savings from the boost it provides
A car with guns fastened to it.
This has to be purposefully not getting media coverage so as to not incite panic/public support, right? When I saw the first ruling posted by Gov Abbott it seemed almost like a secessionist rant, but itâs NO WHERE to be seen in MSM
I'd say its not getting coverage because Texas talks about seceding almost every year and states have been using their national guard as political tools for years now.
When the national guard was sent to DC after the insurrection, Texas pulled their national guard back because of "poor treatment". I was there, there was no poor treatment. Texas (and several more states afterwards) used their national guard as a political tool to make the other side seem bad.
Texas doesn't talk about seceding. A tiny miniscile handful of people who live in Texas talk about it.
Attention is what they want. They want drama. They want the illusion of high stakes. We shouldn't give them what they want.
https://www.mediamatters.org/cnn/cnn-legal-scholar-steve-vladeck-debunks-greg-abbotts-claims-about-texas-control-border
This will all blow over once Trump fucks off to private dementia care to escape prosecution.
AKA Epstein's Loli Island
I can't imagine it disappeared with him, I wonder who's running it now.
Donald Trump, of course!
Gotta grab 'em by their pussies!
That's disgusting even in context
Compare the map you posted with the population map
There is many more people in the states that would be a Union Army, the fools that would wage war on the United States would be defeated and most Americans wouldn't even need to do anything but watch
Don't forget to cut Texas up into three roughly equal categories:
The loud fascists fomenting this shit
Their quiet neighbors who hate them, their ideas, and every single word they ever utter.
The Oblivious / Disinterested
And statistically, about half of each of those categories are armed.
The real problem is that they cut us up along crazy lines and lump the second and third groups together, so that the nice bluish-purple i see out my window looks bright red from space.
Fuck I hate my governor...
Certainly would be exciting as an Australian
Seen from the outside and ignoring all the innocent people suffering, I would love one thing about the USA splitting up, it would be the perfect example of how shitty things can get when people don't realize they live in conservative locations that depend on the goodwill of more progressive locations. Split the USA like on OP's map and just watch as the red part devolves into a third world country.
It would be rad for me too. I don't wish harm to Americans of course, but I think it's about time they start throwing hands instead of whining on the internet 24/7 about how much they hate eachother.
Wait. The first civil war ended? /s
â enslaved person being emancipated an extra two years late in Texas on Juneteenth
â enslaved person being emancipated in 1942 Beeville, Texas
Holy MFinâ Jim Crow, Batman :o
From the Wiki article...
Bruh, 4 years for doing Chattel Slavery in 1942??? I didn't even know that part. That's so crazy yet somehow not super surprising đ
Ain't no way this is actually going to happen, any attempt at succession will be put down by the much larger national military. There will be no civil war.
Eh there won't be an organized civil war of large standing armies, but I can definitely see the Redneck militias doing some damage. If it dragged on long enough they could theoretically get organized somehow.
I really doubt that the politicians in the GOP states want a Civil war though, it is gonna be hard to extract wealth from the poor if the whole system explodes.
i also notice nobody mentions the possibility that cartels could try to take advantage of any significant unrest in some states. i doubt states or feds want that mess.
If any deep red states try to leave, why not just let them?
It's violating the will of the people. They're removing people from their country without consent or notice; no referendum nor opportunity to leave.
Because not everyone there actually wants to leave.
Taking into account the overall average of all the comments posted to tour question:
It looks one the answer is:
No one knows.
And as usual, the ones that act like they do know, are specifically the ones you should ignore.
Thanks for the summary. I just heard about the Florida State Guard in another comment. It's been reactivated and I'm honestly more shocked that's happened than this new thing. Creating an army separate from the main government is kinda the definition of starting an armed rebellion. But no ones panicking. The last time Florida had a state guard was WWII when it made sense cos the NG left.
But there's no war. Everyone seems very calm and complacent right now.
Which makes me wonder - do you reckon Trump is shouting this stuff and Florida is provoking the Federal Government could be so Biden federalises so Reps can start shouting "Inssurection" and accuse him of doing what Trump did?
So basically pretend to sart a Civil War and if/when Biden moves to protect the Union Trump can scream - "EVIL INSSURECTIONIST DICTATOR".
Cos that seems like a really, really stupid and dangerous thing to do. Normalising this level and extreme of sabre rattling is not good.
Fuck Trump and his shit-headed followers forever.
From what I've heard, the supreme court decision was mostly about the feds having access to the border, and the ability to cut down the razor wire, rather than any specific opposition to the razor wire existing in and of itself. I would wager this whole deal is mostly just a kind of political play, to try and egg biden into doing something stupid, while simultaneously keeping up the appearance that everyone at the head of these states is doing something dangerous, anti-institutional, and counter-cultural, even though they're all kind of inherently unable to do anything along those lines just as a matter of their positions.
Everybody's correct when they say that the political divides in this country are less clear-cut, but I also don't think that the radicalization that we've seen, as a matter of perspective from being in online space, necessarily reflects reality. I think if you look at most people, most people want social security of some kind, and want healthcare of some kind, and want drug legalization of some kind, and want us to stop fighting wars in some form. Those are all kind of generalities, because the specific mechanism by which people want those things achieved differs from person to person. It's very fractured as a matter of course, as a matter of how our political system and society is set up, and the ruling class has taken advantage of this to enact a divide and conquer strategy, where they can selectively promote whatever ideological positions benefit them the most, and cordon everyone off into a relatively small set of solutions over which they have a high amount of control. Rather than, you know, what a good democracy might do, which is come to a compromise solution, that everyone but the most extreme propagandized radicals might be kind of okay with. There is a reason why lots of conservatives like communism, as long as you use the right words. Both parties attempt to be mostly "populist" parties. This is all kind of obvious, right, but people understate the degree to which it's a deliberate thing, and the overstate the degree to which it's been successful, you know, which isn't surprising, because, again, serves the interests of the powerful. People aren't, broadly, morons, people have realized that this is all the case. That's mostly what the "radicalization" that you've seen online has been, people just realizing that they hate these shitass solutions that aren't really compromise solutions. See how everyone is cripplingly disappointed with the democratic party, and also how, likewise, conservatives are consistently disappointed with their own party, as well, and for many of the same reasons, barring the extreme radicals.
Most people are focused on how the internet divides people into radicalized swaths and conspiracy theorists, which is true, but even the mainstream monopolized internet is kind of a good tool for mass mobilization. See the occupy movement and the arab spring for older examples, for more recent examples, maybe the george floyd protests, or the french retirement protests. The only risk of these is kind of that they more easily get co-opted as a result of their visibility, i.e. "defund the police" gets turned into an argument for "fund the police". If you were an asshole, you could cite charlottesville, or jan 6th, for examples of internet mobilization, but those are relatively smaller scales of things, compared to the others, which were more popular, they just got disproportionate media attention relative to their size, and had disproportionate political effects.
I think if we're looking at the true, extreme political radicals, we're seeing them come about as a result of a kind of well-oiled engine. I'm not gonna say that this is an institutional kind of thing, and it's maybe more of a third level effect of active decisions, but it's still something that, nonetheless, has been deliberately constructed. 4chan is funded by a japanese toy company and a hands off japanese internet techbro, and is administrated by some former american military freak who's deliberately organized the site. The more radical offshoots, that use the same source code, tend to be funded by oil money, and political action committees, but through second-level effects, where they fund some small level conservative actor, and then they prop up the space. Which churns out some radical terrorists that are capable of your more fucked up bombings, and shootings, and controlled and coordinated protests. And then you kind of get military people at almost every level of this, in lower numbers, who act to control the space.
I dunno what I mean to extrapolate from all of this, but yeah. There's probably not going to be a civil war.
So.... there's still a chance then....
If you read the popular opinions around 1860, we have the same âwe are right and weâll show themâ attitude building up in the new poor-people-and-women slave states.
Yeah I see it (as a not American looking in from outside the country). Every time I visit the USA, the changes in things are more and more visible.
did we even have a federal military back then tho? because we have one now and no state could prevail over it.
The US Regular Army (RA) was founded in 1775. State militias supported the RA through the various wars fought on what is now US soil (including the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812). In the Civil War, the RA was supported by volunteers and fought on the side that ultimately won. The Confederate Army was similar to the RA at the time. Currently, the RA has been absorbed into the US Army (including Army Reserve and National Guard).
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regular_Army_(United_States) and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_Army
So... yes there was a federal military, but it was a different thing than the US Army is now. How that would play out if things went bonkers in 2025... who knows. There are a LOT of people around the world watching VERY closely though... and really hoping (not that confidently though) that sanity will prevail.
History is about to repeat itself so you know what? I'm going to sit here north of the border watching you guys burn
I donât see how the national guard isnât already federal, itâs the national guard, not the state guard. They get called up just like regular military for wars.
Cut off their money, court martial them, dishonorable discharge, take away their guns and vehicles. These belong to the military, not Texas.
National Guard listens to the state by default, as each state has its own National Guard. However, the federal government can intervene at any time and give them new orders.
I guess theyâre just choosing not to do anything? IDK.
The national guard is part of the military, so funded and supported by the feds. Unlike normal army units though, each state or territory has its own national guard unit under the command of the governor. The intention is to give each state the power to quickly respond to emergency situations without needing federal approval. They're the successors to the old state militias, but have much stronger federal ties now.
What's the chain of command?
Does it stop at the Governor, or does it go from the Governor to the President?
Do they swear an allegiance to the state Constitution, or to the Federal Constitution?
They swear allegiance to the federal constitution, the governor, and the president. With the president being CIC and having power over the governor and the constitution having power overall. So in theory, the governor cannot give you orders that defy the president, and not even the president can give force you to comply with an unlawful order. It would take some serious stones to defy orders though
That same separation is what prevented Trump from sending in the national guard to Detroit and Oregon just because he disagreed with the protests there.
The intent to give the peoples of the state further say in the use of force in the state.
What is curious to me is these are state departments disagreeing, though the previous civil war was fought between federal and state governments with raised armies.
This time I was expecting the police vs. militants. Uncontrolled civil unrest. Portland and Minneapolis but spread across the nation, cranked to eleven.
We thought we were getting a proper class war and instead we get fascist versus not fascists but they still hate you
Portland and Minneapolis? So like, a protest/campout in one or two square blocks while everyone else goes about their normal business?
And the same footage of that one or two blocks being ran for over 6 months on loop
No.
Thank you for your indepth and insightful analysis. đ
Haha
A lotta people's shitty 2nd amendment logic is about to be tested.
This shit needs to stop. As a Texan (by force...) I'd absolutely be joining the feds to fight against Texas.
Holy dog shit! Texas?! Only steers and queers come from Texas, Private Cowboy! And you don't look much like a steer to me so that kinda narrows it down. Do you suck dicks?
Are you a peter puffer?!
Biden needs to send the army to Texas and arrest Winey Greg.
Weak king, so the local lords smell the opportunity to gain power, tale as old as time.
Dumbasses once again saying, "Now is the time!" when they're clearly outnumbered and outgunned.
We can beat them! The US Army, Navy, Air Force, and that other one that no one cares about, they don't stand a chance!
Like, we can all joke about civil war and splitting up the red and blue, but, like, when it comes down to deciding who gets the nukes in the divorce, it becomes pretty obvious that it's just super dumb to think about realistically.
There's two now; two branches no one cares about.
Could they not at least bunch up a bit so it's easier to build a wall around them?
Ayo check out the Cornfederacy up there!
Oh, this'll be fun in the future when people try to whitewash it. We'll have another chance to follow up by asking, "a state's right to what, specifically?"
to drown parents and kids, i guess. âšď¸
but honestly, i think Abbott is engaging is massive political theater. i seriously doubt that man's interests are served by actual conflict.
I'm an american and an idiot. I thought the National Guard was a Federal organization?
Regardless Governor Abbott is a hateful idiot, along with all of the other leaders in Texas. I just left Texas because I can't handle paying their salaries anymore, though I went to Louisiana where they are somehow more corrupt but also bigger idiots.
It is. It got federalized during World War 1 and later the supreme Court basically ruled that the federal government wasn't allowed to do that but they weren't going to make the federal government give control back to the individual states anyway.
These days some states have state guards, but not all do. Of those that do, a significant amount are absolute jokes. It's fairly logical, of course. What state has needed an army in the last hundred years?
I read this shortly after posting and apparently NG is State managed unless it gets "federalized" which means the Federal Government takes over.
All of the recent news surrounding Texas tells me we need to return to a more literal reading of the 10th Amendment. Bring back dual federalism.
Neither an American nor knowledgeable about constitutional and amendment law - would you mind elaborating please?
IDK but I got shut down when I asked a few weeks ago.
Honestly I wouldn't be surprised.
Like even if this thing with states acting up doesn't work out the people they are speaking too are definitely gonna still be riled up.
It seems obvious to me that they are probably planning something for the upcoming election since they would try and make sure that another "election steal" wouldn't happen again.
The only way that I see this not turning into a civil war is for government to somehow change the conversation drastically so that people aren't asking these questions.
Because if people begin asking these questions then people planning to do stuff are gonna be even more anxious and try and do the thing earlier.
I'm not sure how they would change the conversation though because all the republican population is going to just ignore them and still think we are heading towards a civil war making it just more likely to happen.
No, the civil war 2 looks like mass shootings and terrorists attacks. It started with the Oklahoma City Bombing. Liberals just refuse to acknowledge it's existence.
There's an argument to be made, though, tha the US has always been in a state of civil war. The Spartans would symbolically declare war on their slaves every year. That's kind of what slavery is: a constant war on a portion of the population. That's aside from the whole genocide of native folks. Since the 13th amendment didn't actually ban slavery, it never ended and if you look at standing rock, you know that whole native genocide thing never ended either.
Then when you contextualize all this with stuff like the Red Summer, you realize the recent violence is just the normal terrorism that white supremacists do every now and then to get control back. There probably won't be a war with two side, more just escalation violence from one side leading to the systematic murder a huge chunk of the population. The question is if it will be officially sanctioned like the Holocaust, or continue with the ad-hoc stochastic terrorism like the Rwandan genocide and the Serbian ethnic cleansing.
I expected more snipers, bombings, and attacks on infrastructure but if Trump wins it's definitely gas chambers.
Democrats are too afraid of "real war" to actually do something about this. If they did they might have to deal with the mess for real and open themselves up to political challengers from the left.
A good portion of Democrat voters are boomers who created this reality by selling off everybody's futures to corporations. It's not that they're afraid, this is precisely what they had in mind.
The US is the next empire to fall. I am a US citizen and i am taking steps to GTFO if needed. I have an e-residency and ID card from another nation and am working up to the investment for full citizenship.
I mean, the issue is that most of the rest of the so called free World (and in my opinion correctly so), especially Europe, depends on the US for defence, specially weapon production. Despite France constantly whining about it, insisting on strategic autonomy, as far as I am aware, when it comes to ammo production and air power, we very much depend on the US for production and designs (the design when it comes to aircraft)
If the American empire falls, it's not going to reduce weapons production or arms sales. Decline into fascism requires more guns and bullets, as they get turned against domestic targets, while guns and oil are among the US's best sources of external currency.
Please explain the e-residency and id card thing. Iâm in the red area and really really donât want to be.
âtake over texasâ as if the federal govt wasnât already in control of the states. the states pay federal taxes, and they receive various federal benefits. texas isnât some separate nation. itâs just one of the regular 50 states.
No.
Tangentially related: https://mander.xyz/comment/7170064 that was after Jan. 6, and no we fucked around and didnt do any of this shit.
Nah, just giving Texas back to Mexico.
Serious question. Couldn't Texas just hold a referendum to scede?
Abraham Lincoln thought they could not. In his inaugural address, he opined that the union was formed for perpetuity and that if the accession of a state to the union required the consent of all other states, so would its secession. He was, among other things, a lawyer so he usually knew what he was talking about.
If they really find out that they want to secede from the US, I don't think they will care what the US says.
I have a vague memory of Texas having a unique status, versus the other States, when it comes to succeeding from the Union.
That there is some kind of (state?) constitutional clause that would actually allow them to succeed if they wanted to.
Has something to do with the fact that they were their own country for a very small period of time, before joining the Union.
Can't remember any details though, was something I read a long time ago; apologies.
Legal Eagle just released a video on exactly this topic. Spoiler: the whole Texas being allowed to secede is basically a myth and pretty much all scholars agree that Texas nor any other state has the ability to leave except by a mutually agreed dissolution or via revolution.
I adore Legal Eagle.
Love his videos! I'll be sure to check it out.
The thing about law though, is that it's just a framework of written social contracts between rational parties agreeing to abide by the terms and consequences.
Reality is a bit different.
Texas could halt physical transport of goods/services. Refuse to buy US imports. Stop collecting tax revenue. Gun down federal employees that don't swear Texan allegiance.
It doesn't really matter what legal papers say, when it comes to actions.
Sure - there may be consequences for such "illegal" state actions, and the documented illegality would be articulated as official justification after administering such consequences.
But that also only matters if Texas is defeated ... in the unlikely event they "win," - they'd write their own narrative with legal justification.
how would texas win against the full federal military that has nukes and drones?
I'm not saying they have any chance - just making the point that "legal" and "illegal" are arbitrary and determined by whoever is the dominant power. Texas seceding is "illegal" only so long as the US remains powerful. If by some unholy miracle, Texas were to win independence from the US, they would probably write their own laws to say rejoining the US is illegal.
Another pair of cases to make my point - the Holocaust was "legal" to the Nazis. After they were defeated, the UN made genocide "illegal." But how many genocides have occurred around the world since 1949?
Laws are only as good as they are enforceable, which is exactly what you underscore by citing the strength of the US military. Is it "legal" to make drone strikes or drop a nuke on Texas? đ¤ˇ
Even if they voted for it and ratified it they couldnât over turn it or legally secede from the USA.
In the 1869 case Texas v. White, the court held that individual states could not unilaterally secede from the Union and that the acts of the insurgent Texas Legislature â even if ratified by a majority of Texans â were âabsolutely null.â
When Texas entered the Union, âshe entered into an indissoluble relation,â Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase wrote for the court. âAll the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation, except through revolution, or through consent of the States.â
Chase added: âThe ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law.â
Another source of confusion and misinformation over the years has been language in the 1845 annexation resolution that Texas could, in the future, choose to divide itself into âNew States of convenient size not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas.â But the language of the resolution says merely Texas could be split into five new states. It says nothing of splitting apart from the United States. Only Congress has the power to admit new states to the Union, which last occurred in 1959 with the admission of Alaska and Hawaii.
So far as I understand, there is a common idea that Texas has the legal ability to leave it it wants, but it's just a popular myth as far as I'm aware. Whatever their state constitution says doesn't matter anyway, because federal law trumps state laws and as far as I'm know there's not a legal mechanism for states to leave again, it'd have to either get the government as a whole to make legal or possibly even constitutional changes to allow it, or leave illegally, either by force or by having a sympathetic government just not press the matter and just ignore the laws in question. I can't really see them getting enough support for the former two, they're too weak compared to the federal government for an actual war, and the current administration is not likely to just let them go, so I don't expect them to go anywhere unless one of those things drastically changes.
Inb4 president 47 Trump let's them succeed for shits and giggles
Sort of. According to the US, they couldn't. Secession is a denial of the authority of the US though, so what the US says doesn't really matter.
Why not Arizona? That's surprising.
42% of Arizona is federal land, they know it wouldn't end well.
As far as I can tell, it's a purple state. The right republican would have to come along to pull moderates/libertarians in the state and Trump will only lose the state again - he talked a lot of shit about John McCain; that's not going to go well. Don't get me wrong, every state has it's Trump cultists, but there's just not enough.
Not enough cousin fucking to cause genetic mutations?
States right right?
To do what again?
Not the important part of this.
No, Tim Pool.
I dunno who that is, sorry. :/
Good, Dim Tool isn't worth the attention.
The disunited states has gone post-truth. When two sides vying for power don't agree on the nature of reality, ie immigration vs invasion, I don't see how there can be any agreement or good faith negotiation. So how can the result be anything but war? Whoever invented the notion of alternative facts has a lot to answer for.
Living in Georgia rn, I'm pretty confident the state won't be seriously attempting succession in the near future. The political will simply isn't there.
It's interesting that the fairly small group who want (or think they want) succession are forced to share a political party with the country's most nationalist. I suspect any serious attempt at it now would further divide the Republican party.
This all have a strong brexit vibe, but taken to the next level in a very MURICA! style.
Civil war 2: Electric Boogaloo, also: Blammo?
who's the Youtuber in the bottom right
It's Hasan Piker aka Hasanabi
So guys just in case, can you like maybe hand over your nuclear launch codes. You can have them back when you've calmed down.
Apparently our generals take those very seriously. I had fantasies Mattis was going to stab Trump with a steak knife to stop him from pulling a Stillson. IRL, Mattis said I'll get on that right away, sir ...and then just didn't.
I'm pretty sure Mattis was the top ranking agent of the Deep State and that figured into why he got replaced with Esper. In the meantime, there's a long chain of officers who are eager to interrupt an unnecessary nuclear exchange.
Here you go
1-2-3-4-5
Spaceballs
Up until the seventies it was 00000000
Lol no.
If you look at history it takes more than this. I doubt people would go to war over illegal immigrants.
It's the same as the last civil war. One side can't bear to live in a world where brown people are treated the same as white people.
It always was.