Is America Headed for a New Kind of Civil War?

[QUOTE
]A day after the brawling and racist brutality and deaths in Virginia, Governor Terry McAuliffe asked, “How did we get to this place?” The more relevant question after Charlottesville—and other deadly episodes in Ferguson, Charleston, Dallas, St. Paul, Baltimore, Baton Rouge, and Alexandria—is where the United States is headed. How fragile is the Union, our republic, and a country that has long been considered the world’s most stable democracy? The dangers are now bigger than the collective episodes of violence. “The radical right was more successful in entering the political mainstream last year than in half a century,” the Southern Poverty Law Center reported in February. The organization documents more than nine hundred active (and growing) hate groups in the United States.

America’s stability is increasingly an undercurrent in political discourse. Earlier this year, I began a conversation with Keith Mines about America’s turmoil. Mines has spent his career—in the U.S. Army Special Forces, the United Nations, and now the State Department—navigating civil wars in other countries, including Afghanistan, Colombia, El Salvador, Iraq, Somalia, and Sudan. He returned to Washington after sixteen years to find conditions that he had seen nurture conflict abroad now visible at home. It haunts him. In March, Mines was one of several national-security experts whom Foreign Policy asked to evaluate the risks of a second civil war—with percentages. Mines concluded that the United States faces a sixty-per-cent chance of civil war over the next ten to fifteen years. Other experts’ predictions ranged from five per cent to ninety-five per cent. The sobering consensus was thirty-five per cent. And that was five months before Charlottesville.

“We keep saying, ‘It can’t happen here,’ but then, holy smokes, it can,”....[/QUOTE]
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/is-america-headed-for-a-new-kind-of-civil-war

The blood has already been spilled, life is cut short. The parties receive their first sacral sacrifices, their first heroes. Mutual accounts and claims are growing.
The formal reason for the clashes (I hope everyone remembers the difference between the reason and the occasion for the school course of history) was the attempt of the federal authorities to demolish the monument to General Lee.

This monument stood for more than a hundred years, did not bother anyone. But recently, the Feds began to view the symbols of the southerners as "a threat to territorial integrity." If your authority is threatened by a monument to a long-dead general of the losing side, then your authority is a colossus on clay feet.

The real reason for the clashes clearly describes the slogan put forward by the protesters - "White life matters". The Anglo-Saxon majority was fed up with negative discrimination, fed up with the fact that Negroes and Latinoes, gays and lesbians, feminists, invalids and "alternatively gifted" have numerous privileges over the actually oppressed white majority.

In addition, about 47% of Americans surveyed believe that Christianity in the US is an oppressed and persecuted religion.


Accordingly, we have the lines of schism in American society:
- Geographical (south against the north);
- Historical (confederates against the feds);
- racial (white versus "color");
- religious;
- ideological (conservatives against liberals); - and there also try to and gender factor.

For most civil wars in the history of mankind, any of the above factors was quite sufficient. And, most importantly, the current conflict in the US has economic.

Mutual accounts and claims are growing, the abyss and hatred are expanding. And behind the backs of the street fighters loomed the ghosts of General Lee and the "liberator of other people's slaves" (their not liberated) Abraham Lincoln.

The federal authorities are too busy with the struggle for power and foreign political games, demonstrating complete inadequacy. The expression "civil war" is increasingly heard on the air of American media.

What do you think about it?

 

Nah. There won't be another "Civil War".

America just needs to silent the racists.

If the racists freak out and use their guns (the guns that make them feel empowered as they wallow in their societal inadequacy), they should be arrested and thrown in prison.

Civil War? Not a chance.

 

Never say never.
The other side believes that those who destroy monuments to southerners should be in prison.

 

We are on the path to civil war and the more and more grotesque the left become the closer we get. I thought after the BLM were assassinating police and then with the Bernie lover, anti-Trumper lib killing Republican politicians could have been the first shot but not just yet. I think it will be here soon, the left aren't letting up and have become addicted to being offended and their violent destruction of the US is getting old. Their agenda of wiping out their history to try to stick the right with their past won't work. If the left really wanted to get rid of all slavery reminders they should abolish their party, since they're the party of the KKK but that's not going to happen. They're here to irritate and push us into it. Funny, the media never states how all of the statues being removed are all democrats.

 

It will not be a war but it will be ugly. The leftie/socialists have been in full hate mode ever since Hillary Clinton shoved a knife directly into Bernie Sanders back.

 

George Soros, who has caused all the protests, chaos and wars in other nations so as to muster control for his one world order/government, felt the US was the most difficult. He has over 150 organizations in the US supported by his Open Society Foundation pushing for his liberal agendas and his one world government.

Soros hopes that the stronger the push, the more of a chance there is for the 'right' to react, and the quicker the government can take away our freedoms... or at least what's left of it. There will be a civil war, especially if they try to get rid of Trump. There are thousands of well armed and trained militias in this country just raring to go.

 

When has there never been extremist groups?

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/is-america-headed-for-a-new-kind-of-civil-war

The blood has already been spilled, life is cut short. The parties receive their first sacral sacrifices, their first heroes. Mutual accounts and claims are growing.
The formal reason for the clashes (I hope everyone remembers the difference between the reason and the occasion for the school course of history) was the attempt of the federal authorities to demolish the monument to General Lee.

This monument stood for more than a hundred years, did not bother anyone. But recently, the Feds began to view the symbols of the southerners as "a threat to territorial integrity." If your authority is threatened by a monument to a long-dead general of the losing side, then your authority is a colossus on clay feet.

The real reason for the clashes clearly describes the slogan put forward by the protesters - "White life matters". The Anglo-Saxon majority was fed up with negative discrimination, fed up with the fact that Negroes and Latinoes, gays and lesbians, feminists, invalids and "alternatively gifted" have numerous privileges over the actually oppressed white majority.

In addition, about 47% of Americans surveyed believe that Christianity in the US is an oppressed and persecuted religion.


Accordingly, we have the lines of schism in American society:
- Geographical (south against the north);
- Historical (confederates against the feds);
- racial (white versus "color");
- religious;
- ideological (conservatives against liberals); - and there also try to and gender factor.

For most civil wars in the history of mankind, any of the above factors was quite sufficient. And, most importantly, the current conflict in the US has economic.

Mutual accounts and claims are growing, the abyss and hatred are expanding. And behind the backs of the street fighters loomed the ghosts of General Lee and the "liberator of other people's slaves" (their not liberated) Abraham Lincoln.

The federal authorities are too busy with the struggle for power and foreign political games, demonstrating complete inadequacy. The expression "civil war" is increasingly heard on the air of American media.

What do you think about it?

[/QUOTE]

What I onow

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/is-america-headed-for-a-new-kind-of-civil-war

The blood has already been spilled, life is cut short. The parties receive their first sacral sacrifices, their first heroes. Mutual accounts and claims are growing.
The formal reason for the clashes (I hope everyone remembers the difference between the reason and the occasion for the school course of history) was the attempt of the federal authorities to demolish the monument to General Lee.

This monument stood for more than a hundred years, did not bother anyone. But recently, the Feds began to view the symbols of the southerners as "a threat to territorial integrity." If your authority is threatened by a monument to a long-dead general of the losing side, then your authority is a colossus on clay feet.

The real reason for the clashes clearly describes the slogan put forward by the protesters - "White life matters". The Anglo-Saxon majority was fed up with negative discrimination, fed up with the fact that Negroes and Latinoes, gays and lesbians, feminists, invalids and "alternatively gifted" have numerous privileges over the actually oppressed white majority.

In addition, about 47% of Americans surveyed believe that Christianity in the US is an oppressed and persecuted religion.


Accordingly, we have the lines of schism in American society:
- Geographical (south against the north);
- Historical (confederates against the feds);
- racial (white versus "color");
- religious;
- ideological (conservatives against liberals); - and there also try to and gender factor.

For most civil wars in the history of mankind, any of the above factors was quite sufficient. And, most importantly, the current conflict in the US has economic.

Mutual accounts and claims are growing, the abyss and hatred are expanding. And behind the backs of the street fighters loomed the ghosts of General Lee and the "liberator of other people's slaves" (their not liberated) Abraham Lincoln.

The federal authorities are too busy with the struggle for power and foreign political games, demonstrating complete inadequacy. The expression "civil war" is increasingly heard on the air of American media.

What do you think about it?

[/QUOTE]

Suggest you bother to look up when the statue was actuslly erected. Hint, it wasn't near a hundred years ago.

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/is-america-headed-for-a-new-kind-of-civil-war

The blood has already been spilled, life is cut short. The parties receive their first sacral sacrifices, their first heroes. Mutual accounts and claims are growing.
The formal reason for the clashes (I hope everyone remembers the difference between the reason and the occasion for the school course of history) was the attempt of the federal authorities to demolish the monument to General Lee.

This monument stood for more than a hundred years, did not bother anyone. But recently, the Feds began to view the symbols of the southerners as "a threat to territorial integrity." If your authority is threatened by a monument to a long-dead general of the losing side, then your authority is a colossus on clay feet.

The real reason for the clashes clearly describes the slogan put forward by the protesters - "White life matters". The Anglo-Saxon majority was fed up with negative discrimination, fed up with the fact that Negroes and Latinoes, gays and lesbians, feminists, invalids and "alternatively gifted" have numerous privileges over the actually oppressed white majority.

In addition, about 47% of Americans surveyed believe that Christianity in the US is an oppressed and persecuted religion.


Accordingly, we have the lines of schism in American society:
- Geographical (south against the north);
- Historical (confederates against the feds);
- racial (white versus "color");
- religious;
- ideological (conservatives against liberals); - and there also try to and gender factor.

For most civil wars in the history of mankind, any of the above factors was quite sufficient. And, most importantly, the current conflict in the US has economic.

Mutual accounts and claims are growing, the abyss and hatred are expanding. And behind the backs of the street fighters loomed the ghosts of General Lee and the "liberator of other people's slaves" (their not liberated) Abraham Lincoln.

The federal authorities are too busy with the struggle for power and foreign political games, demonstrating complete inadequacy. The expression "civil war" is increasingly heard on the air of American media.

What do you think about it?

[/QUOTE]
I think Terry McAuliffe didn't do his job.

 

The first thing I noticed was cultural-Marxism PC revisionist history.

The painting above is suppose to be the Battle of Fort Henry that took place in the state of Tennessee in 1862.

What you see is the Army of Tennessee with the Confederate Navy Jack that wouldn't be adopted as the battle flag of the Confederacy 22 months later.

The Battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia was square while the CSA Navy jack was rectangular.

A more historically accurate painting would be...



The Army of Tennessee and all other Confederate state armies wouldn't adopt the rectangular Confederate battle flag until December of 1963.

Below are the flags of the Confederate States of America for you who were unfortunately indoctrinated by liberal revisionism.


First national flag with seven stars
(March 4, 1861 – May 21, 1861)

First national flag with nine stars
(May 21, 1861 – July 2, 1861)

First national flag with eleven stars
(July 2, 1861 – November 28, 1861)

First national flag with thirteen stars
(November 28, 1861 – May 1, 1863

This was the last flag of the CSA.


Third national flag (after March 4, 1865)

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/is-america-headed-for-a-new-kind-of-civil-war

The blood has already been spilled, life is cut short. The parties receive their first sacral sacrifices, their first heroes. Mutual accounts and claims are growing.
The formal reason for the clashes (I hope everyone remembers the difference between the reason and the occasion for the school course of history) was the attempt of the federal authorities to demolish the monument to General Lee.

This monument stood for more than a hundred years, did not bother anyone. But recently, the Feds began to view the symbols of the southerners as "a threat to territorial integrity." If your authority is threatened by a monument to a long-dead general of the losing side, then your authority is a colossus on clay feet.

The real reason for the clashes clearly describes the slogan put forward by the protesters - "White life matters". The Anglo-Saxon majority was fed up with negative discrimination, fed up with the fact that Negroes and Latinoes, gays and lesbians, feminists, invalids and "alternatively gifted" have numerous privileges over the actually oppressed white majority.

In addition, about 47% of Americans surveyed believe that Christianity in the US is an oppressed and persecuted religion.


Accordingly, we have the lines of schism in American society:
- Geographical (south against the north);
- Historical (confederates against the feds);
- racial (white versus "color");
- religious;
- ideological (conservatives against liberals); - and there also try to and gender factor.

For most civil wars in the history of mankind, any of the above factors was quite sufficient. And, most importantly, the current conflict in the US has economic.

Mutual accounts and claims are growing, the abyss and hatred are expanding. And behind the backs of the street fighters loomed the ghosts of General Lee and the "liberator of other people's slaves" (their not liberated) Abraham Lincoln.

The federal authorities are too busy with the struggle for power and foreign political games, demonstrating complete inadequacy. The expression "civil war" is increasingly heard on the air of American media.

What do you think about it?

[/QUOTE]

I think you should peacefully separate. A war at this point would probably become global.

 

No. Maybe more active domestic insurgencies.

 

Your statements don't take into account that the policies of both parties have reversed since the Civil War. In the 1860s, the Republicans were the party of freedom, equality and inclusion. Democrats offered policies protecting the existing status quo. Today they are both opposite. Democrats are the party of freedom, equality and inclusion while Republicans are the party supporting white supremacy, racism, and a return to segregation.

 

I do not see state vs. state, but can imagine a lot of violence.

As a country we have been through this before. Irish and German Roman Catholics immigrants upsetting the Protestants. Some today are echoing the same complaints people were in the 1800's. They are stealing jobs, they are criminals, they will mainly vote Democrat because the party at that time focused on the needs of lower income people, they will just be leaching off society and giving nothing back. Guess what happened. Violent clashes and a nativist movement gained momentum. It caused a divide in the nation and many politicians ran on a anti-immigrant platform.

They had stuff like this for their campaigns:


The foreign influence being immigrants.

Another interesting thing was also beginning to happen in the early 1800's and gaining momentum. Talk about abolishing slavery. Racial tensions. Causing such a ado that a Civil war was eventually fought. Similar to certain groups now gaining rights.

There was also rather large cultural differences mainly between the South and the North. The North were considered the elitist and cosmopolitans like urban centers are viewed today.

The industrial revolution also arrived in the US. Machines started being used and different industries became more productive and did not need to hire as many people to get the same amount of work done. Similar to what we are facing today with the advancements in automation. It also caused the same concerns that some people have about losing their job to a machine.

With the industrial revolution came increased profits and growing economy. Like now with the opening and increase in global markets only a few really benefited relative to the majority. Some people had issues with that.

TL/DR: This has happened before in the US to varying degrees. A lot of change over a short period, immigrants being vilified, few people really profiting from economic growth. We can hope it is limited to clashes in the streets here and there between the people willing to resort to violence on both sides.

IMHO we have entered a time where we will see more and more violence like what happen in Charlottesville. I hope I am wrong, but see it getting worse. Violence will spread on both sides. Being justified because of the violence committed by the other side.

 

Is America Headed for a New Kind of Civil War?

Headed for?

I'd argue we're already in one, & it's gone from cold, to warm, & getting hot.

Within a decade, if something/one diesn't come along, we'll be under martial law in many areas .... At a minimum.

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/is-america-headed-for-a-new-kind-of-civil-war

The blood has already been spilled, life is cut short. The parties receive their first sacral sacrifices, their first heroes. Mutual accounts and claims are growing.
The formal reason for the clashes (I hope everyone remembers the difference between the reason and the occasion for the school course of history) was the attempt of the federal authorities to demolish the monument to General Lee.

This monument stood for more than a hundred years, did not bother anyone. But recently, the Feds began to view the symbols of the southerners as "a threat to territorial integrity." If your authority is threatened by a monument to a long-dead general of the losing side, then your authority is a colossus on clay feet.

The real reason for the clashes clearly describes the slogan put forward by the protesters - "White life matters". The Anglo-Saxon majority was fed up with negative discrimination, fed up with the fact that Negroes and Latinoes, gays and lesbians, feminists, invalids and "alternatively gifted" have numerous privileges over the actually oppressed white majority.

In addition, about 47% of Americans surveyed believe that Christianity in the US is an oppressed and persecuted religion.


Accordingly, we have the lines of schism in American society:
- Geographical (south against the north);
- Historical (confederates against the feds);
- racial (white versus "color");
- religious;
- ideological (conservatives against liberals); - and there also try to and gender factor.

For most civil wars in the history of mankind, any of the above factors was quite sufficient. And, most importantly, the current conflict in the US has economic.

Mutual accounts and claims are growing, the abyss and hatred are expanding. And behind the backs of the street fighters loomed the ghosts of General Lee and the "liberator of other people's slaves" (their not liberated) Abraham Lincoln.

The federal authorities are too busy with the struggle for power and foreign political games, demonstrating complete inadequacy. The expression "civil war" is increasingly heard on the air of American media.

What do you think about it?

[/QUOTE]

If you do, it'll be "the war on............", any ideas?

How about the war on aliens?
The war on Illegals?
The war on fake americans?
Maybe just "the war"?

These white supremacists make me laugh - They are immigrants moaning about immigration, the only difference is the timescale.

 

What is needed for a Civil war.
* Plenty of guns [x]
* Different ideologies [x]
* Weak leadership, low ratings [x]
* Cultural and racial differences [x]
* Bad Economy [/]

When the **** hits the fan, that is Economy going down. Well you know the recipe. And we all know how governments react to uprisings.
All though I hope it doesn't come to that. I'm planing to eat a tomahawk steak without being disturbed next year somewhere in USA.

 

Yep.

 

Of course, this changes the matter.

 

The picture was chosen by me as an illustration of the civil war .... I'm new to the US heraldic history. Thank you for your comment. To me was interested and informative.

 

[QUOTE="Steady Pie, post: 1067887078, member: 60761"

I think you should peacefully separate. A war at this point would probably become global.[/QUOTE]
This hardly. If there is a real civil war, each side of the conflict will seek the support of a foreign state. You should understand that in case of a full-scale civil war - the dollar will turn into dust. Therefore, it is necessary for the conflicting parties to finance military expenditures (food, ammunition, weapons ... etc)
Once the dollar turns into a pumpkin, you will understand that in fact the US is a poor country. Officially recognized as 80% of US GDP - the service sector. Therefore, I do not think that dog hairdressers will be able to provide all need the people.

 

At least you die with a smile

 

When the Nazis occupied France, they removed all metal monuments & statues




Fallen monument to Claude Chappe, French engineer.

 

The Alt-Right population is far too minimal to create a serious movement within this country and is primarily a disgusting nuisance more that anything of potency. Even with Presidential support it fails to inspire and instead bring the President down with it.

 

The left used to passively deploy sneering contempt and humiliating rhetoric to counter their adversaries' opposing dogma but now they've 'cut out the middle-men' and physically go straight for the jugular. In fact they've taken up the mantle of violence as a first reaction from the rightists.