I mean, that’s how America was originally founded. We got sick of Imperial Britain’s shit, fought them to get the fuck away from us. Then, when critical ideals came ahead about slavery, we had our civil war. We definitely need another, but the problem is, with how the world has changed.
Because, it’ll be very bloody simply because one side will have all of the guns and ammunition (Government, police, military .etc) and the opposing side would only have numbers. In either case, it would send a very impactful and long-standing message about what happens when things are left unchecked for too long.
I don’t think Democrats are that interested in fixing or helping things anymore, they have their own agendas, disguised in the form of progressive measures. They helped fund ICE earlier this year. They didn’t fight hard enough to prevent any measures Trump and Republicans have taken that has undone what progress we have done.
So, if shedding blood has to be the answer to make anyone see or realize what really needs to be done, then that’s what it is going to take.
You should really rethink the American Revolution. The crown was a restraining force on the colonists’ genocidal drive Westward, and legal cases were proceeding that were lying the groundwork to end chattel slavery. Both of these things, coupled with the massive economic potential of North America that was being subordinated to London’s financiers and the crowns taxation all led to the American Revolution. It was first and foremost a drive for unfettered greed and unfettered dominance.
The Civil War was not about ideals. It was about economics. The North saw much larger profits in industrializing compared the cash cropping of the South. Cash cropping meant remaining subordinated to London, primarily. The cotton from the plantations were raw materials. It was London that turned them into high fashion. Essentially, what we see today in overexploited nations where the people are employed in the lowest rung of the value chain like cobalt mines and what not, that’s what the American South was economically. The Northern financiers wanted to move to industrializatoon and that would require a different labor configuration. You can’t use illiterate chattel slaves in factories, you need a different mode of labor. That would inevitably mean changing the nature of ownership of human beings from private property to wage slaves. And that meant the South would lose their investments both in cash cropping and in humans. So the South seceded in order to create a separate nation with a separate economy from the industrializing North. And the war was fought under the command of Lincoln who not only didn’t care whether slavery persisted or not but believed that black people should leave the US and go back to Africa. His Emancipation Proclamation only offered emancipation to enslaved people in the rebelling states and only if they took up arms against the rebels. It was a recruitment gambit, not an expression of ideals.
As for war, we have consistently seen how guerilla warfare always beats the empire. Hell, the American Revolution was won primarily as a guerilla war and not a direct confrontation. Vietnam. Korea. Afghanistan. It’s imminently plausible for the US military to lose to a domestic uprising. And even more important, war is primarily a destruction of economies first, people second. The US is struggling desperately to manage its own economic output and can barely produce war machines and munitions at this point. A civil war would further destroy the economy here, cementing China permanently and the UD elites would have nowhere to go except back to Europe which is also floundering.
At this rate, yeah.
I mean, that’s how America was originally founded. We got sick of Imperial Britain’s shit, fought them to get the fuck away from us. Then, when critical ideals came ahead about slavery, we had our civil war. We definitely need another, but the problem is, with how the world has changed.
Because, it’ll be very bloody simply because one side will have all of the guns and ammunition (Government, police, military .etc) and the opposing side would only have numbers. In either case, it would send a very impactful and long-standing message about what happens when things are left unchecked for too long.
I don’t think Democrats are that interested in fixing or helping things anymore, they have their own agendas, disguised in the form of progressive measures. They helped fund ICE earlier this year. They didn’t fight hard enough to prevent any measures Trump and Republicans have taken that has undone what progress we have done.
So, if shedding blood has to be the answer to make anyone see or realize what really needs to be done, then that’s what it is going to take.
You should really rethink the American Revolution. The crown was a restraining force on the colonists’ genocidal drive Westward, and legal cases were proceeding that were lying the groundwork to end chattel slavery. Both of these things, coupled with the massive economic potential of North America that was being subordinated to London’s financiers and the crowns taxation all led to the American Revolution. It was first and foremost a drive for unfettered greed and unfettered dominance.
The Civil War was not about ideals. It was about economics. The North saw much larger profits in industrializing compared the cash cropping of the South. Cash cropping meant remaining subordinated to London, primarily. The cotton from the plantations were raw materials. It was London that turned them into high fashion. Essentially, what we see today in overexploited nations where the people are employed in the lowest rung of the value chain like cobalt mines and what not, that’s what the American South was economically. The Northern financiers wanted to move to industrializatoon and that would require a different labor configuration. You can’t use illiterate chattel slaves in factories, you need a different mode of labor. That would inevitably mean changing the nature of ownership of human beings from private property to wage slaves. And that meant the South would lose their investments both in cash cropping and in humans. So the South seceded in order to create a separate nation with a separate economy from the industrializing North. And the war was fought under the command of Lincoln who not only didn’t care whether slavery persisted or not but believed that black people should leave the US and go back to Africa. His Emancipation Proclamation only offered emancipation to enslaved people in the rebelling states and only if they took up arms against the rebels. It was a recruitment gambit, not an expression of ideals.
As for war, we have consistently seen how guerilla warfare always beats the empire. Hell, the American Revolution was won primarily as a guerilla war and not a direct confrontation. Vietnam. Korea. Afghanistan. It’s imminently plausible for the US military to lose to a domestic uprising. And even more important, war is primarily a destruction of economies first, people second. The US is struggling desperately to manage its own economic output and can barely produce war machines and munitions at this point. A civil war would further destroy the economy here, cementing China permanently and the UD elites would have nowhere to go except back to Europe which is also floundering.