The author is vague and has his own strong ideological blinders, but the topic is a good one. How do you see things escalating? I don't know if there will be civil war, but the last 3 years has been looking more and more like 1960s level of political militancy. Will there be more bombings? Will new militant political groups rise up, like modern versions of the Weather Underground? Will there be states or even municipalities seceding?
It will be a civil war of a different kind, no battle lines will ever be drawn but both sides will have its soldiers and leaders. If the right thinks they can take over unopposed like they did before then there will be a United left front, guaranteed.
And it would be more cohesive than their's. Ancaps, most altrights and other memelords wouldn't get out of their armchairs for the apocalypse, but I'm willing to bet at least some Internet leftists would put their feet on the ground if needed, myself included. The fascists would lead the charge, but would risk alienating themselves. If the left recruits intelligently, it's a war we can win.
Wyatt Sanders
They literally want as much violence as possible so society devolves into a Nazi masturbation fantasy. It's a common facet of American ethnonationalism.
Aaron Ross
It's possible that this was a shit article to start the discussion, but I posted it because it's gone somewhat viral. This guy makes it seem like people will be so doggone mad at Donald Trump and his administration that they will rise up against it. Personally, I would look more towards people who are part of the "going nowhere" working class, often with huge college bills, who are tired of decades of bullshit and no future in a completely corrupt corporate system.
And yeah, there will be groups with their own agendas, but there are more fundamental issues in how badly things are just fucked. The problem is that I really don't know what form this type of mass uprising, if that is what you want to call it, would take.
Both sides are very fragmented. I don't think there will be a lot of ideological solidarity, but there already is a lot of anger.
I can't speak for others, but I'd fight shoulder to shoulder with a ☭TANKIE☭ if I meant we could go No Pasaran on some reactionaries
Jeremiah Jackson
Right wing groups will carry out a preemptive counter revolution before the "left" carries out meaningful reforms. We're heading for Brazil or Honduras style paralysis, with judicial coups and capital strikes.
Asher Cook
But here's the thing, they don't know what the left actually is and thus will in all likelihood end up attacking liberals instead, giving the actual left forwarning.
Cameron Allen
Google the "Years of Lead".
Christopher Hughes
Political violence will hopefully kill liberalism once and for all.
Joshua Cox
I don't really see this hysterical FUCK DRUMPF nonsense turning into serious political violence tbh, any more than it has done already. A lot of people (on both sides) want him to be Hitler, but he just isn't. And 'starting a war' won't drive violence unless it involves conscription, which it won't. Wars are nice and remote for civilian Americans now.
Now this, maybe. But it doesn't matter who is in the White House when it happens.
Samuel Taylor
Maybe a 'wave' with a high tide and an ebb tide, very quick, like Occupy. Why? Because people don't see things the same way, have different notions of cause and effect, justice, etc combined with the enemy utilizing these differences to drive wedges, infiltrate, etc. The radicals will be marginalized and liquidated as they have been in past encounters. The big discrepancies I see are between basically ☭TANKIE☭s, succdems, and anarkids. We know what the ☭TANKIE☭s want in broad terms – "the revolution", worker's state, lord knows if they're going to conquer the world or play geopolitics. At least it would be a good change. Then Socdems, who basically want what we have now but with more gibs, more idpol. Definitely the most palatable side for porky and side with the most traction in terms of current numbers and potential numbers with people who sway. Then anarkids, who are basically reviled and would prefer to create 'autonomous zones' despite some of them trying to out-politik the former two. I agree very much with Tiqqun which means constituting ethical war machines, spreading molecular revolution, liquidating apparatuses and okay, what we might call 'adventurism' A real question is what's to prevent conflict from being avoided by massive porky gibs? Another is, can we even have a revolution when we are so dependent materially and ideologically on the current system? For all their problems, I'm basically with the anarkids. "Material conditions" will be ripe when the ☭TANKIE☭s are set for POLITICAL takeover. Material conditions are overripe and rotten, but the condition of the human material is very poor too. Anarkids basically have an openness to living differently that ☭TANKIE☭s and succdems do not, despite all three having some people more bourgeois than others, inb4 lifestylism. I'm saying that they are further along with new conceptions of humanity than the others which are depressingly still very bourgeois (e.g. worth based on labor). They could very well live like raccoons on the margins and not get shot by porkys experimental securobots.
Dominic Jackson
Also violence will come in two ways: lone wolf attacks or confrontations US ANTIFA style or UK Tommy Robinson style. Above that, I.E: organisation terrorism I cannot see getting off the ground. The Dissident Republicans can't do that nowadays and they know what the fuck they are doing.
Adrian Carter
Like in OWS, lmao. Right wingers are much more united.
Brandon Lee
this violence will acomplish nothing if the left doesn't have a coherent plan already, and certainly nobody does, everybody is aiming for the return to past systems, socdems, ☭TANKIE☭s and anarkidies, all systems with big failures, and no we can't just do like ultras and wait for the big spontaneous revolution, that we swear is going to happen any day now
Grayson Baker
once LE TRIGGERED LIBRULS goes out the window, the lolberts, ancaps, conservatives and others will flake away from the fascists. This isn't 1936, there are many different groups and forces at work here.
Leo Brooks
So do we.
You are right. This time there isn't any sort of left wing force capable to assert themselves in a civil war.
Ryan Perez
Why would that be? Historically, the liberals, conservatives, moderate nationalists, etc. all broke for the fascists and the nazi's in response to turmoil. Once things get violent, they will not say, oh gee, things are violent, maybe we should stop associating with these fashie types. They will rather conclude that the only way to maintain their position is to throw in with the fascists.
Brody Rodriguez
so what do you suggest? just say and roll over to accept the stomping? no. what we do is not be dreary pessimists and appeal to people in such a way that we would be the better option. moderate leftists in parliaments and senates is a good start to precipitating class conciousness.
Jose Allen
Yes, that is just what we need! We need to support /ourguys/ based neo-liberals with a human face! Shadilay Praise kek!!!
Christian Kelly
no you fucking clot, people like Cortez and Corbyn who can act as the soft left as a lead-in to the hard left
Cameron Allen
Avoiding violence for as long as possible and focusing on mass politics seems like a good start. The OP quote mentions that in the 70's there were thousands of bombings - and all put together they achieved dick. People like the romance of direct action, but the only thing that really chances public opinion are expertly targeted, well organized, specifically chosen actions (like during the civil rights struggle), not anarchic violence. So yeah, supporting the likes of Corbyn, and keeping at a safe distance from violent types, who are most likely to be provocateurs anyway.
Connor Bennett
PoC will participate in mass cannibal rituals in the streets
Jose Reed
Waiting for 1917 for all eternity doesn't really seem like a winning strategy unless you're in 1916's Russia
Jeremiah Baker
That would be wonderful, but sadly most people don't share your racial vore fetish.
Kayden Sanchez
get baboon poster in here
Blake Thompson
I don't think they are more united, but they aren't bound by being subservient I can't think of a more appropriate word tbh to a relatively tiny minority of scumbags who wish to take over or trash people attempting positive change. Pic very related.
The right has a lot of issues, but there is no equivalent to this for them that I can think of.
The rightwing would probably win because most of their opponents would be liberals who hate guns
Lucas Gomez
If anything, they were probably counter-productive, at least or especially when there were casualties.
Elijah Cook
Conservatives have all the guns so if there is a civil war we will ensure every leftist rat is dead very quickly. You soiboys cannot fuck with the right on this and deep down you know it. The gun shop owners vote Republican. The veterans are Republican. The U.S military is Republican. All the militias are Republican. All the gun clubs are Republican. You fucking worthless faggots would literally get crushed in a single day and it would be glorious. Just start the civil war I want to kill some dirty rotte leftist slime so bad.
Joseph Foster
Wars are not decided just by guns anymore, if the army sides with "the left" or whatever then all the larp ar15 guns you have in the case that Obama introduced healthcare will be useless outside of decoration………. Read a book sometime……
Luis Turner
Thanks for bumping, but you add nothing to the discussion. The Splinter article was about a civil war prompted by leftist dissatisfaction with the Trump administration, but the question in OP was
This question could be asked on Zig Forums or /liberty/ or other political boards. Why don't you try to answer it as part of constructive dialogue?
As I implied here I think the political left is severely hamstrung by political correctness and their willingness to bow to manipulators if they represent favored minorities. They need to overcome that. If they do, there is strong popular sentiment for many other issues they address, from overall quality of life in the modern world to environmental destruction.
On some level I don't. Weed is easier to get but guns harder to get, the populace will stay distracted until they are completely unable to afford any type of escapism. This day will come; already over the air TV is dying off while the end of Net Neutrality means higher mobile data rates, which will get much higher after 5G is rolled out and mobile companies openly try destroying Google/FB with Rich Communication Services (enhanced but also paid SMS). Even legal weed will become too expensive, especially if healthcare insurers deny coverage based upon smoking weed or drinking soda. Meanwhile schools will be completely locked down and free speech drilled out of children until age 22 when they graduate college with student loans. The day of reckoning is shoved off until those loans have to be paid back in their late twenties.
When that day comes everyone will find the shock of reality so appalling violence will become inevitable. This can already be seen in any third world country: homeless camps are built between gated suburbs as random home robberies and carjackings become commonplace. Bourgs try striking back using police but it only results in proles just killing witnesses after they rape them, escalating into arson. This is when people will realize that if they destroy bank records they can destroy their loans, so data centers will be targeted for bombings.
This will take at least another 5-10 years to form. See the student loan thread , as banks get fucked up from insane default rates the financial system won't be able to provide itself with capital while students become afraid of state education. That's when things start to break apart.
Gun owners are a lobby who will quickly pick sides if the state decides to take their weapons. And one day the state will because people will use guns to attack banks.
