In the event that guerrilla warfare were to break out in western countries, what do you think would happen?
I personally think it would start in the cities (more people live there), lead to a destabilization of the security situation in the country in question, and that the urban guerrillas would eventually support guerrillas in what few rural areas are left.
While I think the 'classic' three-phase Maoist model of guerrilla warfare has its merits (this is NOT an endorsement of communism), I think it be more fragmented with competing guerrilla forces each trying to be the one true resistance.
Urban violence would create a scenario much like we have already seen; white flight to more rural areas. Really, what happens in the urban areas will be none of the rural concern because the problems there will be second to the problems the rural citizens are facing. Floods of weak, confused and afraid urban people running, en masse, from their problems and attempting to quickly resettle in the rural communities not built to handle them. Furthermore, as we have seen, the urban run aways will respond to the locals with disdain, even in the height of running from the problems they created. Their spoiled and unrealistic views will keep them from understanding that, even at this point where things are at an all time low, the rural areas do not have the amenities they are used to. We could be 10 years in to a century long bloody civil war and the urban refugees would still expect Starbucks and Fios from the small towns they resettled in. However, the ruralites will not allow it to get that far and that is where you will see the true organized warfare. At first it will be rural Americans (assuming this is America we are discussing) attempt to take preventative measures to stop the floods of urbanites. Most likely non-violently, but close to. We will see, shortly after, the armed refugees from the urban areas that are now in total ruin attempting to make their way to rural areas looking for easy pickings. In the end, no matter the ying and yangs or various gives and takes that can be attributed to both rural and urban areas and their relationships, the real test will pit both against each other. Urban centers will have the advantage of pure numbers, and arguably ports and various transportation uses for goods. Rural areas will have the skills and ability to sustain anything serious beyond a few weeks. As for exact guerilla tactics, that widely varies depending on what stage and what enemy variants.
Juan Wright
Impossible to tell, who got the most support from the populace and military win.
Levi Lee
Ultimately I question whether the rural side could emerge victorious. Much like conservatism as an ideology, they will be conceptually be fighting a defensive war. If your goal (conservatism or "rural-ism") is to be left alone, that doesn't lend itself to any sort of final victory, but rather needing to win a succession of skirmishes while hoping the other side eventually gives up. This is why conservative ideology is at a structural disadvantage politically: the enemy gets to choose the battles, leaving conservatives in a reactionary position.
In the context of urban vs rural, let's try to imagine how it would play out, best practical case, for the rural side. They rebuff the urban hordes, but the urbanites keep coming, and the "legitimate" government backs the urban side. Are the rurals really willing or even able to lay siege, occupy, garrison, and pacify the urban centers? Rural people just want to be left alone. How badly do they want to be left alone? Badly enough to intentionally genocide the urbanites using methods like Caesar used at Alesia? That's probably the only way to win.
If the rurals don't have the will to achieve victory then the best they can do is stalemate. It's more likely that they will be overrun by the urbanites.
Jayden Peterson
Interesting and well thought through post, fukken saved. In that scenario how far do you think the Ruralites would need to be pushed before they come out of the defensive mindset?
Landon Roberts
I leave the city and bombard it with napalm or chemicals
David Moore
Early on I think the most effective tactic available to rural Americans would be to dump caltrops on major roads leading out of the cities.
Josiah Edwards
I disagree that it would eventually require a siege of urban areas to preserve the rural, for several reasons. First, while its true that rural people are on a defensive front, it's a front that well matches the task at hand, and the enemy it faces. Urban people can't form a caravan to a destination as ill-defined as "anywhere with less minorities", and will be dispersed as soon as they leave the city without anywhere specific to go. Additionally, urban people are poorly equipped ideologically and practically for this invasion. Any power they have to enculturate an area relies solely on them outnumbering the local ruralites, which isn't actually that easy or quick to do. Any urban militant groups formed from the vast minority of urbanites who aren't afraid to touch guns will be disadvantaged in a rural environment with which they are unfamiliar, and surrounded by enemies on all sides that they cannot identify until they are being shot at. All the tacticool urban practice they've done will gain them nothing if there are no building corners to pie.
The only real threat they present is enculturation, and it will never get too far. There's always a littler town farther away to retreat to until it's just too uncomfortable for the cidiots to live there. Any militant action would be immediately disadvantaged to near uselessness, and would lose the war of attrition it would quickly devolve to.
Juan Reed
Thank you for the well reasoned counterview. However, I still demur.
Call it roughly a 2:1 or 5:1 numerical disadvantage, plus the rurals are older. The exact numbers are unimportant, but the general demographics pertain to the following discussion.
I am not solely focusing on the potential urban/rural military conflict, but also that in a larger sense the lack of self-sufficiency in the urban/suburban population. This is why I chose the word "horde": within days of a breakdown of order, "starving" masses will be fleeing the urban areas to seek food and flee the violence of the burning urban areas. While these urbanite hordes may be poorly equipped, they will also be desperate. It will be like a plague of locusts, and it will initially be very difficult for the naturally compassionate white rural civilian population to be willing to use lethal force to dissuade "caravans" fronted by mothers with crying children from entering their towns and immediately exhausting all the available food and fuel. These caravans likely will attack anyone who resists. Furthermore, I don't put it past the urbanite military planners to use the desperate hordes as a method of scorched earth to scour & depredate the rural areas.
Now in the context where somehow the "legitimate" government manages to keep the fragile logistics of feeding the urban/suburban areas during a war against the rurals (how?) and thereby prevents the hordes from sallying into the countryside—which, again, the urban military planners would probably want the hordes out there—how do the rurals achieve a final solution to the urban problem, as opposed to a stalemate?
Samuel Lewis
Fair point with numbers, but they won't disperse. A full 2/3 of these people aren't equipped for a weekend of camping with light rain. They are utterly dependent on each other and their social structures to survive, which is why they're from the city in the first place. What would end up happening is all of them would swarm on a couple nearby little towns, which would be become hellhole tent cities overnight. No one outside of 50 miles from a large city would have much to worry about, especially if anything disrupted motor transportation.
These people think it's a struggle to have to take a different bus route across the city at busy times of day. They don't have the equipment, training, mindset, or capability to keep themselves alive, let alone a sustained effort at deading anything else, and those that do would be more likely to integrate into rural culture anyway.
Liam Cook
If you're in an urban area during any sort of major rural and urban guerilla action, your first priority should be to get the fuck out. Not only because of the obvious threat of getting shot at, or the crackdown, but because the guerillas will most likely use siege tactics and hamper, and if they are 100% successful, completely cut off food and supplies from the cities, meaning that there would be massive shortages of food, medicine, ammo, and other important items, which will just fuel the fires of violence as the niggers, spics, liberals, and CIAniggers kill and get killed.
Kayden Jones
Lack of clean drinking water will kill the vast majority of people who are fleeing. Diseases carried by unhealthy individuals spread en masse and kill the vulnerable elderly and children, as medical care is nonexistent. What you'll have left are people who ultimately have nothing, are weak, and begging for help. Their money is useless because the stock and real estate markets are in free fall.
I also disagree with the notion of people simply leaving the cities en masse. That didn't happen during Katrina or Harvey. Where would they go? The next city is the same. Bumfuck, XX? Has no resources and is likely full of hostile people who are rightfully suspicious of urban and suburban faggots.
The will stay put just like in Yugoslavia. Cities didn't massively depopulate during the war. And the "legit" government wants it that way so they don't lose tax revenue and raw labor power. Cities are engine, its population are the fluids that allow it to work.
The rural population will likely be hit by an even more severe medication, manufactured goods, and imported goods shortage. They have clean food and water, but not much else. They will still be better off that the self-immolating cityfags, but not by much.
Carter Brown
The logic and reason are strong in this one!
I would also add that while cities are likely to be the first places to descend into anarchy, they are also the first places likely to have law and order restored. If for no other reason than the fact that the political class owns property and have business interests in the cities.
Landon Davis
Why?
Charles Perry
modern cities have roughly 3 days of food, give or take. the riots start on the third day.
Logan Ward
Sorry, I misread your post as 'white cities'. I suppose they would still be the first to fall into anarchy as Chicago, London etc are already anarchy.
Thomas Baker
wasnt my post, just chimng in with some knawledge
Gabriel Williams
Exactly this happened in Russian civil war of 1918-1921. Peasants just wanted to be left alone and leave their shitty simple rural life. Peasants had temporal success when sides were busy with each other but in teh end untied urbanites keep coming and hacked them into pieces one be one. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestor_Makhno
Cityniggers have always been trash. Kulaks did nothing wrong.
Jackson Watson
I think it comes more down to specific individual situations than overall meta tactics. It depends who is fighting who, who is rebelling, who is resisting, which factions take arms, which support which, who supports whom, the whole thing is impossible to understand in such complex situations until they play out to some extent. We don't know if its going to be one legitimate side against an insurgency, or if the legitimate is called "illegitimate" or if its 10 sects fighting each other or 20. Regional or country wide, are the various regions fighting for any autonomy, who gets the upper hand, who does not?
A US struggle could easily just become racial/ethnic instead of class based or even ideology based. European Americans now know they are going to be a minority in a country of minorities and that they are hearing every day that they are the enemy of everyone else, in the end this could bring them together in a conflict. US cities naturally segregate themselves into racial/ethnic lines. Suburban "whites" have more in common with rural "whites" then with any urban non whites, in many ways those that have already fled the shit pot that is the city have more in common with rural whites than urban whites. Many small metros in the US, or even in Europe, hang on the edge of people within them declaring themselves rural or truly urban. Will Asians ally themselves more with whites against negroes, or will they all just join blindly with the party? Will well to do white Latins side with the party, or will they side more with whites and those with money, will the mestizos become fast loving friends with blacks whom they hate?
Whose ideology, whose base of power, who will lead? What is the message, the goal, the end? Many people who vote by race or ideology may not fight that way, people who will argue with each other in politics may fight side by side in war. Rural areas are usually racially homogenous and united, modern western cities are self divided places that will be more concerned with killing each other than conquering the rural hinterlands?
Interesting topic, I'll keep thinking on this.
Chase Gomez
Most farmers grow one type of crop. And most of the crop is exported. For a farmer to feed themselves they would need to crow several different types pf cereal crops, plant beans, have some kind of protein source (chickens or other livestock, or rice to combine with the beans), have a garden full of lentils, and perhaps a small orchid for fruits and nuts.
In the city there are plenty of things you can trap - cats, dogs, pidgins, rats, squirrels, raccoons, and so on. Popcorn, a small fishing hook, and some fishing line may not be humane but it is effective when you need protein in a hurry in a city.
We live in the information age. Learning how to trap, gut, skin, and cook wild game is only a website or video away.
And even a cityfag can have a larder. Rice, beans, and grains can be bought in bulk and stored for later use. Canned foods may not be the healthiest, and may only last a couple of years, but they are cheap and easily available.
Josiah Perry
LOL
Jack Rodriguez
Keep the rust off em and cans will last for a lot longer than a few years.
Jason Turner
The only urbanites with larders are Mormons and even the canned goods would disappear within the first week. Hell, even the vermin would probably be gone within a year.
On one level, basically. Blend into the populous, strike targets, blend in and escape. Enhanced security in some areas, active conflict in others ( even if low intensity, relative to conventional conflicts ) with the entire urban area essentially walled in.
On another level, three dimensional trench warfare. Anyone with enough resources to become a credible force ( police, national guard, conventional military, well armed / run gangs, etc ) will likely have reinforced encampments and enough weapons / troops to defend them. Raiding parties would require stealth with larger assaults / air support / artillery occurring with some regularity.
Nathaniel Williams
Such a persuasive argument! Where did you get your education?
Where's the chad ruralite's food crop? And if I didn't know better, I'd say that was a field of lavender.
Cameron Kelly
Let me guess, you're the kind of retarded subhuman that tramples canola fields for selfies and the closest you've come to growing produce is visiting Woolies.
Luke Murphy
No. Just the sort of retard who wonders why people thinks the cities/towns will be abandoned by the starving hoards post SHTF even though there are many examples where this didn't happen.
Anyone remember the wars in the Balkans? The Siege of Sarajevo? Anyone read of the cities that were not abandoned in WWII even they were being bombed on a daily basis?
Jordan Jenkins
The eternal urbanite, ladies and gentlemen.
Levi Fisher
And by choice no less! It's not like there are people who can't afford enough land to be self sufficient. And well paying permanent jobs are plenty! You don't even need a high school education. Being able to breathe is enough to get a well paying job. So I guess I will have to choose to stay in the cities and town and die if/when SHTF and be laughed at by the chad ruralites for not being one of them.
Or be killed by the chad ruralites for being a retarded subhuman urbanite.
Dylan Hill
You're projecting pretty hard here, comrade. No idea where this 'well paying job' nonsense is coming from. Consider the resolve of the people and conditions of cities in Eastern Block 1990's. There are no niggers, no internet infrastructure, not many (if any!) gangs, two entirely different planets in a sense. You expect me to think a shit hole like New York, or even Seattle, would fair any better than rural Americans? Sure you can be somewhat self sufficient, New York and Seattle for example have ocean access and in Seattle's case plenty of rain water, but how many city dwellers can fish? Or know to filter/boil water before drinking? How many are with substance dependence and need their opiates to function? What of the niggers, rowdy from lack of welfare and no police to quell them? I'm assuming you don't have much choice to be stuck in a city, and that's understandable, but acting like a faggot about a bad situation isn't any good either. Plenty of us would welcome a strelok in need, however with that city slicker attitude you're more likely to garner a chorus of go fuck yourself's than anything welcoming.
Camden Clark
i.e. not smart enough to realize that it is alluding to the fact that you can't buy land or move out of the city without money or a well paying job.
Why?
A strelok with aspergers syndrome like myself is probably just as likely to be called subhuman and sterilized or killed.
Either way, I'm out. Zig Forums doesn't need me and I don't need Zig Forums
Jaxson Nelson
With a disposition like that, good riddance. I tried being polite regardless of your hostile inflection, but it seems a (self admitted) retard like yourself can't appreciate that fact. Back to reddit with you, we're full.
Cooper Martin
Alright, I'm convinced this poster is a woman who confused this board with somewhere else and wandered in by accident. There's no other reason they'd be acting like this.
Indeed. Rural areas would be overwhelmed either by escaping refugees or by government forces searching for supplies.
Same thing in some situations, perhaps.
Though outside of a complete collapse most economic activity will still be centered in cities. Rural areas would be subject to crime.
Urban tradecraft is necessary both for the urban dweller dealing with increased crime and for the rural group looking for uncensored info on nearby urban areas.
Rural areas have both the advantages and disadvantages of isolation. Carrying / deploying long arms, setting up mantraps, etc. is all easier. Though the odds of being overwhelmed may outweigh part of that advantage.
Benjamin Wilson
That's more like general urban warfare.
He's asking specific about gorilla warfare, which would presumably occur in a friendly city occupied by the enemy.
Kevin Miller
A civil war in a western country will definetly draw a lot of attention which will lead to other countries getting involved. Now talking about this aspect would create hundreds of what ifs so let's leave it at the national level.
The civil war would have a lot of similarities with the Syrian and Ukranian civil war. You can expect regions with a more supportive population to the revolution to become strongholds of the rebel force. Of course these regions will vary depending on the revolutionary cause. Now these regions will try their best to connect with each other and build some form of self suffiency. There will also be a lot of neutral territory at the start and seizing territory at the initial stage is incredibly important as the governement forces would have a hard time to properly mobilize and move units in the areas where they are needed. This would enable the rebel force to take territory with little resistance. This can be seen perfectly at the start of the Syrian civil war. For the first year you can not even determine frontlines like you can do now and there were just general areas of resistance which linked up with each other.
A big factor will be air superiority and close air support. If the civil war is going to last for longer than a few months one side would most likely have complete air control. As the chances for the rebel force to take air superiority in such a scenario aren't high they should rather focus on building up a proper SAM network. The Syrian rebels didn't achieve that apart from a few MANPADs and SA-8s yet scored a noteable amount of kills against aircrafts. The Ukranian Separatists managed to maintain AA units which effectively fought against Ukranian aircrafts even if they didn't have a complete network of SAMs. Anti-air is incredibly cost effective and the only realistic way a rebel force can ensure not getting bombed 24/7.
Jackson Phillips
For an organization that is mostly "grassroots" such as the PIRA, how would that work?
Does anyone have the leaf screenshots about a hypothetical DIY SAM?
Jayden Cooper
Good thing in America the only people who have guns live in the rural areas.
Joshua Flores
A SWAT team can't kill one fucking man with a gun in a cabin without burning the whole thing down how the fuck are untrained city faggots going to overwhelm entire farming communities?
Breakdown in fuel shipments, which means breakdown in bulk food, feed and fertilizer shipments. Which means mass starvation due to our hyper centralized agrieconomy. Might last longer than it should due to mass proliferation of terminator seeds.
Aiden Ortiz
Thats literally everyone in a city under 50k IIRC. Cities that small typically have people with connections and families and friends in the outskirts/rural areas. keep that in mind
Brayden Roberts
You know, the US breaking out into a civil war would be quite a good thing for the global agricultural sector. It would be a massive, and much needed, wakeup call for farmers.
Brayden Gray
The divide isn't so simple as urban/rural, what with a middle, small cities and neighbhorhoods, firmly existing.
The fight is getting people to move and attack other locations.
Henry Reed
Not really. Australia is at the breaking point already, New Zealand can not expand much without harming their absolutely baller dairy industry and sheep industry. Brazil is teetering on the edge, and who does that leave? Everyone else is mostly supporting themselves with almost all excess needing industrial fertilizer.
In fact, that little bit would fuck Mexico super hard, as although they grow most of their food, they don't produce their own fertilizer with their own refinement facilities. And without Americans having their lives wasted in a sandpit, most of that shit would get wrapped up very quickly, one way or another.
But if the Middle East goes offline because the Saudi's go full retard, then Russia has Europe by the balls, heart and stomach.
Brayden Reyes
I was more referring to the fact that when farmers internationally see the negative consequences of mass adoption of terminator seeds they will likely reconsider their use.
Also our farming sector is a blight on our economy, because of how big it is we end up with our government being full of retards who don't understand much outside of farming or forestry, and as a result we end up getting policies which ultimately harm our small but increasingly important tech sector. The only party which actually understands tech is our Green party and I am sure as shit not going to vote for them.
Ryan Gomez
The right already controls the countryside. Population reduction in the cities and wait for elections to come back.
Lincoln Johnson
Urbanites would have a lot of trouble controlling rural territory whereas ruralites need only point their pickup trucks toward the big blue blobs on the latest election map: every house gets a Molotov, if the people stay in the smoke gets them if they run out the bullets.
Ayden Roberts
Oh right that. Certain Indian farmers have learned the hard way about that, there were protests several years ago.
Connor Butler
Your know Russian empire liberal hipster students who were vanguard shocktroops of Communism didn't have military grade weapons pre 1918. But was fixed overnight buy commie government.
The difference between the modern red and the red of yore is the ones nowadays tend to be to the point of unhealthy that they'd probably keel over at the faintest sign of resistance. I might laugh to death if those fucks stepped into my spooky ass woods, hell drunken ass WW2 reenactors would probably go circles around them.
Pretty good points in this thread. Most farmer communities would be hit with some form of violence in SHTF once moocher fuckers run out of food and try to use violence to live one more day, not caring if the next day after that they will starve because they robbed the man who fed them. The best method of security here is obscurity; 50 guys and girls who believe in living off their own backs and only ever obtaining what they want by consent in the middle of a fertile mountain range is far better in the long run than the strongest tactical militia in a megacity. Not everyone is going to be able to pull this off; the next best things for farmboys to do is agorism- pay your bills in whiskey and rye, stamp out some privately minted coins, use no government bills, do not use the grid for any reason Punch up your own outer space imageboard using clusters of rpis for shitposting and forming your own law and order. All of the above is effectively starting the country all over again as it should be- without pain, without leeches, and with rights again.
Blake Perez
Don't worry the lefties judges gave maximum sentence to all the "Nazis" involved (read: attacked).
Isaac Rogers
True American hero that man, remember watching him on the news with my dad and seeing him as a modern Robin Hood.
Have you not seen the footage of people fleeing cities under siege? Huge lines of people who figure they can wait and die or take a very slim chance of survival on the road. If you have no way to survive the urban environment you head out of it. Some will hunker down and use the black market to survive but a lot won't.
Rural people will on average have better medical care than the urbanites because they have access to natural medicines. Not stupid hippy junk but real herbal options which help. Diarrhea is a serious issue and some herbs can help settle it a little. Using these combinations will go a long way to helping survival rates.
Cooper Cruz
Found the urbanite tard.
Firstly, farmers are not isolated. Farm land is divided between many families who all grow crops and raise live stock. They can mix and match these as a community and then next year figure out the optimal way to work as a group.
The country is full of animals, much more so that the city is. If you think it's easy to live in the city try living in the country with wild berries, apple trees in most gardens and fisheries close by. It's a utopia of food that country folk are experienced in processing for long term storage. Local jams and preservatives are made by many in the country. Food is often left to rot because there is so much of it.
Small time gardeners are common too. Lots of people have an allotment or a vegetable patch in the garden. Everyones garden becomes a vegetable patch and you have even more food production.
vs
Kayden Reyes
Reading posts like this reminds me just how much I hate my grandparents because they sold our ancestral land for cheap shekels when communism ended…
Situations like this will actually thrive after a collapse simply because they can build a wall, arm up and do even better without shit like taxes eating into their work.
Jayden Carter
I still don't know what the whole manhunt was about and why he did it to this day, I sometimes forget about it compared to other shit that happened in 2012 and 2013.
