The Bloodless Civil War in America

Posted by freedomforall 3 weeks, 2 days ago to Politics
22 comments | Share | Flag

Intelligence analyst and Iraq/Afghanistan war veteran Samuel Culper breaks down a rational way to look at "Civil War 2."

Unless patriotic Americans act soon, socialist control of America is guaranteed.

SOURCE URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca7mGSvRdoM


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by KevinSchwinkendorf 2 weeks, 6 days ago
    The shooting almost started in Oregon in the last couple of weeks. The state legislature wanted to vote on some stupid global warming bill (i.e., carbon taxes), and the GOP senators refused to take part. As I understand it, there are 18 democrats and 12 republicans in the state senate. All democrats were going to vote in favor, all republicans were going to vote no, thus ensuring that the bill would pass 18-12. But, according to their procedural rules, there had to be a quorum of 20 senators present in order to hold the vote. All 12 GOP senators left Salem (and presumably Oregon as well), thus blocking the vote. Uber-lefty democrat gov. Kate Brown then ordered the State Police to round up the republicans (presumably at gunpoint) and drag them back to Salem so they could keep their chairs warm and give in to the passage of the bill (by being there). One GOP senator Boquist stated that if the State police tried to drag him back to Salem, "they better come heavily armed" because he wasn't going to go peacefully. Ultimately, the leader of the Oregon Senate relented and stated he no longer believed they had the votes for passage, and so they allowed the bill to die. Now (I'm not a lawyer), but unless somebody is suspected of committing a crime, the police have NO authority to "arrest" anyone and drag their asses anywhere just on the royal prerogative of the ruler. Missing votes in the legislature is something that happens all the time (just look at Obama's record), and its not a crime. But, according to hyperventilating leftwing Social Justice Warriors (SJWs), failure to support new taxes on "carbon" to "Fight Climate Change" is now considered a crime. Just today, I heard on the radio that Gov. Kate Brown stated that given the failure of the legislature to pass this bill, she will "use her 'Executive Authority'" to make the bill law (all by herself?) - hm just like Obongo and "DACA"? The guy who created this video is spot-on in several ways. One - nobody can predict the future with any real degree of accuracy (there are too many variables, or "degrees of freedom"). Two - nobody can predict what the "trigger" might be that starts armed conflict. Is it gun confiscation? Or maybe its your elected representatives being put in prison as political prisoners because they refuse to vote the way der Fuhrer wants them to vote? It sounds like antifa is back in the news again too - I just heard that some journalist who works for a conservative outlet was just beaten up by an antifa mob in Portland, and its getting very little coverage. Let's see what happens when antifa (I refuse to capitalize their name) tries to beat up someone who happens to be a concealed-carry holder, and they fight back with their own "great equalizer." I think we're headed for real war. One reference from the past: The "trigger" or tripwire for US involvement in WW-II was unpredictable too. We knew war was coming, and in fact we were expecting a Japanese attack on the Philippines, but not at Pearl Harbor (but actually, they attacked in the Philippines too). Just some thoughts...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ewv 2 weeks, 6 days ago
      That is true, but the course of events depends on conscious choices that people make over time, what kind of leadership they exercise, and what the general public is willing to tolerate. It's not just about some instability being triggered out of countless other possibilities.

      The almost inevitable path to WWII was not caused by where and when Japan unpredictably decided to attack. FDR wanted the war and planned a "backdoor to war" that most of the citizens did not want and did not know about. He expected it as a result of his own foreign policy, knowing that he was deliberately provoking it while carefully avoiding be seen as the attacker. He didn't have to know where they would attack to know what he was getting. FDR's actions were in turn part of the general progressive trend and the willingness of the voters to put him back in office several times.

      In the 1960s and early 70s there were violent uprisings across the country, in many ways more widespread and common than today. The New Left leaders were anticipating a Marxist revolution, but with the end of the draft and the Vietnam war that movement collapsed and they went back to an incremental approach with economic and environmental regulations clamping down steadily over time in a more "stable" trend driven by the intellectual establishment..

      The sporadic overt violence by antifa and a couple of radical left universities in recent decades has in some ways caused a backlash, but without reversing the trend driven by the same ideas. The radical left -- originating in the New Left now entrenched in 'mainstream' politics and business -- came very close to the Presidency with Gore and Kerry until they got it (and Congress at the same time) with Obama, which in turn created another backlash.

      But with the premises of the intellectuals left unchallenged, the backlash can never be enough, instead creating a zigzag but net decline. No one can predict when some instability might cause a sudden lurch down, but we can predict the overall trend downward if the philosophical trends are not reversed. It becomes harder and harder to reverse as it becomes more entrenched, until freedom of speech is all that is left, for as long as that lasts, to protest entrenched statism.

      For example, more and more states have become 'blue' or unreliable, and it's not hard to see where that is leading and what is becoming impossible to reverse by a voter backlash alone -- just as, ahead of us by several decades, the Fabian Socialists and the Labor Party zigzagged Britain into socialism and stagnation, with no recovery possible in the foreseeable future because even though a lot of them don't like it, they don't know enough to know what is right and are afraid to give up their torment.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by KevinSchwinkendorf 2 weeks, 6 days ago
    Andrew ("America was NEVER that great!") Cuomo and his lacky AG Letitia James already have declared that the NRA is a terrorist group, and Cuomo has bullied (blackmailed, threatened) large banks (headquartered in New York) into cancelling Visa and MasterCard accounts that NRA uses to do business. The NRA has already filed suite in court - have not heard any results on that yet.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 2 weeks, 6 days ago
    "Patriotic Americans acting soon" how? This video has no solutions and nothing to say about causes. It partly repeats political trends already observed, and pointlessly speculates on the form of future chaos and decline and when.

    There is nothing in it at all about the nature of the philosophical ideas driving the course of the nation and what is required to reverse it. Ayn Rand wrote about the underlying cause and solution extensively, including the nature of pressure group warfare,"Global Balkinization", and the civil war between the original American individualist sense of life and the establishment intellectuals. Repeatedly ignoring this on an Ayn Rand forum while speculating about upcoming chaos with an empty injunction to "act soon" makes no sense.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ewv 2 weeks, 6 days ago
      How about an intelligible response instead of a mindless hit and run 'downvote'? How exactly are "patriotic Americans" supposed to "act soon"? This is supposed to be a discussion forum for Ayn Rand.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Owlsrayne 2 weeks, 6 days ago
      High Schools up through college seem to have put all Ayn Rands books on the forbidden list. So, unless things change academically very few will know about Ayn Rands books. That's why some of the contributors on this forum talk about creating a Galt's Gulch as a way of escaping the coming chaos this country could experience. Talking about Rands philosophy in the Gulch is fine but out there in the world, a lot of people either put their heads in the sand or are so polarized they don't what to have such a discussion. Many people probably never have heard about Ayn Rand or her books. I know my neighbors haven't and quite a few are retirees from California.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by ewv 2 weeks, 5 days ago
        There is no connection between how Ayn Rand's ideas are spread and "that's why some on this forum talk about creating a Galt's Gulch as a way of escaping". Utopian societies are not realistic and don't become realistic depending on what high schools do with Ayn Rand's books.

        Her books have never been popular with the intellectual establishment, including in the schools. The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged spread by word of mouth despite the establishment hatchet reviews, from the beginning through the Tea Party popularization. They can't stop people from reading and talking (and they can't stop the Ayn Rand Institute programs that have put tens of thousands of the books into the classrooms.)

        But talking requires understanding, which is not automatic. Discussion on this forum is surely not enough, but it can be a source of information, and could be a source of knowledge of events from an Ayn Rand perspective, on how to apply Ayn Rand's ideas, and where to find out more.

        Ayn Rand discussed the importance of first understanding for oneself and then of speaking out in her articles "Don't Let it Go" (1971) and "What Can One Do?" (1972), both in her anthology Philosophy: Who Needs It?

        Unfortunately, too many on this forum have little understanding or interest in Ayn Rand. They liked something she said or something about a novel and never went beyond that, assuming that "Ayn Rand" only means whatever they already believed -- which here is mostly conservativism, mixed in with anti-intellectual conspiracy theories and utopian schemes, none of which Ayn Rand is. They don't look to see what the philosophy is that made Atlas Shrugged possible, and what is required to change the course of the nation.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Owlsrayne 2 weeks, 5 days ago
          Man! You really bum me out. I perceive from Ayn Rand "....there is no greater moral goal than achieving one's happiness." If the individual or individuals want to create a Galt's Gulch to achieve one's happiness, why not? In this reality, there are political and social forces trying to tear the US apart. How would you deal with it through "Objectivism"? Maybe this where the debate should begin!
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by ewv 2 weeks, 2 days ago
            Achieving happiness requires reason and objective principles, not whatever someone feels like. Ayn Rand rejected subjectivism and hedonism. You should understand why.

            Creating an impossible utopian "Gal's Gulch" does not suddenly become possible when there are "political and social forces" that are destructive. You can only do what is possible, which requires understanding cause and effect. There are no short cuts. Fantasizing wishful thinking is not a substitute.

            If you want to know what Ayn Rand wrote about this start with "Don't Let it Go" and "What Can One Do?" in Philosophy: Who Needs It?. This has been referred to many times on this forum.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by Owlsrayne 2 weeks, 2 days ago
              In "Don't Let It Go" from what I just read is talking about the rational man and watching a video presentation on "What Can One Do" is about fighting back or in other words an individual can effect changes in one's life that could effect changes in the external world.
              Okay, on this forum I wrote a list and posited some ideas of an island Gulch. To answer that isn't possible:
              1. If you Google - islands for sale; there is a plethora of islands for sale.
              2. I created a list of what "I" can do and procure with sizeable monetary resources. (see: JBrenner Assigns Homework)
              3. The way I view Gulch in "Atlas Shrugged" isn't quite a Utopia. I view it as an alternative hidden industrial zone which is governed by the founding members of the Gulch and John Galt is the chairman of the board.
              4. I'm submitting "my" scenario in a rational way.
              5. "I'm" not fantasizing! "I'm" thinking o/s the box!
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by ewv 2 weeks, 2 days ago
                The references to "Don't Let It Go" and "What Can One Do?" meant to read them, not repeat the titles and then propose the opposite in the name of "outside the box". Go and live in your "hidden industrial zone" because there are real estate ads with "islands for sale". "John Galt" will not be "chairman of the board" nor does any of the fantasizing have anything to do with Ayn Rand.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo