3 ms·

A deeply religious conservative America, or a secular progressive America. Groups are not seeing eye to eye on the fundamental role of government, and lines in

A deeply religious conservative America, or a secular progressive America. Groups are not seeing eye to eye on the fundamental role of government, and lines in the sand are being drawn.

BatFastard 4y ago
I could see Christian Nationalists making waves, but those are 1% of society? Secular Progressives are non violent by creed(small joke), so I just don't see that happening. Poor vs rich? I see poor on all sides of the issue, hard to see that happening.
- __jambo 4y ago
  I second this. Progressives wouldn't fight. Some small radical groups people would, but they aren't large enough or organised enough, who/what can they do other than spot violence/terrorism? I don't think the US can have a proper "civil war" there are too many disparate groups. But then again, Germany was very divided before WW2, so maybe one of these charismatic cult leaders could to come along.
hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
> Groups are not seeing eye to eye on the fundamental role of government I wish it were that. Having differing opinions on the fundamental role of government would be a good thing in a normal, functioning political environment. What's going on now is that each side fundamentally believes the other side is rigging the system against them. Trump-siding conservatives believe (provably false, I might add) that the voting system is "rigged". Those on the left believe (but, this is actually provably true) that the voting system is also "rigged", albeit that "rigged" here is exactly how the Constitution intends (e.g. a voter in a small state has a vote worth ~50x a voter in a large state in the Senate, and that the winner of the presidential popular vote has twice in the last six elections lost in the electoral college).
moduspol 4y ago
Which side has 95%+ of the guns and land?
- unethical_ban 4y ago
  Neither.
- jonnycomputer 4y ago
  If you think that Democrats don't own guns, you'd be dangerously mistaken. As for owning most of the land, shrug. Who cares. In a war, property deeds aren't worth the paper they're written on.
  - moduspol 4y ago
    It's not about property rights--it's about control of land and resources. Look at this map and tell me how you defend the blue areas against the red ones: https://brilliantmaps.com/2020-county-election-map/ https://brilliantmaps.com/2020-county-election-map/ A civil war isn't "every Republican vs. every Democrat." It'd be rural areas vs. urban ones, and it wouldn't really be a fight. One side has substantially less land, guns, and fighters than the other. It'd be unwinnable.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
  There are 120% the number of guns in the US as there are people. Only a great fool would believe they are all in the hands of a group that can't even muster up a popular vote win in a presidential election.
  - moduspol 4y ago
    Not all. But the vast majority. And they're the ones that have experience using them, too.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago

A deeply religious conservative America, or a secular progressive America. Groups are not seeing eye to eye on the fundamental role of government, and lines in the sand are being drawn.

BatFastard 4y ago

I could see Christian Nationalists making waves, but those are 1% of society? Secular Progressives are non violent by creed(small joke), so I just don't see that happening. Poor vs rich? I see poor on all sides of the issue, hard to see that happening.

__jambo 4y ago
I second this. Progressives wouldn't fight. Some small radical groups people would, but they aren't large enough or organised enough, who/what can they do other than spot violence/terrorism? I don't think the US can have a proper "civil war" there are too many disparate groups. But then again, Germany was very divided before WW2, so maybe one of these charismatic cult leaders could to come along.

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago

> Groups are not seeing eye to eye on the fundamental role of government I wish it were that. Having differing opinions on the fundamental role of government would be a good thing in a normal, functioning political environment. What's going on now is that each side fundamentally believes the other side is rigging the system against them. Trump-siding conservatives believe (provably false, I might add) that the voting system is "rigged". Those on the left believe (but, this is actually provably true) that the voting system is also "rigged", albeit that "rigged" here is exactly how the Constitution intends (e.g. a voter in a small state has a vote worth ~50x a voter in a large state in the Senate, and that the winner of the presidential popular vote has twice in the last six elections lost in the electoral college).

moduspol 4y ago

Which side has 95%+ of the guns and land?

unethical_ban 4y ago
Neither.
jonnycomputer 4y ago
If you think that Democrats don't own guns, you'd be dangerously mistaken. As for owning most of the land, shrug. Who cares. In a war, property deeds aren't worth the paper they're written on.
- moduspol 4y ago
  It's not about property rights--it's about control of land and resources. Look at this map and tell me how you defend the blue areas against the red ones: https://brilliantmaps.com/2020-county-election-map/ https://brilliantmaps.com/2020-county-election-map/ A civil war isn't "every Republican vs. every Democrat." It'd be rural areas vs. urban ones, and it wouldn't really be a fight. One side has substantially less land, guns, and fighters than the other. It'd be unwinnable.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
There are 120% the number of guns in the US as there are people. Only a great fool would believe they are all in the hands of a group that can't even muster up a popular vote win in a presidential election.
- moduspol 4y ago
  Not all. But the vast majority. And they're the ones that have experience using them, too.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago