Who Would REALLY Win A Civil War?

[@AmberCommentsThings]

It's sad how much it feels people seemingly WANT a civil war, without realizing how horrifically bad of an idea that is

[@matejsk5770]

is it tho?

[@andrewrogers3067]

@@matejsk5770 Please enlighten us on how it wouldn’t be without sounding brain dead

[@josephstalin839]

Right. If people in the USA think the Russo-Ukraine War and Hamas-Israeli War think, especially the latter, it is terrible, cruel, and genocidal. Guess what? What do you think will happen in the US? People will attack others either on racial, ethnic, religious, geopolitical, or just political lines.

[@crusader2112]

@@andrewrogers3067 I think some people are just so bored they want something to happen even something as destructive as a civil war.

[@ibro8855]

​@@crusader2112why would people want mass death in a country that hasn't seen war on it's soil since the 1860s

[@vernonhampton5863]

I was a Marine on embassy duty during the civil war in Angola and during the DROC elections of 2002-03. And was stationed in Jakarta Indonesian the following year. I have to say that an American civil war would be an absolute nightmare in reality. The average American doesn't truly understand what war is, especially if you have to fear your neighbor and don't have clear sides. Also, domestic terrorism would wreck your psyche a lot more than your body. I think there is time to turn around, but anything will help to prevent this horror show.

[@maymay-ci1oi]

Maybe the conservatards should chill the fugg out

[@C.Brown5150]

Amen Brother.. I agree with you 1000%.👍🇺🇲

[@gtrdxz]

Naw its time to clean house.

[@almaadams3631]

​@@gtrdxzDC and the intelligence goons are the problem. Let's not forget the globalist plan: Eliminate 80% of the populous, control every breath the remaining populous takes.

[@vernonhampton5863]

@@gtrdxz so, you want to kill fellow Americans? For what?

[@gregoriancatmonk6904]

Yeah even if there was civil war, there wouldn't be any lines on a map. It would be a insurgency nightmare with nobody truly knowing what side people are on and thats not counting foreign actors who will take advantage of the chaos.

[@rewar5870]

Yep , wouldn't be any lines , be folks out to settle scores in the absence of law , I keep my list in my head 😅😅

[@notusingmyname4791]

nowhere would be safe.. it's not like a few right wingers in a largely leftist community would be granted safe passage out to a right wing location (we saw that with a few "peaceful protests"), and the leftists in a right winger community would refuse to leave without an audience to show how un-reasonably violent the right are being...

[@adamelghalmi9771]

@@rewar5870 not a funny joke mate

[@rewar5870]

@@adamelghalmi9771 Your right it's not funny. But it's also not a joke , that usually happens during internal civil wars. Just look to Bosnia and Serbia , no one wants to admit it , but it's right under the surface of many people. Pray such a thing never happens here again

[@adamelghalmi9771]

@@rewar5870 this is nothing like the bosnian genocide, it's not against ethnic or religious groups. your suggesting commiting a grave act over... well essentially nothing

[@Blurns]

I missed the part where a win condition was actually clarified.

[@Joshua-ps5de]

That's because there won't be a winner.

[@Blurns]

@@Joshua-ps5de How do you know that if you can't even say when a side has won or lost?

[@Joshua-ps5de]

@@Blurns you obviously haven't seen, and I mean really seen, what misery and suffering humans can inflict on each other in war. Because if you have, and you still would like to see this country spiral into that, then I dearly hope with all my agnostic heart, that there is a Hell, and you spent infinite time there.

[@benpressly200]

There couldn’t be a win condition without it being an actual civil war in the real world. This is a hypothetical scenario and he talks about the difference between a civilian uprising and a state secession. Can’t be a win condition without a concrete scenario

[@Blurns]

@@benpressly200 Exactly. And this hypothetical scenario is so vague as to be worthless.

[@FamhairChloiche]

Not Vietnam. Not Afghanistan. Yugoslavia...

[@rodrigosantoscienceros]

Meh.. Realistically "The Troubles" of Northern Ireland. Only radicals are foaming at the mouth for a conflict the other 90% of the population doesn't give a shit. And of those radicals only a few actually have the balls to do anything.

[@artt8381]

Or Northern Ireland

[@livefree223]

Ding ding ding! We have a winner! And who is still the biggest faction? Huwite people. How do most of the actually productive and capable huwite people break?

[@FamhairChloiche]

@@artt8381 How do you think my ancestors got here?!

[@BLFranke]

French Revolution.

[@Peefman-c3f]

I don't care who wins, I just hope both teams have fun.

[@camquest6108]

That’s the spirit!

[@MilwaukeeF40C]

And it is entertaining to watch.

[@maureenjackson2041]

Nothing fun about war

[@edmartin875]

You are an obviously smoking some funny stuff. And the fun will cease when lead comes your way.

[@HammarPwnsYourFace]

@@edmartin875 getting some freedom seeding headed your way, always seems to do that for some reason. Idk what’s with that? Almost like people believe some dumbass shit that has no grounds on reality…. 😂. Edit: this is agreeing w/ you ed. Not. OP. OP is delusional af. If he was messing, he clearly didnt paint the mud picture with enough crayon for me to understand it.

[@flamingtp4947]

Those who wish to be left alone will always lose against those determined to win.

[@EdwardCostigan]

I think wanting to be left alone is the greatest motivation to win. Look at the taliban, Vietnamese, or any other guerilla movement lol

[@emojicaptain7285]

​​@@EdwardCostigan they were determined to win in their own country without foreign interference

[@NikasInParis_777]

They lost those wars idiot​@@EdwardCostigan

[@NikasInParis_777]

​@@EdwardCostiganthe reality is America destroyed those countries even felt by Vietnam to this day Vietnam and Afghanistan are still irrelevant countries and the USA was able to leave after military intervention with literally like no scars physically

[@ulfskinn1458]

​@@EdwardCostiganThe South Vietnamese were really the only ones who just wanted to be "left alone." The North Vietnamese and Viet Cong's goal was always to conquer the south and united Vietnam under Marxism. Not to mention the fact that, within one decade of taking over, the Communist government had invaded literally every single one of its neighbors except China.

[@slolerner7349]

I laughed out loud when you said "They'll be welcomed as Heroes and Liberators" That trick Never works!

[@SusCalvin]

In the world of insurgency finances, military control of an area means you can tax it. Even if it's a border crossing in Afghanistan. IRA and Union groups ran effectively a protection racket.

[@ZeroDim]

Lets be honest American armed forces are Loyal to America not just a singular party if a civil war happens whomever starts the conflict will be the loser

[@randlebrowne2048]

That would depend on the exact cause of the conflict. If it starts because the federal government is ignoring the Constitution, the military's oath requires them to help take down the federal government. The big question is how many in the military believe that the federal government has become an enemy of the Constitution that they swore to defend.

[@joedatius]

​@@randlebrowne2048 The military isn't going to attack its own government because somebody told them that [insert Politian here] is being unconstitutional. if they did then it would of happened a long time ago. the us military cares more about geopolitics then it does anything else.

[@randlebrowne2048]

@@joedatius The individual soldiers have eyes and will decide for themselves. There is a reason why so many are choosing not to reenlist or even join the military in the first place.

[@joedatius]

@@randlebrowne2048 what the fuck are you talking about.

[@Jakrr1346]

Wrong. Colonialists started the revolutionary War, which was a civil war that resulted in a new nation so its a revolutionary war, but anyways, they declared war and made the USA. To say whoever starts it loses is nit true at all and is just a cringe saying to create a stalemate between people who would be willing to fight. Lol you don't live in a movie and that doesn't have any ground in reality

[@WyoSavage1976]

The simple answer is there would be no winners.

[@Grubnar]

This should be the top comment! It is not a question of who "wins", but who will lose less.

[@rontamburrini8968]

All the other major powers would be the winners.

[@aaronbaker2186]

A serious US civil war means 60 million refugees.

[@hobbit321a]

Thats so correct even aa declared winner would have nothing to rule as china and Russia and all of those supporting countries would use this time to take over America most communications products and manufacturers would be gone and most of America would be working on food production and power production while a broke government would be struggling to pay its people with worthless paper and trying not to be taken over by any country with a bank account 😮😮

[@semarugaijin9451]

Ohhh, no, there will absolutely be a winner. The left will control everything and fast-track us to living in pods and eating bugs.

[@bringerofword4644]

We’ve reached a point where there is no compromise on a lot of political issues. Abortion, guns, immigration etc. the goals are so far apart there is no middle ground.

[@bringerofword4644]

@@scottanos9981 I think that seems plausible, I also think low intensity fighting, insurgency type stuff. A lot of disenfranchised young men out there.

[@ConstantinedeBurgh]

Empowering State rights, or even County rights would solve a lot of that anger but the left just won't allow any area, anywhere in the country no matter how remote be different

[@flyingmonkeydeathsquadronc968]

The real issue is the left is overplaying it's hands to the point its turning into corrupt institutions vs the people, as many lefties are beginning to realize the insanity of their party. immigration is starting to sway the leftist vote and some lefties are waking up to the gun control issue

[@alehaim]

@@bringerofword4644 they have the right to vote, they are free to get a job as long as the economy has them, how are they disenfranchised?

[@bringerofword4644]

@@alehaim there is much more to life than working and paying taxes…

[@Pug351]

Truth is neither side would want to be away from screen time or junk food long enough to fight any war. America is already dead. Left vs right is merely a distraction. The government is owned and operated as a front for multinationals and global corporations.

[@thndr_5468]

Yeah they make us fat so they don't have to take our guns. Just distract, fatten and addict Americans

[@EEE-1409]

It really feels that way sometimes...

[@aceman0000099]

Yeah like see how the transition of Hong Kong from British to Chinese a few years back resulted in a few riots and then nothing since

[@rc8770]

Nailed it. It’s best to hide in a hole and try to wait it out if civil war broke out. It would be like Syrian “ civil war” three to five major groups with different goals and foreign support fighting among themselves with local war lords going back and forth as it suits them.

[@mustbtrouble]

Yup. But hey my taxes are lower at least. 😉

[@MrOoYT]

This is the angriest I’ve ever heard Mr Z… it caught me off guard

[@kartersith]

Me too

[@ebrimajallow9631]

I mean when people talk about your country burning in civil war and act like it can actually happens you get MAD

[@HELLO7657]

@@ebrimajallow9631 It will happen no matter eventually how much you want it or not. This is simply what happens when you bring in people with irreconcilable existential interests and there is no racially oppressive system to keep one of the sides down and powerless.

[@moledaddy]

He thinks the left is more monolithic than they ate. After 5 years of guerilla warfare the coastal states would get sick of war.

[@somehowstillhere8766]

@@HELLO7657 that and when the system will have decreasing prosperity as time goes on, especially as the ratio or retirees to working people increases.

[@enochbooher6509]

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." - George W. Bush

[@mikebane2866]

Yes, the patriot militia movement are a retarded bunch of alien homosexuals

[@eddiemilne4989]

Hilarious gaffe !..My favourite of his is "The problem with the French is that they have no word for entrepreur"..Makes me realise a senile US president is less of an issue than a stupid one..

[@praavahsebanao4984]

​@eddiemilne4989 are you kidding?🤦🏽‍♂️😅 We have both and he's the worst yet😂

[@TheCriminalViolin]

@@eddiemilne4989 Joe is infinitely worse, and George's stupidity was and is constantly proven to have been a complete persona and act. George is far from a stupid country boy like they had him portray. Joe is blatantly legit, and genuinely senile. There's no real comparing other than the gaffing, which George's were always fucking hilarious, while Joe's are exclusively agonizing.

[@righthandman5000]

​@@praavahsebanao4984 nah.

[@tmac9208]

Dude; the "foreign" interest are already spending billions to "support" the cause of "isms". Destabilization is the goal and they are winning.

[@NintendoDude360]

We talking about Russia and possibly isreal?

[@tokivikerness8863]

Iarael... calm down Hitler.

[@matthewadkins7973]

@@NintendoDude360 WEF

[@WarPigstheHun]

​@@NintendoDude360meanwhile Russia is just a shthole country.

[@domi69ify]

​@@NintendoDude360 Israel... Because the US is all that's standing in their way of global domination? I don't think they want the collapse of the US. At least you got Russia correct.

[@travisgale5558]

Blue states are not blue states.They're blue cities. The states are usually red

[@davidzwisohn5478]

Not only wrong in quite a number of blue states (California, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Delaware, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire), but in all other blue states, the population of the cities DWARFS the rest of the state’s minuscule population. Excluding blue city populations from a state’s color “designation” is a classic dehumanizing tactic of those like you on the “right”, who don’t consider blue city populations, “human beings”, and only consider the people in lower population, rural areas “real Americans”. We’ve never thought of ourselves as the “real Americans”, while considering YOU, something else We didn’t start this war of hate, YOUR side did … But because of YOUR thinking, our side, regrettably, has begun to consider YOURS, as un-American, and quite honestly, disposable trash … BTW, you underestimate our willingness to prepare ourselves. Just because we know the 2A wasn’t intended for “unrestricted gun ownership”, doesn’t mean we won’t be ready. We’ll take advantage of it. Your side may have a head start, but we’re smarter than you, will quickly catch up, and gain the advantage. It’s NOT exclusively YOUR country … it’s OURS too … Get fucking used to it …

[@gregmccarter2176]

Yep..

[@duaneb21]

There's a lot of blue sprinkled in those red states, too.

[@jaybe9627]

“Oh no, how dare the biggest population have a say in a state!”

[@fishgurusince1985]

Blue cities can’t run without the rest of the state being shackled by slavery.

[@leeames9063]

12:42 In the army, most in combat arms lean conservative while those in support roles ie: Signal Corps, lean progressive. At least from my actual experience serving in the Army for 24 years and going from Artillery to SATCOM.

[@itsawoodchuck4330]

The closer to the tip of the spear you get the more right wing you get by exponential margin. He doesn’t consider this at all. Most people in the military are logistics in one form or another, the people who actually do the fighting are nearly all conservative.

[@markpukey8]

I'm genuinely curious. I hope you'll give me an honest answer. As a combat soldier... did you give a rats ass if someone got an abortion? Did you care one bit whether someone NOT IN YOUR TEAM decided they were gay? Or wanted to get married? Did you have black troops with you that you trusted? Did you care if they thought reparations were owed to them as long as they did their job well? How about Hispanics with family still in Mexico wanting to come improve their lives? The basic idea of conservative is "don't fix what isn't broken". It's gradual change versus rapid change. It's not MAKE AMERICA NINETEEN FIFTY! And it's not MAGA for most Republicans or right wing feeling Americans. And even conservatives love them some internet. And cell phones. And combat communications systems that would make Eisenhower cream his jeans in jealousy (If Ike wore jeans, which I doubt). All the changes that make life better than it was 70 years ago. And progressivism is basically being willing to break what isn't broken in search of a better solution than the one we have. It's not radical. It's just faster change. Basically, do you really see "the left" as some existential threat that requires a civil war? Or just different preferences that want to lead to a better America for all of us? I never saw "the right" as an existential threat. But I do see MAGA as an existential threat. Even the Tea Party and their bizarre resistance to Obama were not dangerous. MAGA is, because it wants to replace our system of government with an authoritarian one. I'd be interested in hearing your take on this.

[@sokyoutdoors588]

@@markpukey8The idea behind MAGA is not to return to some other crusty time. It’s simply make your living keep more of your money and keep big government out of the way. A lot of what the progressives are pushing is straight up communism and true Americans don’t want it!

[@dinadaughtry8993]

@@markpukey8 you have it backwards, it's the progressives that are authoritarian and rooted in racism and the maga ideology is simply the desire for a smaller government with less power for the all the three letter agencies and more power for the people, to actually have a government that is limited by the constitution, and to have Representatives instead of so called leaders, really not a huge fan of Trump but he would be much much better than biden that wants control of every aspect of our lives, how we cook, what we drive, where we live,etc.

[@johnjay1147]

@@markpukey8everything you said makes you a threat to my children.

[@RhubarbEnjoyer]

Democratic politicians: "I hate you!" Republican politicians: "I hate you too!" DP: "Anyway wanna get some coffee?" RP: "Sure" Edit: I don't want political comments, so here's a cornbread recipe to distract you Ingredients: 1 cup of all-purpose flour 1 cup of cornmeal (you can also use fine-ground cornmeal) 3 tablespoons of sugar (optional) 2 teaspoons of baking powder 1 teaspoon of kosher salt 1/4 cup of vegetable oil 1 whole egg (beaten) 1 cup of milk Instructions: Preheat your oven to 400 degrees F (200 degrees C). Grease an 8x8 inch baking dish. In a large mixing bowl, whisk together the flour, cornmeal, sugar, baking powder, and salt. Make a well in the middle of the dry ingredients and add in the vegetable oil, egg, and milk. Mix well with a wooden spoon until the batter is smooth and consistent. Pour the batter into the greased baking dish. Bake for 20 to 25 minutes, or until a toothpick inserted in the center comes out clean.

[@MonsieurDean]

It's true, the politicians aren't as polarized as the public is. Most of them might as well share the same bed.

[@BLFranke]

The sad part is the 98% re-election rate of our politicians. It’s almost if Americans want the derp.

[@nathanlevesque7812]

The only politicians going from 'I hate you' to 'let's have coffee' that I've seen documented are Republican.

[@RhubarbEnjoyer]

​@@MonsieurDeanWe really need a more centrist president to help fill the gap Too bad that'd be harder to do than building a fusion reactor with a budget of 10 bucks

[@ianleary5780]

@@nathanlevesque7812 Doesn't that depend on who is doing the documenting and who their target audience is?

[@nathanialblock8480]

So when are you and whatifalthist gonna debate this topic?

[@codysparks1454]

I’d love to see that lmao

[@neondystopian]

There's nothing really to debate. Althist simply acknowledges that a revolution is coming. Z tells us why it won't work. They are both observations and not arguments.

[@lucabrazzi45]

No offense to what if he thinks the cops and military would back the right Which throughout history we know isn't true

[@Cooldude-ko7ps]

It would be very interesting to see

[@neondystopian]

I don't think they would have that much to debate on, really. Althist claims the revolution is coming but doesn't really argue that it _should_ happen, only that it _will_ happen. Z points out why it will fail.

[@gun00b]

I desperately wish to be left alone. Authoritarianism is a blight that somehow keeps being permitted to permeate our society. Really just so fucking tired now.

[@Thorgon-Cross]

It permeates because "I desperately wish to be left alone" has replaced " I will do what is right".

[@jobloluther]

you are weak, and stupid

[@patrickm6012]

@@Thorgon-Crossit permeates because of too much social media.

[@rodicow3491]

Yeah it kinda sucked the that group of asswads trying to ban books and assert central authority over media creation companies, don't they?

[@ridemywheelie]

Agreed but the Democrats are authoritarians. They take more money and give it to foreign governments, force experimental vaccines, forbid you from going to work due to medical emergencies, talk of banning gas stoves and cars, jail political opponents, lawyers, and journalists, and censor opposition.

[@TheNightWatcher1385]

I’ve dealt with a lot of these attitudes from fellow conservatives. It takes more than guns to win a war. It takes logistics, planning, resources, and leadership.

[@TheNightWatcher1385]

@@marianmoses9604 Who are you even talking to?

[@JohnDorian-j7x]

Conservatives will find that without microchips that all their fancy military equipment, communications networks, power grid networks, vehicles, walmart logistics, amazon deliveries, and gas station/convenience store shelves will rapidly disappear and fall into chaos and disrepair. People really have no idea how stupid of an idea "civil war" or "rebellion" or anything else is in the US. What you need to ask such people is this: would a war result in being "better off" or "worse off"? If they're even remotely honest with themselves... the answer is obvious. And the time it would take post-war just to arrive back at baseline would take a minimum of a decade to return to. Its literally just fantasy... fantasy stories that boring people in a boring world with rote meaningless jobs, lives, and opportunities conjure up just to give their boring minds something to be entertained with. Its stupid, but I'm one of them too, lol.

[@gwils7879]

@@marianmoses9604 This is why you're going to lose the war of ideas, and a civil war if it occurs. Too obsessed with limiting the liberties of people you see as subhuman, while not realizing those people know you're their enemy, and own guns as well. You've all made it very clear where you stand. Underestimate everyone you see as a subhuman, and find out what happens.

[@MilwaukeeF40C]

gwils7879 Liberty is not forcing others to accept. Liberty is what you can do without anyone else having to do anything.

[@unclescipio3136]

And brains. Of which there is a serious dearth on the right.

[@benjaminpendleton7797]

Given the truly horrific crimes that were committed during the French and Indian War, the Revolutionary War, the Civil War and the western Indian wars, anyone Right or Left who thinks that they're going to get out of another war unscathed is ignorant of history and flat out delusional.

[@TylerDurden-pk5km]

I think nobody starts a insurrection or civil war, because they think they will get out "unscathed". You go into such a war, because you value certain ideological goals (political, ideological, religious, ethnic, racial, etc.) higher than our immediate well being and security. It is sacrifice for future and posterity - not immediate personal gratification and advantage. The alternative variant is elites simply forcing or paying people to fight, supported by agitation propaganda (agitprop).

[@MegaLokopo]

One way or another a us civil war would go nuclear no quickly. And to be clear it wouldn't be one side nuking another. It would be sabotage or a country like china or russia, once our already disfunctional government has torn itself apart so much we can't actually fire nuclear weapons.

[@playinglifeoneasy9226]

To see a modern analog, just look at Syria.

[@TylerDurden-pk5km]

To "get out unscathed" is likely not the question one would ask, if one intends to start any kind of war. The question would be: From the options and circumstances I have got - is war the best one. And "best one" is a relative criteria - is must not even mean: A good one. Also: The plan would not be, so get away unscathed .- but that your enemy will be scathed much more severely than yourself.

[@benjaminpendleton7797]

@@playinglifeoneasy9226 Yes, exactly. A nightmare.

[@familygene9030]

The electrical grid is held up by 120 million rickety wooden poles in a land with 10 million chainsaws . This is the new dark ages for everyone .

[@KaosNova2]

Yeah but whomever cuts the power is evil and a terrorist

[@KaosNova2]

But there is a point that accidents could happen and the infrastructure is rotting

[@altrag]

The grid is pretty resilient to losing a few poles - it's built to withstand "normal" events like treefall, even hurricanes and tornados in prone areas. It's even pretty resilient to losing a transformer here and there. It's when you get up to the level of substations that things start to get troublesome - single facilities that act as a point of failure for large amounts of load suddenly going offline is difficult for the power grid to respond to. Situations like that cause near-immediate and extremely large spikes which can damage equipment so most of the equipment is designed with fail-safes to shut themselves down. But that upsets the rest of the grid even further and the next one down the line shuts off, cascading until basically everything is offline and you need to try and do a black start (very difficult) to get things going again. That said, even those situations are better accounted for after the 2003 blackout in the northeast US and Quebec, and ERCOT in Texas seems to finally be taking their job seriously after the 2021 winter storm, judging by the fact that there wasn't a "crisis" level event in 2022 or 2023 despite similarly severe winters. There were problems of course - even us northerners have power problems during winter storms - but those problems didn't escalate like they did in 2021. I'm not saying it would be impossible to take down the grid with enough knowledge about how it works. I just don't see it falling down over due to a few people cutting down a few poles. And I certainly don't expect there to be 10 million chainsaws involved - cutting off the power grid cuts it off for everybody. Russia could safely bomb Ukraine's infrastructure because it was entirely separate from their own. The American power grid is not conveniently divided like that. If it goes down, it goes down for everybody.

[@KaosNova2]

@@altrag There were the assholes that shot out power substations in the USA with rifles and haven’t been caught

[@seronymus]

​@@altragso do you mean that there will be total chaos or no?

[@BurnRoddy]

Instead of experiencing a civil war I think America is heading towards a raw livid experience. People have never been this rude yet entitled before.

[@loganrogers4560]

Trump 2024

[@joshua511]

America has a since of depravity that only starvation will cure. I hope things get better soon but I'm not optimistic.

[@aaronarmstead2902]

Yes they have. Victims feel less unsafe speaking out about it and the internet has made everything much more visible. Hell, the most entitled are the boomer Karens and they didn't suddenly become that way.

[@arcadiaberger9204]

What do you mean by "a raw livid experience"? A spanking?

[@trickywoo5165]

@@joshua511sense lol sorry

[@chaddog313]

In a civil war, its not the regular military that is most concerning. The regular service men and women are not super radical about left or right. Its the armed federal agencies that any rebel faction would have to focus on.

[@mrvwbug4423]

Depending on the scale of the rebellion, the military may not need to get directly involved aside from protecting military installations. A small scale guerilla type conflict of mostly mass shootings and terror attacks would mostly be dealt with by law enforcement in the US.

[@NeostormXLMAX]

some airman burned himself alive to protest us support of israel, this man is kinda deluded, if a civil war breaks out, the "leftists" will join the republicans against the neo liberals, don't confused leftists with liberals

[@Migwelp]

@@mrvwbug4423 Yeah, that would go terribly. You seen how hard it is to hire cops these days? Every city in America is understaffed. Here in Texas, some guy drove a semi through a police station earlier today. 1 dead, 12 injured. You want to join that? I've got buddies that are LEOs in different cities and the morale appears abysmal everywhere. You can forget about local or state law enforcement "dealing" with anything. The attrition would be immense and happen overnight. Remember that "summer of love" we had in 2020? They had to send feds in to stop the looting/arson. And that was mainly for liberals and minorities, which some might argue police aren't very sympathetic towards lol. Step into a police station...no one is going to lay down their lives to stop a guerilla conflict. edit: side note: this video severely downplays the faction that provide muscle for police and military. Those are relatively small groups of door-kickers and they are not liberals-not even within the federal agencies. Same with the factions at play in the logistics of keeping the country running/building/etc. Labor is still conservative. This hypothetical conflict would be like the Balkans. The video is good, but ignores the influence of some very small human elements.

[@ghostsniperable353]

I don’t think you served or understand reality. Most of the military is conservative and libertarian, there are many in the military who will pick a side. Also most troops will abandoned their posts to be with their families. No one is loyal to Biden, they just hate Trump. The left can’t take on the right in war.

[@MegaLokopo]

The us does not have a method of deploying federal troops for war on us soil, if they tried that the government itself would rip itself apart. It is the local police that you would need to worry about not federal troops or agents.

[@coryromonosky1344]

At one point in the video the narrator says most military members have careers and families and this will tend to deter them from supporting an uprising. What I don’t think he considers is how few men below thirty are even in a relationship now much less one that will foster the creation of a family. I think that sense of hopelessness is what could drive young disenfranchised men to rebel in large numbers.

[@magicblanket2414]

I do agree with you, but also this video, and here's why. This video entertains the idea of a Right vs. Left civil war (an idea entertained by the Right) and thus has to address the matter in terms of assuming that each of those sides will remain intact and coherent. I agree that there will be psychological turmoil amongst many in the military in absolute numbers (whether this forms a majority or a minority). But I contend that "Left" and "Right" in the USA are artifical voting blocs cultivated by the two parties, their respective allied media and donors playing both sides. The largest outcome of a "Rightist" rebellion against a "Leftist" government, IMO, would the entropy of Right vs. Left as coherent distinctions.

[@ibnkhaldoun4319]

that IS a good point.

[@medusagorgo5146]

You people have never served in the military, because if you had, you’d know that men and women in the military marry at a much younger age, if for no other reason than to get out of barracks. I’ve seen it a thousand times, I’ve tried to talk to my soldiers about it but they don’t ever listen, because they’re “in love” with the barracks hoe and or stripper. By the way, the military is a microcosm of society as a whole, there are plenty of left leaning people serving. That’s what happens when you meet and interact with people from other places, you grow and mature when you are confronted with new situations and cultures.

[@markpukey8]

They have parents. They have siblings. They have cousins. THOSE are the families that matter to unmarried folks without kids. They are NOT alone in the world.

[@domi69ify]

LMAO. 90% of the adults younger than 30 are completely inept in life... Gen Z is a sad joke.

[@streetcarp475]

Wisconsin is far from Left Loyal! Milwaukee and Madison might be ..but the other 95% of the state is NOT

[@Mire-Drive]

Wisconsin is nearly perfectly tied for democrat and republican votes. So that would be other 50%.

[@streetcarp475]

@@Mire-Drive bullshit

[@opposition654]

@@streetcarp475 95% of the state isn't 95% of the population. Those two cities can become strongholds of canadian aid.

[@streetcarp475]

@@opposition654 it's pathetic

[@opposition654]

@@streetcarp475 what?

[@SevereWeatherCenter]

Also, the Civil War movie isn’t right versus left. It’s a dictatorship versus the American people.

[@carlosramirezmaldonado2258]

That is exactly what right vs. left is. Democrats are socialists. Socialism is communism.

[@jhpstudios8107]

Unfortunately, we are very, very close to that if you know who gets elected, and I'm not talking about the 81 year old man.

[@leftistsarenotpeople]

@@jhpstudios8107 People who truly believe that are far, FAR beyond delusional, you are just plain... EVIL!

[@flores4074]

Kind of.. there's plenty of quick, one-off mentions of other groups entrenched in the war and it's made clear that the only thing uniting them was their hate towards the federal government. The Western Front seems to be the strongest and apolitical faction, but there remains mention of "Portland Maoists" "The Florida Alliance" and we see various militias that presumably have, or had at some point, differing goals from other factions. As Sammy puts it: "All these groups will probably go right into killing each other the second D.C falls"

[@Datan0de]

​@@leftistsarenotpeopleImagine being so shallow, so singularly focused on us-vs-them tribalism, having bought so completely into propaganda with your identity so deeply entwined with demonizing half of your own country that the very name of your KZbin account is an attempt to dehumanize your fellow countrymen. I pity you. The world must look like a terrifying place through the lens of your dementia.

[@joelm959]

It's sad, and kind of scary, how much people wrap their identity around being "right" or "left".

[@maymay-ci1oi]

My identity is just not being a dick to people because they are gay, female, of a nonwhite origin, or trans. Imagine getting mad at pronouns. I'm suprised that this is political, that human decency is political.

[@daniel4412]

⁠@@maymay-ci1oiOh give me a break, here’s what we are upset about. - Biological men in women’s sports - Biological men in women’s prisons. - Transitioning of children (there’s a reason the European countries who got a head start on us are now putting a stop to it) - Making laws around words (pronouns). We’ll call you whatever the hell you want so long as it’s not fox/foxself or something completely delusional. Just don’t force us to legally, that’s exactly the kind of law the state would love to open the floodgates for. So no honey, if you’re gay, trans, or some other third thing, we don’t give a shit at all.

[@gravital2257]

​@@maymay-ci1oiyour moral grandstanding is exactly the problem described by the comment you are responding to

[@squared4440]

ikr, literally as long as you are not a d!ck to me i wont be a d!ck to you. why people cant just do that is dumbfounding me

[@DSVlad]

I think the biggest mistake one could make is presuming a conflict would be right vs left, it would imo look more like neighborhood vs neighborhood

[@elijahbutterfield4869]

Many civil wars around the world see a few dozen factions that more or less align themselves into position as time moves on But us Americans are stupid enough to think that every civil war will be states vs states like the first US civil war.

[@joshpatton757]

@@elijahbutterfield4869 And even that is an oversimplification for the history-books, as opposed to the truth. In the civil War, my own state we could draw the line between North and South down one particular street, where those to the north generally supported the union (and the state militia too), but those to the south largely supported the confederacy (albeit more monetarily and with material support than manpower, with some exceptions)

[@maymay-ci1oi]

House vs house. And with a gender division.

[@floriangeyer3454]

@@joshpatton757 Maryland?

[@storbokki371]

There will be no civil war. At most we will see violent right-wing domestic terrorism and the US Government responding to it. For all their bluster, the far-right doesn't have an army. And cities are the hubs from which all jobs, money and food flows. Rural America would be jobless, moneyless and have crops rotting with nowhere to sell it if they try to cut off cities. They are practically already this way now. The cities would simply fly food in.

[@daniel4412]

Who the hell does this guy think controls the food?

[@adamelghalmi9771]

... the government? we export a ton from our friends in latin america and asia

[@stephenaspenberg3173]

Not to sound like a communist but the possibility of a civil war may be predicated on the division based on class not politics. As things are moving we see right and left working class recognizing the fact that neo liberalism is driven by the 1% against the working class

[@Alexadria205]

The thing is there are politicians both on the right and the left that act populist and claim to be anti-establishment but then turn around and screw the 99% anyway and just work to enrich themselves and their friends. Trump is the most glaring example.

[@lukeyznaga7627]

one of the most important comments on this page. Stephen is correct!

[@benjaminlathem2745]

Well said.

[@TylerDurden-pk5km]

Is there still such a thing as a left working class? Hasn't the left elite moved on from the working class to the pervert class, blacks and foreigners as power base?

[@MilwaukeeF40C]

Neo liberalism being corporatist "progressivism".

[@_Devil]

It's usually the most radical faction that wins civil wars. The Soviet's won their civil war because they were so hellbent on dissolving and erasing Russian society/history that they just straight up shot everyone they came across that wasn't on their side. The downfall of American Conservativism is that it's too passive and hesitant to do anything. We Conserve. That's it. We don't conquer like the Left does, so any civil war scenario would have us be on the defensive and it would only be a matter of time before we lose. The only thing that could change that is International support, but I don't foresee many of our Allies not supporting the Federal Government in fear of post-war retaliation. Edit: I'm like 5 minutes in and MZ already said everything I did lmfao

[@renotv3860]

Yeah, but that's only true with old guard Republicans and neocons. Young conservatives are a lot more radical and bloodthirsty, and wars are fought by the young.

[@Paul__Allen]

How does the left conquer?

[@rangda_prime]

The Soviets also won because they, like the Chinese Communist party managed to get a large portion of the peasantry on their side. While their escatological ideology played some part in their popularity, their main selling point was land reform, which for some odd reason sounded wildly attractive to a nation of serfs. Of course, they lied about this and merely ended up centralising land ownership even more effectively than the previous dynasty.

[@ProLifePatriot]

​@@Paul__Allensteal, bribe us force and many more

[@lmvr127]

@@Paul__Allen by not being as compromising or docile as Conservatives, besides January 6th (even then that was the Feds) when have the right ever took to the streets for ANYTHING

[@josephmills9247]

As some one in law enforcement I can tell you in event of an actual insurrection or civil war cities will be utter chaos we can barley hold control now. iam in Los Angeles and with any minor event we would need the immediate intervention and assistance of federal law enforcement and resources. Now imaging that problem nationwide you have far to much confidence in the abilities and competency of the government. I am not saying this opens the door for either side to win politics aside LA alone would have major supply chain issues if we just lost the 15 freeway. With the left tearing up cities and the right insurgencies I see no clear winner and the idea that the military wouldn't fragment like every civil war in history is absurd no one side will control the full military it will split. And last but not least gangs and criminal organizations don't give a shit about right or left they will run the cities the pretty much already do we won't be able to hold order in all the chaos.

[@randlebrowne2048]

Even just *rumors* of a food/water shortage would send most major cities into chaos! Actual supply shortages would turn most major cities into something *worse* than most zombie apocalypse movies! Supply lines, and infrastructure, are extremely vulnerable as it is. The only reason they haven't already collapsed is that most people aren't (yet) angry enough to actually target them! As for the military.... they will likely be paralyzed by divided loyalties (of both leadership and rank-and-file) and either become combat ineffective and stay neutral, or they with split up (likely along state loyalty) and fight each other. National Guard (and State Guard) units would likely side with their states in non-swing states. Those troops in states that are divided would likely desert and go home to defend their families.

[@terrycook5248]

absolutely.

[@TylerDurden-pk5km]

More realistic view how it would work out, than the video.

[@DeathoftheWest]

Youre right. I mean usually in history majority of the military allies with the rulling power put of fear but it is never 100%

[@MilwaukeeF40C]

The military depends on civilian support and supply chains. Look at how many white collar contractors had to be sent with all the high tech gear to Ukraine.

[@samhiltz1107]

Lost me at the point where the American public was supposed to take the Media seriously in a civil war. Just...no. No.

[@guillermoelnino]

Thats the thing. Lef tists always believe only fools distrust the media that demonizes over half thr country

[@creeper326.]

Idk man. The truth is hard to come by if you're not ready to look for it. Plus, it would be more highlighting and exaggerating the mistakes of the opposition, causing them to look like a terrorist group with no reason to adhere to. Even if the average person is distrustful of the news at best, people will still subconsciously think bad about what they see. I'm not trying to undermine you or anything like that, I'm pointing out that the media has a habit of changing the view of the average person. It's more like propaganda but people don't know it's propaganda. Think of plane crashes and car crashes, most people who have a fear of flying don't fear driving. The chances of getting in a car crash is much higher than getting in a plane crash but the media highlights plane crashes so much, that it causes a subconscious fear to spread. I'm honestly not trying to get political, I'm just sharing what I think is good information to think about. God bless you and have a good day.

[@Barnie-pi7mk]

To be honest I hate thinking about it. And the shitty movie about it that came out about this topic doesn’t help. Also with ur Afghanistan and Vietnam examples and the vets I’ve talked to about their experiences in those conflicts the Afghanistan war vets genuinely believe that we should’ve withdrawn from Afghanistan after we killed bin Laden thus avenging those who died in the 9/11 attacks. As with the Vietnam vets while they don’t blame the military but the politics which surrounded the war

[@tandava-089]

Tbh most soldiers, while having a unique perspective, arent really the kinds of people to really have a strong or unbiased understanding of.... really anything, except discipline, following orders, murder, death, and war

[@EEE-pv2eo]

The issue with Vietnam is we were seeking an unobtainable goal. We expected a group of people who wanted to be unified to stay split indefinitely. North Vietnam was going to attack into and probe the South as long as it it existed The United States did not invade the North out of fear of another Vietnam. However if we did, we would have more than likely won, or at worst probably had a stalemate like Korea

[@Barnie-pi7mk]

@@EEE-pv2eo fair

[@duncanharrell5009]

@@EEE-pv2eo You mean another Korea.

[@AL-lh2ht]

@@tandava-089 dude no one thinks Afghanistan was not a shitshow for aa decade+

[@bjmccann1]

I don't anticipate a civil war along the lines of 1861-1865, but rather acts of terror performed by either lone actors or small cells. The 19th century lacked the electronic warfare and intelligence apparatuses that currently exist. For example, even during the Civil Rights movement of the '60s and '70s, it was joked that during any meeting of three activists, that one was a police informant, and another was in the employment of the FBI. The same holds true today, any serious group has already been infiltrated. Also, keep in mind that any form of electronic communication would be monitored.

[@patriotamerican3426]

It would look like the combative tactics of the Irish War of Independence combined with 5th Generational Warfare tactics such as hacking into both civilian and military assets by small brigades consisting of maybe 50 to 70 men and women along with any of their family that aren’t of age to fight or are too old to fight

[@_-.-_-_.._--.-_-_----_-.--_._-]

Revert to the old ways of communication in partisan warfare, though this is something of a skill and most will either not know how to do so effectively, or will refuse to learn it.

[@bjmccann1]

@@_-.-_-_.._--.-_-_----_-.--_._- Not only is what you said true, but it should also be considered that the people sending the messages will be going up against professionals who do cryptography, spycraft, and counter insurgency full time.

[@gandalfthebraindoc2618]

I strongly agree with your 1st sentence. Terror performed by lone actors or small groups. These states aren’t going to secede just because 50-60% of their population voted for Trump and he lost. I think this whole civil war talk is nuts. But must be prepared I guess.

[@tanakritgutzlapcharoen9457]

A coup if things get worse

[@MegrelMamba]

True arguments. If one conservative faction went to rebel, other conservatives would be too unwilling to militarily back them. Then that rebellion would fizzle out.

[@x3dominator28]

I think you underestimate the hatred these people have for leftists.

[@NeostormXLMAX]

12:57 this isn't true btw. my hypothesis is that the left will actually join the right against the liberals, what you people don't understand, is that like the recent airforce airman who burned himself alive, there is a HUGE growing faction of "socialists" with people like hassan and the younger generation hating the "liberals" so basically it would be the neo liberals vs both the republicans AND the left socialists. biden supports israel, and that alone he lost half of the left

[@SisckoImper]

@@x3dominator28 Even if it's their own sons/daughters, sisters/brothers?

[@matte2269]

​@WorldWarRepoterAnd as soon as they create a stronghold, it's now a target. Good luck making it shell/missile proof

[@BigTomInTheBasement]

I think it would take something way bigger than the division or feelings that currently exist to kick off a serious conflict. We're not there yet. Maybe the DC government doing something truly horrible would create a unified cause.

[@graye2799]

Civil war may be unlikely, but what could actually happen is something like the collapse of rome.

[@SusCalvin]

The Italian state did not collapse under the Years of Lead. Germans largely supported the repression of the Rote Armee-Fraktione.

[@FazeParticles]

civil war is not happening but revolution will if the right wing adopts Hamilton's and Jefferson's ideology together to replace the current regime then they can argue what type of executive they want to have. a short term or long term stint.

[@lukeyznaga7627]

No, it would be like Fallout 4- different warring factions

[@adamelghalmi9771]

@@lukeyznaga7627 well we'd have to have nuclear fallout first, no? you underestimate the US military my friend. half a million in the military are worth 50 million armed civillians

[@danpierce8862]

I actually think after this election there will be multiple parties running. Im talking like 5 or 6 different political parties.

[@Gamma-ic8oc]

As a conservative, I believe you're correct on a lot of points, especially the "Leave us alone" stance. Conservatives don't want violence, but the reason many are peacocking about violent resistance is because administration (usually left, but right wing politicians have been known to assist) is choking them under bureaucracy. The AMISH have openly started supporting conservatism in an effort to push back against hostile regulations, and they rarely get involved in "English" matters. The main reason, I believe, for conservative prepping is because they're imagining a situation like the South African farm attacks especially after, several years ago, rioters were threatening to "come for rural America next".

[@jacksmith-vs4ct]

one problem the south african farm attacks thing was grossly overstated by racists

[@thetapheonix]

@@jacksmith-vs4ctIt wasn’t over stated. Simple fact is white people are hated in South Africa.

[@alex52043]

@@jacksmith-vs4ct The real problem is that bringing up something bad that a minority does gets you labelled a liar and a racist.

[@techzone1552]

@@jacksmith-vs4ct Quite the opposite; not talked about nearly enough. It's just as bad when it happened to other races decades and centuries ago, but no one cares because the victims aren't the right skin color.

[@lazylightning1197]

Being a racist gets you labeled as a racist.

[@benjamingrist6539]

I agree that many on the Right is far too confident and hasn’t fully thought through the consequences of war. However, there are a few points you haven’t taken into consideration: 1) You don’t take into account how a Second Civil War would affect the global economy. The war would extremely weaken or even crash the US dollar. Since nearly all currencies around the world are pegged to the USD, the war would cause a global depression, particularly if the war had a dramatic, violent start. The rest of nations of the world would be so concerned with stabilizing their own nations that they wouldn’t be paying much attention to the US. When they finally do create a stable currency not backed by USD and have secured their borders without the American military, why would they bother sending aid to the US which no longer effects them? 2) You wouldn’t have to see mass defection among the military in order for it not to be a threat to the Right. A handful of individuals defecting from any given military unit would effectively neutralize it. A couple members of a battery crew leaving a ship makes it much harder or even impossible for it to fire it’s guns. A mechanic or pilot leaving his airbase would drastically decrease the number of sorties that squadron can fly. A single quartermaster blowing up a supply dump deprives a whole regiment of the fuel, food, and ammo needed to wage war. A lone intelligence officer or radio operator running off with a code book leaves military communications completely compromised. On top of that, each of those positions takes months to train a replacement for. With the military already having recruitment problems, it simply won’t be able to replace or cope with the loss of those handful of men. 3) You seem to think the Left is some united block. It isn’t. Granted, it’s more unified that the right, but it has serious cracks that are only getting worse. The split between the LGBs and Ts, between blacks and immigrants, between Muslims and atheists/liberal Christians, etc. That’s not even taking into account the growing power of the populist left. Should war come and especially if the war drags on for a few years, you’d see these cracks only widen and see the left begin to tear itself apart. All that being said, I agree that we should try to avoid a civil war. Whenever the topic of civil war comes up among my friends, I warn them that it won’t be pleasant and will not be the easy victory they think it is. Reform of existing instructions in the country is hands down the best option.

[@anonymousanon6913]

The left is unified in their hatred of White people, most people on the right can't even admit White people have any political interests. Cope

[@renotv3860]

"Reform of existing [institutions] in the country..."? Can you please elaborate on how that is even feasible?

[@benjamingrist6539]

​@@renotv3860 It would have to be a gradual reform, as that's the only way the left would NOT have a knee-jerk reaction to violently stop reform and because slow reforms are longer lasting than quick reforms. I'd view the conservative recapture of the Southern Baptist Convention as an example of how to do it. While many conservative churches left the denomination as it drifted further and further left, the pastors and members of those that stayed slowly worked their way back into positions of power and eventually took back control. The SBC was one of the most liberal denominations in America before the Charles Stanely became its president in 1980 and turned the organization sharply back to the right. Even then, it wasn't until the early 2000s that they finally purged the SBC Seminaries of liberal professors. It's possible for the same thing to happen in the US, but it'll be a decades long struggle for reform. But I think we've had a good start the last few years and just need to keep pushing towards our goal. Also, man, is my original post full of grammatical errors.XD I'm gonna leave it unedited just so people don't think I tried to go back and change the essence of my thoughts.

[@renotv3860]

@@benjamingrist6539 Infiltration and reform sounds good on paper, but it isn't really feasible. First, it'd require enough of our guys to enter positions of power which is becoming harder and harder because of DEI and the current establishment's hostility towards us. Second, the infiltrators would need to stay loyal which can happen, but by joining the swamp you almost invariably become the swamp. Third, the country is quickly degenerating, and it'd be at least sixty years until we could start making big plays, and by then it would be too late both culturally and demographically. You can say that a civil war would never happen or that the rebels would lose, but America is becoming a third world country. As the people become poorer and the nation less stable, revolution becomes more and more likely. Effectively, a revolution will happen when enough people do the math equation in their head and determine that keeping the system going is worse than gambling to change it. 66% of young men now are single and most will never own a home as well. A society that gives people nothing is worse than a dream of something.

[@renotv3860]

@benjamingrist6539 Infiltration and reform sounds good on paper, but it isn't really feasible. First, it'd require enough of our guys to enter positions of power which is becoming harder and harder because of DEI and the current establishment's hostility towards us. Second, the infiltrators would need to stay loyal which can happen, but by joining the swamp you almost invariably become the swamp. Third, the country is quickly degenerating, and it'd be at least sixty years until we could start making big plays, and by then it would be too late both culturally and demographically. You can say that a civil war would never happen or that the rebels would lose, but America is becoming a third world country. As the people become poorer and the nation less stable, revolution becomes more and more likely. Effectively, a revolution will happen when enough people do the math equation in their head and determine that keeping the system going is worse than gambling to change it. 66% of young men now are single and most will never own a home as well. A society that gives people nothing is worse than a dream of something.

[@CheeseTriangles]

Imagine trying to fight an insurgency that speaks, acts, and looks like you and is at most a 2 day drive away from where your family lives. What a shit show.

[@MonsieurDean]

I can spot a southerner pretty easy.

[@CheeseTriangles]

@@MonsieurDean fair enough. What with their wide brimmed hats, long mustaches, and all white suits they do kinda stand out.

[@SazonLES]

Z is delusional

[@randlebrowne2048]

@@MonsieurDean Most of us look just like northerners. You have to be close enough to hear the accent (which not all of us have) to tell us apart. That's generally well within reach if we happen to mean harm.... It's not like a Texan would deliberately wear a cowboy hat on a commando raid to a big city.

[@TechnoMinarchist]

​​@@MonsieurDean6:55 The pentagon did red blue teaming on this very topic some years ago. Their conclusions were that a small insurgency of 7 man teams (made up of US veterans) per state would be enough to cripple the entire US military logstics chain and city power grids and food supplies, leading to a conditional surrender within 2-4 weeks. The military would get bogged down in keeping the peace within collapsing, starving, and infighting urban areas as they'd need to install Martial Law. The electric grids themselves are too wide to protect every point. Eventually the military cedes under the pressure of the civilian populations demands for a return to normalcy.

[@semperfi4046]

This video and the bulk of the comments clearly show a lack of understanding in regard to military tactics . You also dont understand how easy it is to bring a high-tech country to its knees. Those of you who live in any city, starting right now, if you couldn't leave your home, how long could you survive? The estimated average is 5 days. If you dont have the ability to last a minimum of 90 days, the chances of your surviving drop to less than 10%. This is a government estimate. You must have shelter, a clean water supply, food, sanitation, and the abilities to defend the area 90 days is reasonable as the bulk of the population won't last more than 30 (why do you think government bunkers are set for 90 days) This horific event can be initiated in any city by ONE person. War is only one thing, wrong. This is not a video game. Millions of innocent people will perish. Ask yourself, why?

[@saphironkindris]

I think that really big deciding factors for who might win, are who starts it, and who is in a leadership position at the time.

[@C.Brown5150]

No one will win .. No One !!

[@faytwind3913]

@@C.Brown5150 Just like the last Civil War. No one won....wait

[@DivineRedwood]

*There is so much wrong with this video that it would be difficult to point it all out without doing a line for line deconstruction while simultaneously giving actual examples on why a Civil War would be justified.* You are making some massive under and over estimates. Plus you've wrongly assumed a direct assault would be the main strategy. You clearly have zero military experience. The rebellion type has to match the vulnerabilities of the target. The government and its institutions are NOT invulnerable, or all powerful. With the right equipment, people, and strategy it could be done. Winning perse isn't necessarily the goal. Suppression of the continuance along a path would suffice. Could give time to re-think our futures.*

[@philhelm1318]

I agree. I had a conversation with someone about this scenario who claimed that the U.S. military would destroy the rebels, but he didn't understand that nobody would try to face the military directly (and it would be too small to effectively police the entire nation). Victory from a rebel perspective doesn't mean killing soldiers but sapping the government's ability to function.

[@EQ_EnchantX]

Remember the government was almost overthrown by a 1,000 unarmed protestors right? Remember Jan 6th, the most dangerous moment in our history... lol

[@brooksroberson9861]

which will never happen you will be suppressed crushed and shown to be the monsters that the right is all on the left think you are crazed evangelicals who hage gays/lgbtq /women etc you really don't understand the might that would fall on the right if they did this and there's no right equipment you could bring to the table that you could afford or get your hands on to take down America or make this grand stand your diluted and foolish

[@DivineRedwood]

@@brooksroberson9861 First of all, I'm talking about the TOPIC, NOT me. Do NOT try to connect my analysis to my politics, which I have NOT expressed here in any shape or form. The TOPIC is, "Is revolution possible", and the answer is YES, it very much is under the right conditions. This is where YOU fail. If you cannot understand the enemy then you don't understand yourself and why someone may oppose you. This ISN'T about politics, it's about UNDERSTANDING what is and is not possible.

[@DivineRedwood]

@@EQ_EnchantX Grandma's in prison and the American public took note. It will be interesting how this all plays out.

[@Mattineu]

It's good to hear a pessimistic right leaning view for a possible Civil War, but now i'm wondering how would a pessimistic left leaning view about the same topic would look like.

[@MonsieurDean]

The left is in no state to rebel unless you had someone utterly indifferent to the preservation of the union in office, and even then that's a stretch.

[@Mattineu]

@@MonsieurDean I mean, this other video i'm thinking about could focus on a scenario where the right rebels, but it could also a video where the left rebels, somehow, maybe by Trump winning and the loonie-bin of the left tries to riot like in the George Floyd Protests.

[@victorrosenheart8036]

​​@@MonsieurDean What I want is HOPE! You offer nothing but despair and dread! I would rather hopelessly believe in a right wing rebellion than think you do ASSHOLE!

[@ilovejettrooper5922]

@@MonsieurDean Isn't rebelling the only thing left actually does?? (Not as learned as I should be, genuinely asking)

[@anauthor3330]

@@MonsieurDean The left is literally rebelling right now, genius. They rebel over the police; the climate; trans rights; the rich. Where the hell did you get your news?

[@deltaraven]

Its amazing that people still do the doom and gloom end of the world chaos 😂 just like every single election in all American history

[@Christof708]

The last time States tried to keep a candidate from the ballot was Lincoln, and we know what happened.

[@BurgertubeFounder]

Yeah but Lincoln was legit the predecessor of everything wrong with modern America. Let's not deify him as the 'hero who freed the slaves, saved America and never told a lie'.

[@ericjones3692]

When he won, the left tried to leave.

[@ConsistentlyInconsistent]

Last time a disqualified presidential candidate attempted to run for office was Jefferson Davis post civil war. He realized that the 14th Amendment S3 applied to him though he likely bowed out to try to dodge Treason charges. Trump is currently disqualified from holding public office due to being an Insurrectionist. He has had 3 years to change that and will try to do some shady stuff to get back into the White House to avoid prison.

[@Chris-Smith]

yeah, the liberals won

[@EuropeanLoyalist]

Because the liberals back then were also conservative patriots. Don't compare slavery to conservatism

[@Myrtlecrack]

This is all based on a scenario created in the mind of one man.

[@joedatius]

wow its like you just figured out what a theory means

[@gtrdxz]

@@joedatius Did he hurt your fee-fees?

[@JohnayersAyers]

You can tell how far left he is lol.

[@Eyes-Opened]

Goofy sounding lol. Sure is making a bunch of goofy people happy to hear it though.

[@brentmiedema7002]

A Marxist man, at that.

[@th3greathonigdachs575]

This video is a good example why the "right" needs a vanguard party.

[@crusader2112]

Or a new aristocracy. Populism/power to the people is not gonna win this. The Populist Delusion is a good book I hear.

[@Skyhanger]

This is when people accuse you of being a Fed

[@avus-kw2f213]

No the right needs Juche

[@crusader2112]

The Right new a new aristocracy.

[@Rob_F8F]

The Trump Family is the new Conservative Aristocracy. ​@@crusader2112

[@animalmother7634]

"A domestic insurgency could not stand a chance against the strongest military on the planet" yet historically major power militaries have lost against insurgency. US v Taliban (Afghanistan), US v Al Qaeda (Iraq), Russia v Taliban, US v Viet Cong, British Empire v 13 little North AmericanColonies, etc.

[@creeper326.]

still, with military targets not far away from a gargantuan resources and military might, the military could still cause devastation. The reason the Taliban and ISIS were so successful is because they used absolutely every advantage they had including hiding behind women and children. The Viet Cong stayed in underground tunnels and hid behind thick bushes and even then they suffered by toxic gasses and mass drops of bombs including napalm as the logistics was said in the video. The US military is not a force you can cross and expect to not suffer from. There's a reason that the saying "there's nothing more dangerous in this world than a marine and his rifle" exists. The Arabs piss themselves when they think of facing off against America because of the training discipline and equipment they have. A conventional war with the US will be lost exceedingly quickly and if the rebels do play it smart, the US still has some of the best anti-terrorism training in the world and will use it against gruella fighters. I'm not trying to undermine anybody or sow fear, I simply want to point out that the American military is in no way supposed to be underestimated.

[@skogib4846]

@@creeper326. Why would a military visit extreme decimation on its tax cows? You can't tax irradiated wastelands and rotting corpses.

[@sammhyde7589]

Ol boy has never met a serviceman or rural American family and it shows. Time will not vindicate him

[@buddermonger2000]

I think the point is: even if it does somehow do it, if it's all risked on doing so, what's there to gain?

[@buddermonger2000]

​@@skogib4846The IRS will try

[@kaydenchan7093]

I’ve never seen Mr. Z so angry before

[@PeruvianPotato]

@@firefly9838 Or maybe because he realizes another civil war won't be a Call of Duty match

[@OG-B0BBYJ0HNS0N]

All I heard was the coping & seething of a fracturing sense of purpose built on faulty hardware

[@PeruvianPotato]

@@williamh5011 Or it was KZbin themselves considering that 6 of my comments were deleted in this comment section

[@MrWake1084]

He's what you wou😅ld call an extremist

[@MrWake1084]

Actually our youth is becoming very conservative All you democrats have are liberal white women in the elderly.And gay people of course. yall lost the black and hispanic vote lol

[@Haduuna_Wrur]

Crazy to me how many of these comments talk about the taliban, viet cong, american revolution and civil war as if none of those were mentioned in the video in pretty explicit detail.

[@MonsieurDean]

What did I say? A lot of these folks aren't even going to watch the video.

[@alexlowe2054]

@@MonsieurDean I've never watched this channel before, but this is the first time I've seen a video where the like/dislike ratio was NOT representative of the quality of the video. It's surreal to see so many people who respond with kneejerk reactions before they've even heard what the other person has to say.

[@joshua511]

@@alexlowe2054 I watched the entire thing. He makes a handful of decent points but seems to genuinely have no clue how conservatives really think. He also completely abandoned all the cool shit the legislatures in red states are doing. KC/STL have very little power in Missouri. Could/would conservative citizens fight the military? Of course not. Would red state legislatures do nothing if the military started attacking their citizens? Of course not.

[@theodoremccarthy4438]

They’re brought up despite being addressed in the video because Z’s use of them is unpersuasive. The failure of the US military to eliminate insurgencies in Vietnam and Afghanistan are demonstrative of a major weakness in that institution which Z does not address. Instead he suggests that American Nationalism is too vague and fragmented to provide a popular support base for an American insurgency to take over the country in the wake of a foreign occupation collapsing in like manner to the US withdrawals from Vietnam and Afghanistan. This is a non-sequitur. The US government has nowhere to withdraw too in the face of an internal insurgency, except to go into exile. Who inherits political control of the country after the government has to flee into exile has no bearing on the question of whether the government can maintain power. As for the American Revolution and US Civil War, the historic lessons of those conflicts are, respectively, that majority support is not necessary to throw off an existing regime and that giving the US military a standup fight instead of waging an asymmetrical insurgency is the wrong way to fight them. Z doesn’t address these lessons or the fact that many on the right have long since internalized them. Z hinges his entire argument on contrasting rightwing factionalism with the left’s institutional dominance. In doing so he ignores that factionalized civil wars are the norm historically and that having a plethora of enemy factions doesn’t make the central government’s job of holding the country together easier. He also ignores the simple reality that we are watching the institutions of American civil society decay in real time. The media and universities have long since lost credibility with the populace. The courts and the military, the last two institutions to maintain majority public approval in recent years, are now seeing that public trust rapidly decline. Congress, which is necessary to fund the national government and military, is almost completely dysfunctional, and recruitment for the military and law enforcement is approaching crisis levels. Ten years ago if you added up all active duty military, all reserves, and all law enforcement to calculate the number of people who are sworn to bear arms in defense of the current regime, you got a number around 3.8 million. Today that number is only 2.9 million, and all of those people have existing missions and jobs which combating a domestic insurgency would be added on top of. Institutional dominance is a liability in an era of institutional decay, and that is a point I’ve yet to hear Z address.

[@loganrogers4560]

Trump 2024

[@kalebdaark100]

11:34 "Britain...continuing the colonial war would take more investment than it cared to waste." As a Brit I have to say this was a bit of an oversight on our part. 😉

[@davidwindell]

There are a LOT of oversights in this video and I assume it’s primarily due to the naivety bred by the author associating in a like minded echo chamber. He speaks as if he’s got deep knowledge of the ideology, resolve, and resources of both sides but he clearly has a fundamental misunderstanding of the American conservative population on all these factors.

[@kalebdaark100]

@@davidwindell ...and there I was just making a joke about British Colonialism.

[@markpukey8]

@@davidwindell Really? You might want to listen again. As far as I can tell, this video is all from the RIGHT WING point of view! He seems to be trying very hard to honestly evaluate the options... and not very happy that the American MAGA crowd is fucked. Are the American right OLD? Yes, yes they are. Older on average BY 20 YEARS than the liberals left. That matters! Do the American right live in flat, easily attacked areas? Yes, yes they do. Are they a cohesive ideological group ready to fight for each other? No, they are not. Do they lack the deep financial resources that an American Government would have? Of course they don't have the money the US Gov has!

[@youtubecommentsectiondebates]

The creator of this video has an extremely high school-esque understanding of the "left" and the "right" and politics in the US; the childlike assumptions employed and constantly referred to are truly mind-numbing. For many reasons most of what this guy says and predicts simply isn't accurate, primarily because the "left" and the "right" are not unified, monolithic ideologies. They are each political and geographic coalitions, which would themselves immediately fracture in an actual civil war. It would not be "left" vs. "right" -- it would be far more fractious and nuanced than that. Videos like this poison the political conversation.

[@curts7801]

It’s one thing to vote together temporarily for an election. I share some of their ideology, but I’m not going to die for the pink haired man lady’s authority to demand we all ask for her pronouns. I’ve got conservative friends, and they would not run into the woods to join that fat man on the KZbin with black paint on his face. Most Americans are going to sit this one out.

[@brooksroberson9861]

not exactly the left largely agree that letting the fascist religious conservatives win would be bad and would all most likely unify against that greater looming threat where as the conservatives will be the more to be mine is better then yours and infight or skew each other later the left is more educated and understands that unifying with those i don't 100 percent agree with against a greater threat means we all get to exist to have it out after the threat is delt with.

[@raeyner]

Thank god someone is bringing some sense into this. People see like counts and attribute those to the popular opinion of a subsection of a subsection of a people. You can't alienate the other side if you want conversation. "Left" and "Right" doesn't divide the ideals that people have the right to liberty and pursuing happiness. Whichever side forgets that first isn't in a great position with the military, or "patriotic" Americans.

[@AllenGraetz]

Yes, rather puerile to think it's "right vs left". Those are big tent coalitions. The core question is what sort of ___DIVIDE___ would be so large that it would lead to war. Without having something more concrete, we can't speculate on how these groups might line up. More so, as we saw with the Civil War - ya, we've had one - there will be a geographical component to all of this AND people will primarily fight for their brothers, neighbors or state, not some vague political ideology.

[@youtubecommentsectiondebates]

@@AllenGraetz 1000% correct

[@JD-sh8ub]

The title in your thumbnail is laughable.

[@damocles5968]

Dude is getting heated in his own fantasy lmao

[@unusuarioimportante]

Of course not dude. Everyone knows there are no republicans in cities. Also every republican is old, most democrats want to fight and everyone who voted democrat last election would definitely fight for them. Wars are EASY!

[@TheDmitriProject]

That’s exactly what it is. Fan-fiction.

[@snow24121]

I'm not a fan but it's not his fantasy, MAGA nutcases fantasise about civil war on a daily basis and they are clueless enough to think they even stand a chance.

[@sammhyde7589]

He really set his war game passions lose. I've never heard of this chap until today (when the algorithm recommended this loser)

[@Sorinoir]

Whatifalthist: the right will wim Monsieur Z: the right will lose

[@redredred1]

I'd pay to see a long form debate between these 2.

[@AP-kw9ip]

the country will lose. Depending on the victor you either have the centers of culture and commerce destroyed or the countryside depopulated. Or both

[@CountAdolfo]

Moron Z doesn't really grasp anything and uses false analogies... so, I wouldn't pay him much mind.

[@joshua511]

@@AP-kw9ip Meh, the country is already lost. We already have "selective enforcement" from mostly left (but some right) political leaders at city, state and federal levels. Military members got fired for not taking the jab, while federal law gets ignored by the current administration allowing military aged males of unsure background (and jab) status. Authoritarianism is already here, and celebrated by the Left. History has shown we will probably have a right-winger step it up even further but I don't see it happening on Trump's watch if he wins. Probably another election or 2 away but I guess we'll find out!

[@TheGreatK0rnholio]

everyone but political extremists loses. Either way, the rest of us are caught in the middle of 2 "parties" that don't care one bit for anyone but themselves. It'll only end when both the radical left and radical right are thrown out of power, and unless the majority that's in the middle finally breaks its silence, the cycle will continue.

[@ozinga614]

If half the country simply says piss off theres nothing they can do about it.

[@caynine29]

Except, half the country won't.

[@ozinga614]

@@caynine29 Maybe you never can tell.

[@dario5178]

So whoever starts the war alienates the military and ends up loosing

[@jKLa]

Nope. Whoever starts the war will be not the federal government even if it really is started by the federal government, -according to the federal government. Regardless any attempted insurection won't go far. But it is the response to it from the government, what they would try to do, that could easily lead much of the public to turn against them in a much more extreme way. So yes it could become like Vietnam. Or like Haiti. There could be chaotic violent conflict, extreme violence by an ineffective government, many smaller rebellions and ultimately a failed state. In THAT context you could then see a coup type situation, but only after a catastrophic failure of authority took hold. We saw just a bit of this in 2020-2021, state and local as well as federal leval.

[@Nta_winy_lftst]

Please tellvme you never served in the military. I'm not trying to be a dick, but if you did serve in the last 15 yrs since I got out and that is your position, we're f*cked.

[@dbcooper2756]

The military wouldn’t even be a factor. The enlisted ranks are largely going to grab what seems useful and take care of their families/communities. They don’t stop having a human nature just because they enlist in the military.

[@vanceparrish5251]

Nope. The military is predominantly conservative right-wing. They're going to be supporting the right.

[@jKLa]

@@vanceparrish5251not necessarily, that all depends on what the actual "right" and "left" sides would actually look like (those terms can mean different things) as well as the evolution of the military over time. There could also be a split between different divisions if things broke down enough.

[@themightydropbear]

I don't think you're getting the reaction of the military quite right. In the event of a right wing uprising, it won't be right leaning soldiers turning their guns on their officers and joining the rebels, it'll be paralysis. You'll just see desertion and people doing their jobs poorly and small acts of vandalism, or even sabotage. You'll see more disciplinary issues like fighting, drunkenness and violent criminal acts. The U.S military is a massive organism that requires a lot of cooperation to function properly. If enough people become disillusioned and leave, or start sandbagging, their operational ability will suffer. We're already seeing this in the current recruiting shortage and the attrition caused by the vaccine mandates. A lot of people, not just active duty service members, but also civilian support personnel, declined to reenlist and left for the private sector over the last few years. Also, while I do agree that the military has been actively discouraging extremist viewpoints within its ranks, you need to remember that the military is something like 80% support personnel, so while the overall distribution may be fairly evenly split, when you break it down to combat vs support, the actual combat personnel skew pretty heavily to the right, and it doesn't matter if you have tanks, jets and drones if you don't have anyone to operate them. They're the so-called "tip of the spear" and if they leave, what you've got is a blunt spear, which isn't super useful. I don't think we'll see a full blown civil war for many of the reasons outlined in the video. Instead I think we'll see massive civil unrest, acts of domestic terrorism and lots and lots of manifestos. If we get too caught up in our own bullshit, we'll start seeing more activity from the other players with an interest in upsetting US hegemony. Eventually the provocations (or alleged provocations) from one or more of these players will manifest as a clearly definable threat (China sinking an aircraft carrier for example) and whoever is in charge will use it as an excuse for us to "put aside our differences" and rally around the flag to face this external threat. We'll trade Civil War 2 for World War 3.

[@theseukonnen1200]

On the flipside, if the logistics and support personnel aren't with you, the "tip of the spear" loses its haft. A spearpoint with no haft becomes a second-rate dagger with no reach.

[@themightydropbear]

@@theseukonnen1200 You're right, which is why I believe that in a genuine Civil War 2 scenario the military apparatus would simply become too dysfunctional to operate at anything approaching its current level. There's also an almost-but-not-quite-zero chance that those "tip-of-the-spear" types are able to stage a military coupe and bring the haft along for the ride through coercion, threats of force and incentives, but I think anyone with the organizational skills, force of personality and clout to stage such a coupe was probably forced/encouraged to retire a long time ago. Mattis *might* have been able to pull it off, but he's been out of the picture for a while. Also, I work with those support personnel and they're a pretty mixed bag too, so when it comes to lines being drawn in the sand, I doubt there would be enough of them on any one side for sustainable operations. The only scenario where I see everyone continuing to show up to work is the one where the military remains neutral and takes an outward facing stance against foreign threats and leaves the fighting of partisans to the National Guard.

[@AuroraBlue01]

One thing to consider, if shtf war time a fair number of people are going to move. I’d take may family to Texas.

[@The_WatchList]

You're welcome to come here too brother

[@AuroraBlue01]

I see you have addressed that….

[@MonsieurDean]

Long term, Texas isn't a great investment. I would suggest Montana instead.

[@The_WatchList]

@@MonsieurDean Montana is a great place as well. Why not Texas?

[@AuroraBlue01]

@@The_WatchList about half of my wife’s family is in Texas.

[@theorderofthepurplephoenix3321]

The real problem is the overreaching government. Whether you like guns, abortions, lgb, cars, the 70% percent of the money you make that you get to have, fair elections, fair markets, or whatever it is, we should all agree that government is the problem, not the solution.

[@mainely8007]

Government is not perfect but no government is chaos and lawlessness

[@BioGoji-zm5ph]

The people who came up with "government is the problem" are the people who fucked up the government in the first place.

[@kristinagraversgaard5328]

A thing that people talking about this topic keep forgetting to mention is that NATO might intervene.

[@dinadaughtry8993]

They are the only troops that would fire on the American citizens because the US military took an oath to protect the constitution which forbids the government from using them against the American citizens

[@markpukey8]

Why? NATO is a defensive alliance. And a civil war IS NOT an attack by an outside force. I think they would work really, really hard to NOT get involved in any way.

[@mistyl1987]

​@@markpukey8you sure? Look at the foreign soilders in Canada during the trucker protests. Not NATO? Who knows.

[@mistyl1987]

UN forces?

[@mistyl1987]

30:30 timestamp

[@mikeh7917]

This video assumes the right would be the insurgent faction.

[@joedatius]

because they would. there really is no justification to assume otherwise since the Far Right in itself already has a boner for "militias" the majority of which will simple dissolve the moment any of them find out what fighting a insurgent war against a military is like

[@sornehdoty6691]

I feel like that makes logically the most sense

[@techpriest2854]

they did march on the white house

[@mikeh7917]

@@techpriest2854 The left ALSO rioted in the Capital.

[@joedatius]

@@sornehdoty6691 especially when you consider that the majority of high profile mass shooters have incredibly far-right views and even some components of conservatives openly support them (mainly the freaks on 4chan)

[@gaylynnhorncri]

The Battle of Athens is the first one where the people said no and won.

[@radagast25a]

In a city-state of what is believed to be about 20,000 - and where the idea of dissent and discussion had already had a century-long tradition.

[@beybladeguru101]

@@radagast25aBrother, he is referring to Athens, Tennessee. Please look up it up.

[@tubeguy4066]

Tulsa Oklahoma too

[@austinkirkwood6228]

bias mindset that loosely understands history and military tactics and resource control

[@wolfcole]

Last year I joined the army. Something that no one seems to take into consideration is that we're capable of making our own decisions and we joined because we love the people of this country. Everyone that I've talked to in the army has agreed that if a civil war breaks out and we're ordered to fire upon our own friends and family, we'll simply refuse. Our job is to protect our country from outside threats, not to rip it apart from the inside.

[@jeremyhartman1205]

Actually your job is to protect and defend the CONSTITUTION of the United States against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC, unless they took that part out of the oath. The domestic part is the absolute hardest to figure out.

[@jeremyhartman1205]

Oh, btw.....I hope you have a great time while in and may your leaders not be the toxic ones. Find the good leaders and learn from their examples (not being sarcastic either)

[@NeostormXLMAX]

@@jeremyhartman1205 when all hell breaks loose, every law, signature and oath is nothing but a piece of paper with no meaning, read max stirner.

[@haltersweb]

@@jeremyhartman1205what excellent and caring advice. @wolfcole thank you for your service. My son is an officer in the Navy and still remembers the advice given to him by his enlisted cousin just before he was commissioned: trust your enlisted compatriots, listen to your chief, lend the same hand you would expect of those under your command, and don’t be an a-hole. He tries to follow this advice every day.

[@cashisfunsobuythings]

@MonsieurZ This is the same thought train the South Africans had after witnessing the downfall of Rhodesia, Mozambique, Angola, Namibia, and Malawi; You rightfully state that conservatives tend to just run away to states more comfortable when policies become pressing on their ideologies and beliefs but where does one go when there is nowhere left to run? Also seem to wrongfully insinuate that some rightist faction would be the first to strike a blow, referencing, rather indirectly, to January 6th and promote that the ideology of the military falls in line with the establishment because *not the Army* but National Guard weekend warriors were okay with occupying DC. To back up this claim, then reference the current "polling" within the military leans towards the left in presidential election, therefore, are more willing to side with the establishment. The only way this happens is if your insinuation that the right strikes first is true, but January 6th was little more than a riot (which the left had done in the streets mere months before) and there is almost zero hard evidence to suggest that any (name one serious non-federal agent instigated) group of individuals planning on doing something that could constitute an "attack on American civilians" that would turn the country on them. It was also evident throughout the entire video of your emotional bias as a conservative New Yorker, someone who doesn't likely own firearms or have regular access to them, but this truly is a hard line in the sand for many conservative minded people, reference the attempt by the state of Virginia to neuter/strip gun rights away from the state's populace despite controlling the state house and executive branch, which did not become enacted after tens of thousands of armed people peacefully protested in the capitol of Richmond, even going as far to have a majority of the counties and city regions in the commonwealth to declare their support for annulling the bill (which happened). We already have our 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th amendment rights being violated on a daily basis, but a stripping or neutering of the 2nd puts citizens backs to the wall. I believe you really gloss over this as some kind of nothingburger but I have yet to see a single other issue unite conservatives to such a degree (again, it's your bias as a New Yorker, someone who willingly abides by the unconstitutionality of what your state, and city specifically, have stripped from you) and I believe your sentimentality is shared by those of your city and state; this is a stretch to paint what is around you as true for the whole country. Again, the way you were emotionally charged is understandable due to your region and views, but paints glowing holes in how far you have to reach to think this would be the train of events. tl;dr New Yorker has hot takes that his thought process is right and disregards the largest uniting idea of the conservative movement is a nothingburger because he willingly excludes himself from it

[@TylerDurden-pk5km]

Flat agricultural lands are very easily conquered? Strange conclusion from the war in the Donbas and the Ukrainian steppe, where the frontline is moving with glacial speed ... and Ukraine's NATO planed offensive (by the same people who would "easily" conquer Texas and the Mid-West mind you) - conducted on plain treeless step - failed miserably. This is a really poor analysis, closer to propaganda. While some points are valid, it totally ignores the weaknesses of the other side. It ignores possible external support, by China or Russia and it ignores that the outcome of most wars is almost impossible to calculate before they have been thought. In the end - I do not expect an American civil war (and not only because the video is basically intellectualized cowardice and in parts verbatim carbon copy regime propaganda: "Biden mocks Second Amendment supporters, says you 'need an F-16' to take on government").

[@AL-lh2ht]

You are really going to claim the US has the same military capability as the poorest country in Europe....

[@darrendaley4265]

The Taliban had zero F-16s. They run Afghanistan. The Viet Cong had no large tank divisions or air force. The communists run Viet Nam. Frankly, if things go south the left will be too busy trying to control their own blue cities from collapsing into a hellish nightmare if the populace even thinks the shelves will be empty for a week.

[@M.L.Knotts]

Why do you assume that Republicans in the city would not just leave the city? Wouldn't they join up with their Republican friends?

[@PatrickThreewit]

How could they live in the country? If they are raised in the city what makes you think they can survive in the country?

[@M.L.Knotts]

@@PatrickThreewit I never said anything about City Republicans going to live in the wilderness. Why would they not join up with like-minded individuals in rural areas? There are plenty of people in the country that don't know how to "live off the land" .... It's a matter of bodies for the cause

[@PatrickThreewit]

@@M.L.Knotts Few if any Americans could live off the land. Even if I were younger I couldn't live off the land. And why would city republicans be able to survive anywhere better than anyone else? I don't think there are that many city people who would be welcome in rural areas. Rural people would be fighting hard just to be able to survive. Conservative rural folk don't want say Las Angeles conservative people moving to their area.

[@mastergreenfox6004]

You are severely underestimating how difficult it would be to leave the city without just giving everything up. I'm not saying that none of them would leave or that none of them would have the ability to do so. What I'm saying is I doubt the majority of them would be in a financially good enough spot to just up and leave. Remember most Americans are one missed paycheck from bankruptcy or worse. Unless they just wanted to go fully into the resistance, with the expectation that the resistance will just provide what they left behind, they can't just simply leave. And since that's unlikely, what they would actually risk is making themselves homeless and cityless with a background of being a city dweller. It will not end well for most of them who decide to take such a route.

[@M.L.Knotts]

@@mastergreenfox6004 we're talking about civil war.... All that goes out the window.... Also, would you sit there well the people you agree with blow up your city, or would you join them and be around like-minded people and quite possibly the winning side.... City people are sitting ducks

[@boogerie]

"the conservative faction doesn't stand a chance" keep telling yourself that

[@dirtyoldman3]

I believe most people are moderate. Most extremes are just loud

[@Parfumlestink778xby]

Not to mention that the media sticks a skyscraper sized megaphone infront of the extremists, to make sure that everyone hears it louder than they should

[@x3r0h0ur]

this is a hugely stupid myth.

[@Parfumlestink778xby]

@@x3r0h0ur what makes it stupid and a myth

[@x3r0h0ur]

@@Parfumlestink778xby the fact that it's not true and people who think this are coping and appealing to the middle ground fallacy.

[@Parfumlestink778xby]

@@x3r0h0ur erm what the flip dude, provide an example of how extremism is more popular (excluding media highlights) than just the common sense of the average person

[@cjvoerman5591]

Had I watched this even 2 years ago, definitely would’ve called you a fed. Now that I’m older, it’s just like “Damn, Z’s right.” And you make me wonder, “Huh, why do we conservatives do nothing until ‘muh guns!’ is brought up?” Also, great speaking voice. You gonna be President soon, Z?🫡

[@holdenon437]

Hail Z

[@shzarmai]

mu-muh guns! 🔫 🔫

[@eldirector1936]

We need Z for president

[@Jakrr1346]

The culture of calling everyone a fed is the reason why the right won't ever organize. It's scapegoating as an excuse to do nothing. We all know the right is too demoralized and afraid of a prison cell to care enough to risk anything to prevent their nation from getting destroyed physically or even worse, demographically.

[@jasonbennett9957]

MSM is being exposed. I believe that people are waking up. The MSM has been a powerful weapon against conservatives . If we get put in a corner we will have no choice but to come out swinging

[@lawson1294]

Why is this based on left vs. right? What about government vs. citizens or haves vs. have not?

[@CuteFuzzyWeasel]

Because Z is a right winger POS and cant think of anything past that dichotomy, I mean the dude is a nazi (if he wants to admit it or not).

[@jKLa]

​@@CuteFuzzyWeaselI haven't seen any real evidence of that just because he leans conservative. But I think he is delusional. I do think any true and full left or right "victory" after an actual conflict like he describes would be short term at best. Yes, mass disorganized ongoing rebellion against a tyrannical state would likely occur. And we would likely end up with a failed state. I'm not too optimistic about any project for a good outcome or victory for the people in such a scenario: I think we are far too divided and fragmented for that.

[@aceman0000099]

Because the media has divided us and they chose those lines. However I think some people at the top are mutual enemies and would see a collaborative effort to "take their power away" if the opportunity arose (such as Soros, Mike Pence, The Disney CEO, a number of other billionaires, several senators like Mitch McConnell)

[@hydra8845]

Well, when it’s a democracy, the government is the way it is because of the citizens. So it’s is shit government it’s because of the shit citizens. Isn’t the haves and have nots more of a revolution and not a civil war? Also that’s more of Marxist way of looking at things.

[@imnotmike]

Because the government has so effectively divided people into left vs right, in order to keep the citizens from uniting against them. We can't have a battle between the haves and the have nots because the have nots are too divided and easier to access, so we fight among ourselves instead, and the haves sit comfortably in their towers sipping champaign and watching us fight.

[@biggiejeffrey]

The country is neither red nor blue. It's purple. Most Americans have a mixed form of politics. For instance: I am pro-choice, but I am also for capital punishment. I'm for greater gun control, but completely against the outlawing of weapons. Unfortunately, the extremists in both parties would call me a hypocrite, or a "dino" / "rino". This is often the tactic of political extremists who know that their self-centered version of what America should be is unpopular & wouldn't stand a chance in a normal government. Therefore, they must "divide & conquer" by calling moderate voices these names, claiming that they are really "traitors to the cause", and that they are secretly plotting to destroy America. From Alex Jones to Fox News, from Michael Moore to MSNBC, we can see these extremists attack anyone who questions their "patriotism"... but not really caring about the people who listen to them. Any member, from either side of the political aisle, who tries to reach out to the other are openly THREATENED, warned by the extremists that they will do everything in their power to DESTROY their political future if they even think about trying to to so. The extremists don't really care about America, their claimed values, or even about the people that they are appealing to. They. Just. Want. POWER. And they are more of a threat to America than ANY foreign country, religious belief or economic system, socialist or capitalist. Do you REALLY want to prevent another civil war? Here's how: 1.) Be more concerned with governing YOURSELF than anyone else. It's pathetic to see Lauren Boebert preach about biblical values, while she & other conservatives are often caught doing sexual sins that would make the devil blush. As it is written in Proverbs: "It's better for a man to control his temper than to rule a city. RULE. THY. SELF. 2.) Realize and accept the fact that you live in a multicultural America, where do not... AND SHOULD NOT BE FORCED TO... want to be like you. They don't want to LOOK like you. They do not want to BELIEVE like you. They don't want to LIVE like you. If you respect other people's choices to live their own lives, they WILL do the same for you. No matter how "evangelical" you are about your beliefs, DON'T FORCE those beliefs upon others. Let them be. 3.) Stop complaining about seeing your tax dollars go to things that you don't like. There are LOTS of things, from both sides, that I don't like seeing my money go to. But I didn't become a politician, and someone else did, so they got to choose where the cash went. I can petition them to let them know that that's not what I want my money to go to. That's my right. But what's not my right is refusing to pay any taxes, because other parts of it goes to things that I DO believe in, and they will suffer if I don't pay for them. In life, sometimes you win... sometimes you lose. GET OVER IT. 4. TRY to see things from the other side's viewpoint. Not only will you stop believing the lies that the extremists constantly spread in the media, both lib and con, but you might find a political ally in your fight for something in life that you both want. The whole purpose for town meetings was so this exchange of ideas could take place. But the extremists came to these and shouted down everyone trying to talk, making sure that everyone got this message: no compromise on anything, no matter how important it is for the continuation of American society and government. Whenever someone, likely one of these extremists, warn you that they will "get even" if you don't do what they say, they are NOT being true Americans, Christians, or whatever else they claim to be, so just shout back to them to SHUT UP or they will be forced to leave the meeting. Extremists just simply hate it when you stand up to them and for yourself. 5.) Do research. Read up & learn about everything you can on an issue. Don't just repeat like a parrot whatever talking point you heard from some spin doctor. It angers me to no end when I hear the same old "bumper sticker" sayings within a debate. It only shows that the talker knows really nothing about the issues, and is just trying to get their own fifteen minutes of fame on TikTok. Get off of Facebook and hit the books. Your brain will thank you. 6.) Never... and I CAN'T repeat this enough... start talking about VIOLENCE becoming an "answer" to a political problem. Right now, there's extremists who are calling upon taking the lives of people in power, from Palestinian sympathizers to MAGA Trump-turds. This isn't just extremism... IT'S TERRORISM! And it is really what these extremists are: crazed psychopaths looking for an excuse to get off on killing innocent people. John Wilkes Booth believed himself to be a "Southern Messiah" whose assassination of Lincoln would cause people to rise up behind him and retake ALL of America for himself... until he saw the headline in a paper that went "LINCOLN SHOT BY RANK COWARD". It was then that he saw how delusional he was in his hatred. And, right now, there's college students and country "rednecks" who are suffering from the same delusions of glory and grandeur in their own minds. 7.) Stop seeing your party as "God's side". Stop seeing your guy as a political "Jesus" & the other guy as "Satan". THIS is why our nation's forefathers created a wall of separation between church and state. They saw how corrupt both the royal families and their churches in Europe became as God was used and abused by both. From the Crusades to the constant fighting between Catholics and Protestants, they knew how evil men could manipulate believers into becoming mindless monsters, so they said no to ANY kind of a "marriage" between God and government. 8.) Realize that your rights end where someone else's nose begins. In the 60s, a hippie was arrested for hitting a cop in the nose. (funny how extremists, left & right, hate cops, huh?) At his trial, he told the judge that he had a right to hit any cop because that was his constitutional right to express himself. The judge told him in return, "Yes, you have a right to express yourself... But your rights end where someone else's nose begins!" And the judge locked him up because he was right. NO ONE has "unlimited freedom" to do ANYTHING & EVERYTHING they want. Yes, you have freedoms... But they don't make you your own "king" or "god". Take a break from all forms of media, no matter how much of a "high" you get from them, and do an "electronic detox". Read a book or two that has nothing to do with politics. The crazy worries that the media loves to cram down your throat are ALL LIES! I'm gay & liberal. I have no desire to "groom" anyone, much less a child. I'm a Christian. But I am not going to try to get atheists saved against their free will, or even try to make them wish me a "merry Christmas". NO ONE is EVER going to take over the country, no matter how "powerful" the extremists claim that are. Not Donald Trump. Not Joe Biden. NO ONE! Get a grip! Stop letting these crazy thoughts and ideas have full reign over your mind. A disciplined mind is the TRUE "cornerstone of democracy". Thank you, and God bless you. ❤️

[@graye2799]

You put to much into the religious aspect. I think most Christians wouldn't care about ehat specific denomination they are.

[@altrag]

Yeah... your thought is wrong. Or rather incomplete. The video's argument wasn't that Christians would care what denomination other Christians are, but that they wouldn't care _at all._ Importantly, they wouldn't care enough to risk their lives and livelihoods for the goals of some other denomination that don't really align with their own. And that's assuming the age-old Catholic/Protestant divide doesn't rear its ugly head again when people start talking about taking up arms under the auspices of religious justification. Then you absolutely would have Christians starting to care what denomination other Christians belong to, on top of the partisan political nonsense.

[@burningsnow9870]

No he's got a major point. Christians tend to tolerate other denominations because they have to. But when it comes to establishing who's top dog in a conflict, I can definitely see a liklihood of them either betraying each other or refusing to cooperate

[@burningsnow9870]

I mean think about a Protestant and a catholic factions differences. There's already a ton of bad blood that's only fairly recently started to heal.

[@graye2799]

@burningsnow9870 Recently? Buddy, I don't know where your from exactly, but the US hasn't had a major catholic, protestant divide for basically a hundred years and even then, it wasn't as bad as it wa din Europe.

[@burningsnow9870]

@graye2799 Yes and no. The U.S culturally has had major issues between the two just minus the legal hatred between the two. Irish and Italian Americans got a very rocky start in the U.S. due to their Catholic culture. And if you look at current religious far right movements, it definitely seems that the evangelical movement seems to want to be the dominant denomination within the sphere of Christianity and is situated to be so due to their heavy ties to markets and lobbying

[@timothyblazer1749]

Nope. Do a county by county map. The red areas dwarf the rest. Conservatives control all the resources, and form the core population in most of the country, geographically. If something happens, it's not going to be state against state. And it's not going to be Republicans against Democrats. It's going to be libertarians against against authoritarians, and it's going to be country against city. Also, you seem to be unaware of terrain. Think about it.

[@brianmauldin7478]

This video brought to you by King George

[@gtrdxz]

🤣

[@yamchayaku]

The only people who want to fight in a war are the ones who never actually stepped foot in the battlefield.

[@behindthelinemedia3697]

You sure about that? Because veterans today openly train Right Wing civilians on everything they learned in the military to specifically prepare them for conflict. This is what Leftists don't understand. When you guys are out having fun and relaxing during your free time, the Right Wing is literally at the range, in the mountains, in the fields training with veterans. The difference in life style between Left and Right is so vast.

[@nimda0]

Combat veteran... Yea, that's not true at all. I think maybe you need to follow more navy seals and special forces operatives. The left is pushing for war, the right is just willing to win it.

[@crym77]

"Doesn't stand a chance" This guy is pure idealogue.

[@cgyoboi]

sounds like you're just mad someone state their opinion on the internet and you're trying to dismiss what they said :/

[@crym77]

@@cgyoboi Its not even that I'm certain that he's wrong. Its more that I don't believe anyone can be certain what might happen. If it happens. I hope it doesn't.

[@bperez8656]

Agreed

[@snow24121]

The fringe right legitimately does not stand a chance. Not even close.

[@crym77]

@@snow24121 I agree that a fringe element wouldn't stand a chance.

[@frederickwarren4158]

The "Right," would not try to conquer the whole country. That's just stupid. They would defend their own territory/region. You can't compare Jan. 6th to a civil war, if the U.S. Military attacked states, those members from those would leave. For the most part. And those who see that action against states may do the same or refuse to participate in an illegal action. Best case scenario is to Secede and keep a temporary defense treaty and gradually separate institutions.

[@altrag]

You say that, but the people claiming we need a "national divorce" are not coming from the left. You're right that you can't compare Jan.6 to a civil war though - because Jan.6 failed. The potential for civil war would have come about if Jan.6 somehow succeeded. It's one thing for Trump to be a sore loser with little personal power beyond whatever influence his "Truth" rants have over other Republicans claiming that he's still president when nobody outside of his groupies cares what he thinks. It would be quite another thing for him to actually take illegitimate power and leave the country effectively having two presidents, neither of which are _actually_ president - the legitimate one that hasn't been confirmed and thus doesn't technically hold power yet, and the one that still retains power but is no longer legitimate. I don't know where the country would have gone in such a scenario, or whether the path it takes escalates all the way to "civil war", but it certainly wouldn't have been good for basically anyone.

[@burningsnow9870]

Ehhh I disagree to a point. Modern American conservatism (which in substance has gotten significantly closert to textbook facism) requires constant war and expansion to sustain unsustainable domestic systems. Lets look at some of the more traditionally red states in the union. Most of the top 10 poorest states tend to be republican led due to poor economic policies, corporate exploitation, and environmental decay. And a lot of citizens who live there, while not liking those systems, often tolerate and find pride in those systems through the use of religion. The most utilized one being that of the Protestant Christian faith which has been so systematically radicalized that there are multiple articles detailing how pastors are having people leave their church due to the teachings of Christ being "weak". And instilling a cultural basis of imposing ones will onto others which has been well documented in our history. The basis of racial discrimination, lgbtq discrimination, bodily autonomy restrictions, educational restrictions have been almost entirely based on a religious perspective that requires it to be imposed on others. Now why am i talking about the economic and religious issues of Republican states? Because these serve as perfect catalysts for direct authoritarianism and militaristic expansion for the leaders. It would allow the leadership to whip up the public into a frenzy against whatever target the rulers designate, often distracting from the actual causes of those issues. In doing so, claim more and more personal power through the forceful expansion, capturing, theft, of land and the imprisonment, eradication, and torture of select groups under the idea of a religious duty or obligation. The idea that the right would focus on isolation is good in theory, but the core functions of how they've operated throughout the years suggests that that isolation would be short lived and likely framed as a preemptive defensive move.

[@Edfinger-xp4bg]

@@burningsnow9870they use immigrants as an scapegoat just like the nazis with the Jewish not saying they are but it is similar

[@flintglockwood]

​@@burningsnow9870> "muh fascism" in literally the second sentence. > Opinion immediately discarded

[@burningsnow9870]

@flintglockwood Hey, if it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, and tastes like a duck, it's probably a duck. So if it looks like facism, acts like facism, and directly pulls ideas from facist texts, it's probably facism.

[@willster8759]

I think this is a good foil to whatifalthist video on how a civil war for the right would go. I agree with some of your points, but I also agree with some of whatifalthist points. There are too many variables to accurately predict what would happen in the event of a civil war. Obviously, a civil war would be catastrophic and lead to the deaths of many people. I think both the left and the right have a foolhardy view that their side would win a civil war easily, when in reality a civil war could go on for years possibly decades. Millions of people would die, cities would be in chaos, rural areas would risk being overrun by armies and people fleeing urban areas. A lot of various factors people fail to calculate or even consider, as well as the whole notion of having a plan until you are punched in the face. Far too many things could go differently than any of us predict, and I fear a civil war would be far worse than any of us imagine. Think Yugoslavia, French Revolution, and The Troubles all combined and a thousand times worse. I will say one counter that I often think about to the Feds or the army easily defeating rebels is how do you defeat rebels if they aren't an army in a field but rather random citizens who commit acts of violence and disappear into a crowd like the Irish revolution and the Troubles? Again, we can't assume this would happen, but if it did the army can't just open fire on crowds of people or bomb the entirety of middle America, if they did then they would be seen as the aggressor and lose the moral high ground. You would have to have years of covert operations to root out rebel militias from communities and states, which would entail fighting these people as well as alienating the people in those communities and perhaps as a consequence creating more rebels. I think most likely a civil war would be a long and very drawn-out chaotic affair creating the deaths of millions, recking our economy as well as others around the world, and give our enemies ample opportunity to start WWIII while we are tearing each other apart. There is no way to no for a certainty which side would win the war, but the average American would not consider the outcome of such an event a "win." Edit: I edited my poor grammar.

[@SuperUnemployable]

This is the most comprehensive take i have seen on this topic and i must agree if things go kinetic, no common American interests win.

[@terrymcdougal5216]

Who really cares! Nobody I know, whatcha gonna do about it? It is what it is, I'ma gonna get my popcorn & a cool beverage sit back & chill 🤗🫣

[@Avoidiac]

About our enemies starting WWIII while we're busy having a catastrophic civil war. If it were as bad as all you say, I feel pretty sure that opposing nations and their allies would take as much advantage of the situation as possible in order to further the war and cripple the U.S., giving support to one side or another, bombarding us with cyberattacks, etc. It would be a unique opportunity for them. The U.S. military would have to be drastically reduced in power for a foreign invasion to occur, but that's not an impossibility. WWIII could happen right here, for a change. I find it amazing we all haven't been nuked off the face of the planet yet.

[@willster8759]

@@Avoidiac I agree with your take we couldn't rule out the likely possibility of foreign nations throwing resources to one side or the other. Some nations wouldn't want the US to fall due to the power we have on the world stage and what us falling would mean. Other countries would happily donate money to one side or both sides hoping a civil war would greatly weaken us or destroy us. And like you said we can't rule out the possibility of foreign nations sending troops to fight on one side or the other. WWIII could be on our own doorstep. This nearly happened in US Civil war in the 1860s some powers in Europe like Britain considered joining the war or intervening due to economic ties.

[@crimsonterror5795]

Throughout this video I had to gradually keep turning down the volume. You're so passionate in the 1st half of the video that your voice gradually rises throughout the video. You put a lot of thought into this video and it shows, good work.

[@msgtvarela]

You should debate whatifalthistory

[@The_Pecky_Blinders]

This also shows how much we seriously need to have more than only two political parties, too many are blinded by the two labels and ignore the vast diversity even within the parties.

[@matthewflexen9478]

Couldn’t agree more.

[@MilwaukeeF40C]

But there are only two public policy ideologies- negative rights and state power.

[@anniejuan1817]

I think that, ultimately, Trump's greatest accomplishment will be damaging the Republicans to such a degree that a viable third party gets started.

[@unclescipio3136]

A multiparty parliament with proportional representation.

[@dansmith16]

How about a leader who is actually pressured to work with the people and be accountable for everything instead of hundreds of leaders/puppets?

[@bjmcmahon722]

National "Institutions" run and operate on public trust and fiat currency. Idk why this isn't mentioned b4 7min in. Anything changes in that scenario, there would most likely be areas breaking away, many regions.

[@infin1ty850]

The second you start bringing up the term "fiat currency" you've already lost your credibility.

[@TylerDurden-pk5km]

@@infin1ty850 Why? Depending on the size of the insurgency or civil war, this would be a relevant question. If there would be only be the slightest chance of the rebellion succeeding - it would be very bad for the USD.

[@Juan-ci3xr]

@@TylerDurden-pk5kmwhat would you replace it with? Gold

[@empiresacks3498]

@@Juan-ci3xr you would have to

[@Juan-ci3xr]

@@empiresacks3498 who owns the most gold hint* federal government

[@jamesganann3640]

This is laughably naive. None of these scenarios are plausible in this manner. Also, narrator is predictable.

[@burningsnow9870]

I mean its easy to see everyone as naive when you've got your head in the sand

[@Whatfer]

Right-wingers live primarily in sparsely populated fly-over regions of the country and left-wingers are much heavier in mid to large size cities with dense population. Why can't we just respect each other's lifestyles? It's been working until recently.

[@stevenschnepp576]

Because the left can't not meddle.

[@Thorgon-Cross]

Because the "left/democrats" tries to force everyone to live their way as if everyone else is their slave.....wait the party of slavery treats people like slaves, who would have guessed.

[@JosephRaoII]

Because it's about politics and power as well as the overeach of that power. Taking away the rights of people. The constitution has gotten bloated over time for example the 2nd amendment (a very hot issue) uses the words "Shall not be infringed" To me it's pretty clear that means to not change or amend. Regardless of our own constitution there have been 12 major federal gun laws since 1934. Left-wingers and right-wingers want different ways of life, different rights, different laws. Unless we went back to a smaller federal government where we give the states more rights over the feds then people in California outlawing guns all together wouldn't affect Arizona legalizing Machine guns. Like I don't care if you want to make guns illegal for your society but I don't want that for mine. It's all about power over people.

[@ExtremistOnboard]

That's cute but wrong. That generalization is what lost Hillary the election. Well, that and calling 50% of the country "deplorable".

[@RockstarRacc00n]

Because minority groups keep getting rights, and this threatens conservative politicians, because simply knowing numbers of marginalized groups and seeing that society does not crumble when they gain rights vastly lowers someone's ability to be swayed by bigotry, so their moves to Limit those rights have become increasingly aggressive, finally reaching this last gasp point, where the only thing they know how to do is promise to dissolve the democracy if elected and threaten to start some sort of conflict if not elected. The country has shifted away from authoritarianism, especially authoritarian conservativism, and the group that currently runs the Republican Party doesn't want to drop old bigotries to compensate.

[@2joof]

If the whole "why would people ruin their careers and lives for a political ideology" resonated with everyone else, then the American Revolution would have never happened.

[@aomorgancool1775]

That's not true. Colonies were self sufficient. During the American revolution, Americans didn't ruin their careers from rebelling against the British. You keep bringing in examples of a different time period with different culture and attitude than people in modern america

[@FearnOl-Glenn]

Howdy Monsieur! As a person who got their MA in politics and IR (focusing on secessionism, terrorism, and the development of ethnonational conflict), thank you for exercising depth in your analyses via this channel. Couple notes: 1. Commenters: Hopefully you can roll your eyes at me here and say you already know this, but 90-9-0.9 rule applies to KZbin. AKA, 90% of viewers won't engage with your work, only 9% will engage, and of that 0.9% will have something constructive, useful, or non-reactionary to say. Also - yo, bots and deliberate attempts to strengthen extremism remain quite alive and well ('Sup IRA). A study I ran on TikTok in 2021 showed that ~80% of the responses to on a politically sensitive topic were in this category. So! Stay mentally strong amongst these numbers. I know it's rough, but keeping cool's the way to go. 2. Normative performance can also be the political goal of a population. Your arguments around 17:00-19:00 hold water, but I might still challenge to consider whether the "reckless rampage" is itself the intended outcome, impacts be damned? It's not like those Roman Senators who murdered Caesar wholly grasped the impact of their actions, isolated as they were from the people they dominated. 3. 22:00-23:00 >> Another angle to consider is the demographic description, namely age and health status (physical and mental), of these regions. Having lived in Arkansas, Texas, Rural NY, etc., I've personally seen a limited degree of pragmatic alliance between charismatic decision-makers in these different areas. I think you're right that trust would be an issue here, but it might take a few years to fully metastasize. >> >> >> correction : You covered this in 30:00+, so n/m. Nicely done! 4. 26:00 >>> Mmm yes - Drive is the right focus here. If you haven't already, take a gander at the book "Karama" regarding the Arab Spring - it will both support and deepen your analysis on this point. Though 28:00 >> while the U.S. military has done a lot of work to remove Christian Nationalists and White ethno-nationalists from their ranks, local police groups (according to my last read of SLPC's reports) haven't been as forceful on that front [particularly in the South-east and Idaho, but that all's pretty obvi.] 5. 29:30 >> The married couple description made me laugh - I see truth here. 6. 31:30 >> Water-loss is an angle one might explore more too (but I get you - this video is already quite long). IE., Oklahoma, North and Western Texas, the Dakotas down to Kansas are all in their last years of water availability due to overdrawing from the Oglalla, declining precipitation rates, and increasing temperatures. This point basically just underlines your points rather than challenges or diversifies the discussion, but just an addendum.

[@moondropdemon3366]

I admire your knowledge on the subject

[@lowbudgethost8046]

His point about the Great Plains is quite true. I live near Amarillo, TX and can confirm that this place is not a place I'd stay in during a war. Some topography but too little coverage. Water access is becoming worse an worse as the aquifer is drying up. On top of all this,the federal government has a nuclear facility here that I'm certain they'd use to justify military occupation anyways.

[@FearnOl-Glenn]

@@moondropdemon3366 Thank you! >.< If y'all want to deepen your knowledge of this area, here are some recommended reads: - The Mind of a Terrorist - Inside Rebellion: Politics of Insurgent Violence - How Terrorism Ends - Cases of Secession Since 1900 and Their Governing Constitutional Frameworks Towards Secession - The Great Transformation (...do the spark notes on this one, it's a bitch to read) - Modelling ethnogenesis - Geographies of ethnogenesis and diasporas - White Trash - The Theory of Social and Economic Organization (and tbh like all of Max Weber. Just understand that he convincingly writes as an omniscient academic, aaaand he was just a monkey like the rest of us) - The BASICS of Michel Foucault. Guy was rather F'd Up and wrote with pompous, near unintelligible grammar, but his ideas re: the archaeology of history are sound - Creating ethnicity: the process of ethnogenesis

[@moondropdemon3366]

@@FearnOl-Glenn well thank you, I'll have to add these to my list

[@Juan-ci3xr]

Knowing how serious this is I cannot help but point out this man has studied in college so that makes him a liberal so he will be defeated( all jokes aside thank you for your knowledge and grasp of the subject)

[@AllenGraetz]

How much glue was huffed before invoking one of the longest continuous coastlines in the world to be "landlocked"????

[@markpukey8]

I think he was referring to most of "reddest parts" of America. They don't have direct access to a coast.

[@PatrickThreewit]

@@markpukey8 Texas does but only one of the western mountain states has one. Idaho. But if those states decide to secede that access will be gone.

[@SCAR16L]

@@PatrickThreewit Wait, what? Idaho? I've worked in Idaho quite a bit over the last 15 years, and it's a fair ways from the ocean. You've got a libtard shithole between it and the water, whether you go through the north end (through the panhandle) or through the southern part.

[@PatrickThreewit]

@@SCAR16L Maybe you need to check on the Port of Wilma and try to figure out why there is such a controversy with farmers v. the native tribes on taking out the dams. Idaho has a seaport in Nez Perce County. Wheat-filled barges and pleasure cruisers go back and forth to Portland, every day. I can see why the American Indians want to take out dams, but without dams, Idaho's agriculture economy will take a hit. A tough call. I lean toward farmers. I don't know what you're talking about, but I've lived in this region for 31 years and I see the port whenever I shop at Costco.

[@SCAR16L]

@@PatrickThreewit Access to the Colombia River =/= a sea port. If that were the case, Chicago, Toledo, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, Milwaukee, and Pittsburgh could all be called sea ports. Try accessing the sea if the People's Republik of Oregon decided that Idaho was a threat to their glorious People's Revolution.

[@TheShepard2055]

It’s crazy how pooling data on how most Americans by population are moderate right leaning or right would mean that you’re video out the gate goes under a false presumption. If 37% identify as moderate, 36% as right, and 25% as left, even if we say 20% of moderate Americans are left and give the remaining 16% to the right. The right still holds majority of population, not to mention the upward trend in younger men (fighting age) identifying as right, so let’s get this straight majority of population, majority of fighting age men, and you said half of the military? Ok so would this half of the military who swore to protect this country favor the minority who they disagree with, or the majority who they agree with? I mean as you put it in you’re video why should a right leaning Texan die for a left leaning New Yorker as opposed to help a right leaning Floridian or Carolinian. The vast majority of this video flops when you go county by county instead of trying to make state a hair shy of monolithic based upon population centers, also can we talk about the pipeline of Californians who have fled California to Idaho and changed political affiliation almost 30,000 and those numbers are just for one state in 2023. This video purports the idea of left leaning ideologues being the beliefs held via most Americans but census data destroys that notion. You’re argument is that in the event of a civil war the majority of Americans who are the supporting infrastructure to said minority would loose bc half the military would rather fire on there own families then defect, this doesn’t even take into account veterans, mercenaries, local police forces etc. the argument that “ah yes why would half of the army (largest military branch) defect in the face of firing on they’re family members they agree with politically because they took a oath ” is one of the most wild assertions I’ve heard.

[@Chinger98]

I don’t agree with everything you said, but I agree with the general sentiment. Just to prove your point from another angle, a thought leader on the right is Ben Shapiro. You expect me to die for a “thought leader” like him? Haha nope

[@randlebrowne2048]

Quite a few of us conservatives tend to roll our eyes at Ben Shapiro (and most of his coworkers).

[@jackskelington7377]

Make that little oompa loompa fight.

[@MoritzAxmann]

As a European I am absolutely shocked like wtf

[@joshjones6072]

Just remember that we Americans hold dearly to hashing things out very publicly, no subject is disallowed. Better to churn though this conversation than suffer stupid consequences. Also we all have guns, dems and republicans, and we all know it, so it's better to be polite in the end.

[@AmericanAdvancement]

The only time you should be concerned is if one side decides to shut up because that means they’re reaching for their boom stick.

[@byronhotchkiss3254]

@@AmericanAdvancement yeeeppp

[@Utilizador-gs3lx]

Not so far fetched that we might experience soemting similair with the far right grouth

[@MoritzAxmann]

@@Utilizador-gs3lx that is a concerning factor, but I think it’s way less likely

[@ecclektik]

Dude, screaming into your microphone just makes you sound like a kindergartener trying to win a fight of "I know you are, but what am I?"

[@white5096]

"Democracy" as a two party system. What a joke...

[@TylerDurden-pk5km]

Other countries with more parties, are not significantly more democratic. Slightly differing forms of oligarchy is the norm everywhere. An elective oligarchy is still an oligarchy and there is always, sometimes more, sometimes less a preselection of the oligarchs that will be put up for vote.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

Because a 1 party(Made of 1 or more patries) is so much better.

[@dinadaughtry8993]

Glad i live in a democratic Republic and not a democracy,a democracy is two sheep and three wolves voting on what is for dinner

[@TylerDurden-pk5km]

@@dinadaughtry8993 You life in a oligarchy - as held by the "Ion law of oligarchy". Once you delegate power, you will lose it - because you will lose control over the delegates.

[@commandercody8766]

The problem is that we shouldn't be worried about our differences as people, but our blatant curroption in the government in both parties. People on both sides are seemingly blinded to the curroptio, and the government is trying (and succeeding) to get every other group to hate each other, to the point where violent crimes are happening over petty differences and people are litterally segregating themselves. The government needs some serious reform, and nobody important cares enough to make a difference. the government is trying to become a dictatorship and almost nobody is trying to stop them.

[@HealyHQ]

Nobody is blinded to the corruption. Ask anybody how they feel about the government and they'll tell you it's messed up. The problem isn't blindness, it's an inability to organize and strike. A general strike would bring the government to its knees within a week, because corporations are the ones pulling the politician's strings, and a strike is the most powerful thing an organized workforce can do to affect their bottom lines. An organized working class could demand *anything* and it would be done, including installing a new government by demanding the current politicians GTFO. It'll never happen though; the two-party system is specifically designed to keep one half of the country at the throats of the other half, so they will never organize together to demand better from the ultra-powerful and wealthy elites.

[@aspen1606]

The other thing is the average civil war is often led by people of the previous regime. Franco was a general, Robert e Lee a colonel, Napoleon a general, Washington was a general, hitler was backed by Ludendorff. It would be a mark milley militia vs a mattis milita.

[@mrvwbug4423]

Mattis is too loyal, he would never lead a rebellion. That's why he received broad support to be Trump's SecDef because he was well respected by both sides of the political spectrum, loyal to the country more than Trump, and was assumed he would refuse any unlawful orders issued by Trump if Trump tried any funny stuff. A more likely civil war scenario would be a militia movement led by a hard core Trump loyalist with a military background like Allen West, his absolute disgrace of a military career would even give him street cred in a rebellion. West also fits the "previous regime" qualifier, though he would be leading a militia for whoever the leader of the MAGA rebellion ends up being, whether Trump himself or one of his closest loyalists if he's dead or in prison.

[@TheLAGopher]

@@mrvwbug4423 Many high level military officers (including Mattis and John Kelly) ended up resigning and publically denouncing Trump as anti-military and anti-veteran.

[@blackjac5000]

Hitler was elected to office.

[@aspen1606]

@@mrvwbug4423 It's just an example. Civil wars like this come from the top, therefore conditions don't seem civil war. A more divided lower echelon population results in a north ireland style conflict.

[@aspen1606]

@@TheLAGopher Even Monseur said it in the video but Trump's military support is very iffy. Jan 6 was the coup's moment to shine and start the civil war. Nothing happened. Before 2020, people thought 2020 would be the Civil War start date due to a much more energized election and people hating Trump. They did nothing. There are too many stakeholders (85% of Americans thing their lives is going well right now) and Americans arent illiterate peasants. It's all a movie based delusion and cope. If they start shit, the military will crush them.