This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
No, a future American civil war would inevitably involve significant state-to-state territorial disputes because the breakdown in federal authority necessitates big states establishing their regional hegemony to safeguard their own stability and non-isolation from both resources and markets. This process involves lots of conventional armies moving around because that’s what governments do.
For probably the most obvious example, California needs to engage in some level of adventurism against significantly smaller neighbors to ensure its water supply(no, it will not improve its water management, nor do citizens of wealthy and powerful regions accept rationing for the sake of the hinterlands) when the federal government can’t impose an acceptable solution from above.
What "breakdown in federal authority"? My point is that there wouldn't be any such thing. Why would there be? Just because a few hundred temporary figureheads are cut out of the loop more openly and explicitly than before?
Legitimacy, legitimacy, legitimacy. And more legitimacy. And eventually money, but still more legitimacy.
This "legitimacy" thing people keep talking about seems like a spook to me. "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." People obey the law and the government because armed men will haul you off and throw you in a cage if you don't (and shoot you if you resist). "The law" is only whatever rules you'll get punished for breaking. "Federal Law" isn't the US Code, it's only 'whatever the FBI, DEA, ATF, etc. will arrest you for' — nothing less, nothing more. And as long as those men with guns keep on enforcing the same rules, nothing changes, regardless of what some old man in some old building might say quoting old words on some old piece of parchment.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
...It seems to me that the sort of conflict you're talking about here is what happens following a complete collapse of the federal government. You're describing not the next American civil war, but the one after that.
Exactly. And I see no reason for it to collapse just because it's made explicit — even more explicit than our current doddering figurehead-in-chief does — that a US President has little more power than King Charles III does.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Were the federal government to fall, I’d expect the Rio Grande/the Rockies to split New Mexico between the Republic of Texas on the east and Calivada on the west, with Salt Lake taking Wyoming, Colorado, and a V-shaped chunk containing Santa Fe/Taos/Albuquerque.
The official map of The Hunger Games is pretty much how it would shake out.
It seems like based on current trends, a west coast transitional federal council engages in inland-facing imperialism that winds up resisted by approximately 1 trillion local and ethnic/religious interest groups while a red state coalition led by Texas supports them as a buffer to guard their flank in New Mexico and maybe props up some small states(greater Idaho, deseret, etc) to prevent a land link to Colorado. So fairly close I guess; but a Texas-led red state coalition already exists and you can expect especially the ones nearby to throw in with their larger, richer neighbor even more.
I think you’re right that New Mexico functionally ceases to exist in this scenario but Colorado would probably wind up as a major rival towards the Texas led coalition because it’s a geographically isolated blue spec facing a suddenly-expansionist and much larger neighbor- something like Finnish Russophobia except they both wind up with nukes. I also expect an independent republic of Texas to eventually try to split northern Mexico off from the rest of the country because the industrial zone it contains would be pretty key to Texas maintaining both its war machine and standard of living in the imperial core, although I’m not sure how it would do that(probably not a ground invasion).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Crunching some numbers to get a rough sense about potential Second US CW.
Compared to most of world's armies, US armed forces are enormous.
Compared to US territory and population, they are tiny, especially the high tech part.
Assuming US population as 330 million:
2,800 tanks = one tank/118,000 Americans
3,500 aircraft = one plane/95,000 Americans
760 helicopters = one chopper/435,000 Americans
And all these wonder weapons are dependent on supply from American and world economies, who would cease to exist when North America turns into Somalia on ice.
For comparison, in Syria in 2011 when the late unpleasantness began, the ratio was:
Counting Syrian population as 21 million:
4,800 MBT = one tank/4,375 Syrians
4,500 IFV = one IFV/4,666 Syrians
575 aircraft = one plane/36,000 Syrians
191 helicopters = one chopper/110,000 Syrians
Conclusion: Second US Civil War will be fought with pickup trucks and construction machinery with extra metal plates welded on.
And drones. Drones, drones, drones. Masses of 3D printed plastic drones swarming from horizon to horizon.
Yes, bikes too, our poster Kulak's dream coming true.
Interesting times for everyone involved(and the whole world will be involved).
edit: links set properly
Again, what makes you think it'd ever get to a "Second US Civil War" stage with open military, rather than just a bunch of Wacos, Ruby Ridges, and the arrest and/or execution of a bunch of attempted or actual McVeighs? Just ordinary law enforcement keeping Our Democracy safe from domestic terrorists?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link