One factor I would like to see expanded upon more in this manner is what the mobilization of the opposing sides would look like. If what you posit here is true and the advanced pre-war US military is rendered unable to sustain its systems or is too small to fight the war on its own, as was the case in the first civil war, then what would it look like for both sides raise new armies to fight each across the breadth of America? The US is rather unique for a potential civil war in my opinion simply the sheer numbers of small arms in the country (more than the number of people as you say) but a severe dearth of practically every other dedicated weapon of war, from planes to tanks to artillery.
Thus, I can easily see the war, in the beginning at least, being a race between the various militias and governments of each side to raise as many infantry as possible so as not to be overwhelmed by the rifles of the other side. The professional military I could see going in one of two directions.
First, I could see the patriot masses be recruited into the military itself, with the force being extremely watered down by new recruits, as even the pre-war privates would have to be thrust into NCO positions to ensure new divisions aren't made up entirely of the untrained, and the various force multipliers are also distributed shallowly due to limited numbers until production ramps up. This would ensure a minimally competent force, a large one that could be raised in a matter of weeks and would gain experience as the war continued into the months and years. This is the path the US army more or less took in both the first civil war and world wars.
The second option, and the less likely one in my opinion, as that the military retains its current form, a (relative to millions strong infantry hordes) small but elite force that retains its force multipliers within its own units and only expands when enough well-trained men and quality equipment come out of the pipeline. This version of the military couldn't be everywhere and would have to rely heavily on militias or infantry only citizen soldier units to hold lines, and thus be strategically vulnerable. However, as the wars in the Middle East and Ukraine have shown, these professional units, with actual training, experience, machine guns, night vision, artillery, command and control, medical equipment, mechanized vehicles, recon drones, and air support are absolutely dominant over those military formations that lack them, with each additional advantage layering upon each other until the modern US mechanized brigade could easily win crushing tactical victories against undisciplined infantry forces 10, 20 times their size.
The primary weakness of this method of course, is that many of those force multipliers go away rather quickly if logistics break down. They are not forces built for siege, attacking or defending, but rather tips of the spear that favor quick, decisive attacks or counter attacks where they either break against their equals or drive the masses before them. In short, an army that could prove decisive in ending the war early, overrunning the enemy before they are truly prepared, but one that would become less and less sufficient if the war dragged on and their vital equipment and personnel are attrite to shadows of their former selves or left to wither on the vine by broken supply lines.
Some interesting thoughts. That is the biggest question for me, who will be the opposing sides.
One thing I think we can say for sure is that CW2 is not going to have the obvious borders that CW1 did. CW1 borders were an historical oddity due to the fact that cotton requires X number of frost free days to grow. Missouri areas that allowed for cotton contained Southerner sympathizers, Missouri areas that did not had Northern sympathizers, for example.
Today, even the reddest states have a blue capital county. Other than a handful of outliers, almost all of the 3100 or so counties in the US have a 60/40 or 70/30 mix of red vs. blue support. This isn't going to be a CW1 redux, as at the local level it will be Rwanda X Yugoslavia. Which still leaves open the question of what the breakaway nation(s) will look like.
A very interesting missive and well thought out...the problem is that such scenarios never play out as advertised. Yes, we are a divided country and the Left eat their own,,,which is a major blessing. While one can definitely see political violence over the near-term (all done by the Left) there are far more people who remember what America was like and will fight (literally) to get us back to some semblance of order. I would argue at this juncture the Left will figure out they'd best go back into the shadows. I say this even if they control the enforcement arms of government. This group of enforcers are not as big as people give it credit and can be easily degraded. Regardless, I look forward to your other scenarios as I'm sure they will be captivating. Pax
"I would argue at this juncture the Left will figure out they'd best go back into the shadows."
I'd like to agree with you on this point, but that would require self reflection and some semblance of limiting principles on the Left. All evidence currently points to the Left trying to retain power against all other factors to the end.
All the vulnerabilities of the population are much worse for the government. Bases need power, water, food, sanitation and fuel aa much as the towns need them.
Many if not most bases capable of launching aircraft are deep in the heart of what will be hostile territory.
It would be 100 times easier to take out their power, water and supplies. Supplies and I suppose some water can be flown in - on large, heavy and relatively slow transport aircraft. Then there is that pesky fuel problem. Delivered by trucks to bases. How long do you think the locals will let that go on?
Bases have emergency generation, gas or diesel if the local substation transformers are damaged or transmission line insulators (juicy targets) this backup capacity is very limited.
The military cannot even go after generation or transmission because anything they knock out will put them in the dark as well.
Base water supplies are generally municipal, and only one or two danaged valves or a pump VFDs away from being dry.
I wouldn't want to be one of traitors in the military who made war on us. What would you do to the pilot who bombed your house and killed your family?
If you looked at the resources of the US Federal government before the actual US Civil War, there were less than 20,000 Federal troops in the military. The best officers in the Federal army deserted to the Confederacy and the Confederacy captured / confiscated vast stores of Federal military supplies. The Confederacy was far more organized and committed and much larger compared to the Union forces than any US revolutionary movement would be today. Military and logistical technology for controlling territory and projecting force by a centralized government was far, far behind what it is today. Yet the Federal government still won the Civil War. Tells you something about what a determined central government with popular support can do, not based on pre-war imaginings of “do they have enough guys with guns right now to take out me and my hypothetical buddies” but based on mobilization capacity and popular support. The USG would have massive popular support today in putting down an insurrection. The US population as a whole does not feel anything like the way you, a Canadian right wing anarchist, do about the USG.
the situation has changed. its not longer about state's rights, it's about not wanting to be genocided out of existence by an occupied terrorist state. and it's not going to be waged by line infantry and skirmishers, but by anonymous autists using petn packed drone swarms and other untraceable methods in surgical attacks on key individuals. why get bogged down fighting hapless national guardsmen when you can bypass the pawns and send semtex delivered via drone directly into the offices of some globalist ngo executives sponsoring mass migration and their governmental counterparts? the only thing really stopping explosions going off is people's perception that things aren't as bad as it is. but wait until they find out.
"it's about not wanting to be genocided out of existence"
For you it might be. For the vast majority of people it's about getting a raise and how their sportsball team did last night. Government has a lot of power because it is organized; we do not have power because we are not organized. Also, internet debate doesn't count as organizing.
Why does internet debate not count as organizing? What did you think the bolsheviks and commies were doing when they got together in all their meetings, or shared all their pamphlets?
Agreeing? Taking action? No they were wasting time blathering.
Not exactly. Online radicalization leads to a bunch of disconnected radicals. Who should then be organizing non-radicals IRL.
Bolshevik meetings turned out to be mostly irrelevant, as their uprisings were crushed in all places except Russia. Which succeeded because Lenin ignored all the marxist bullshit and stuck with what worked: tell the people at the bottom who've been pissed on that they can be on top and do the pissing if they just obey orders. Hence "Lenin's pragmatism" being a catch phrase used by marxists to excuse the fact that Lenin ignored most of what Marx wrote, and his disciples wrote and argued about in their interminable meetings and pamphlets.
Ah yes the USG is going to arm and train 10s of thousands of dubiously loyal people them unleash them into areas where they can easily defect and bring arms, information, training, and personal to the anti government forces. You can't use conscripts to fight an insurgency of the same population. If even 5% of the urban population is possibly hostile the government has to assume everyone is because there is no good way to find those hostiles until they shoot at you.
What do you mean by "the same population?" We aren't the same population, which is by design for exactly the reason you say. You can't crush a revolt of People X by using People X, but if your empire is comprised of People A-Z, then you can pick and choose who you use to crush it. The Soviets did this a bunch of times, using forces from a satellite state to crush the revolt in a different satellite state.
By same population I mean American Whites, combat troops have to smart or they just die, so whatever the government deploys is going to majority white, America does have some cultural decisions but ethnically a whit dude is just a white dude. The soviets had big populations of at least 3 racial groups that were competent soldiers America has white guys(ethnically homogeneous with the rebles) and Latinos( ethnically homogeneous with a forgien enemy the cartels) Black dudes should be the obvious answer but they just aren't smart enough for modern combat, that means the government must rely on vetted professionals unless they want their intelligence and supply systems to look like colander. I suppose you could use the whites externally and the Latinos internally but that only holds if the cartels stay on their side of the border.
The Civil War was not an insurgency fought to overthrow the Federal government, but rather a rebellion fought conventionally where the South attempted to spilt away into its own nation-state. It must also be remembered that neither side used conscription from the beginning.
The South was first to implement it, in April 1862 (a year into the war) while the Union would follow suit with its own version in spring of 1863. This means that both sides were entirely volunteer armies for the opening year of the war, which means the core veterans of both sides were ideologically supportive of the war from the start and willing to fight it to the end.
In the actual civil war they were fighting a conventional ground campaign against what was for all effects a forgien nation. Union troops mostly had never been a hundred miles from their homes the south was as forgien as the moon to them, Americans today have normally lived in several different regions as children and certainly met and made friends with people from all over the nation. And again the Union was fighting an insurgency they were fighting a conventional feild army in a campaign that was functionality identical to the wars of Napoleon of Marlborough.
This really isn’t true. Most of the civil war was fought in border regions where people were intimately familiar with the South. Stories of families where some members fought for the Union and others for the Confederacy are legion. Even in non border states Americans were hardly peasants who were unfamiliar with the rest of the country. The North and South had huge commonalities. And the South put an army in the field because that is what you have to do to control territory instead of just engaging in nihilistic terrorist violence. Everyone from Russian Communists to the North Vietnamese relied on field armies to actually win the wars that gave them territorial control, even though they were fighting very weak to nonexistent central governments (which would not be the case in the U.S.)
The Confederacy was one third the population of the North and about an eighth as industrialized. The split would be much closer to fifty fifty now and the blue states have regulated much of their industrial capacity out of existence or at least out of their borders.
Not to mention that now the Left would have disjointed territories in the Boswash corridor, Chicago, Atlanta, and the West Coast.
Everything our author is saying about sieges would be far more easily turned against them. Imagine a couple thousand rednecks encircling Atlanta and just cutting the power and water. You’d have mass panic in hours and mass death in weeks.
No, you'd have tens of thousands of city residents organized to kill those rednecks, with federal help.
Also, where are you going to get thousands of rednecks to besiege Atlanta? Young rednecks are too busy listening to rap, smoking weed, and reassuring everyone around them that they can't be racist because all their nieces and nephews are black.
Right now that's very true, suppose it's 2035 though, the US is currently bogged down defending the scrap of war torn territory known as the former Israel, due to the increasingly dicy international situation Gas costs $12 dollars a gallon, the county has been in major recession/depression from the collapse of the student loan and commercial real-estate bubbles for 6 years. J.D Vance's named successor was just killed by a carbomb 2 weeks after winning the republican nomination. 50% of college graduates make 30k a year and remain totally unable to gain employment, even STEM graduates. People would be much more likely to commit violence. This is not an insane outcome this is infact a depressingly possible future.
interesting to contemplate and then decide, nope, we don't need to do that again. We don't need to fall for the same-ole bankers' tricks and be psyoped into playing along with their actual war scenarios, which is exactly what they want us to do. We need to put our energies into building resilient communities and the globalist-free systems we need and deserve. Their house of cards is built on fear and deceit. Not buying into the narratives and turning our attention to ways we can thrive without them will win this war.
They knew what would happen were prepared... and then launched an attack designed to make it happen.
Now Israel’s economy is bleeding out faster than the people of Gaza and instead of being slowly strangled, they might draw the entire world into their conflict
They have a disproportionate involvement in most major wars post napoleon or so. Most peaces are also banker peaces. When they don't want war to happen any potential combatants get smacked down hard.
Hamas drew in the IOF into a Stalingrad-cum-Vietnam urban hellscape tunnel warfare. After a year, it surely looks like the Battle of Kursk for the IOF. The defender gets stronger as time passes by...
To those who claimed Bibi orchestrated the attack: The kamikaze drones blitzkrieg by Hamas blew a massive hole in the IOF's automated perimeter defense during the early days. This is preceded by a coordinated barrage of mortar strikes on the early warning sensors... One hell of a prison break
> and then launched an attack designed to make it happen.
I'm very open to the possibility that mossad engineered that one. It was politically extremely convenient to Nyetenyahu. It mostly served to eliminate political rivals (atheist jews who go to raves on jewish holidays) and galvanised what had been waning support for his regime.
It looks like he might have bitten off more than he could chew, but I definitely think he had a hand in it. If not it was an incredible cohencidence.
we really don't get to decide this. they will make it impossible to avoid war. they will rape your children(more than they already have), they will destroy your communities and force you to fellate transexual black cock metaphorically speaking. it's inevitable at this point. cultivate your gardens, but remember that it's better to be a warrior in a garden than a gardener in a war
it's never inevitable. They've been trying to gin up WWIII for decades. Hasn't worked. They rely on our consent on the basic tenets of their "authority" and "experts" and "emergency" and "threat" or they wouldn't spend trillions for propaganda. That's collapsing by the day. For example:
Gardeners in your analogy can hold an energy that the entire war goes around. There are folks I know who never wore a mask, never bothered at all about the jabs, never got sick and just carried on as normal. They even enjoyed the quiet time with family as the world shut down and they made plenty of money. That too can happen. And we absolutely do get to decide. They're trying to psyop us into believing we don't.
The only way to effectively fight back is by having communities like she speaks of. Lone wolves are irrelevant, only teams are going to make it through what is coming.
Yea this situation would be miserable. But we may not have the option of just going back to the way things used to be. We might have a choice between globo-homo gay race communism. Where you eat the bugs and live in a plutocratic panopticon technocracy. Deal with carbon credits and central bank digital currency and digital real ID - or fight.
Or do not comply and build a better system without them. Jab passes failed because there was a huge push back and noncompliance. If we have alternate exchange systems people will have other options besides their tokens. It’s really pretty simple. We just have been conditioned to believe they have all the power. We are the ones with the power. They need our consent.
In their haste to impose the authoritarian digital currency and greedily tokenizing every commodity, they inadvertantly create a loophole in the system. Any attempt to close such loophole will cast doubt over the entire derivatives market 🤭
If you want peace, prepare for war. When SHTF, what's gonna stop the govt from forcefully takeover your resilient communities using eminent domain? Without men bearing arms who are organized in well regulated militia, you're powerless against such tyranny. Freedom isn't free...
We’re already in a war. A silent war. This war slings messaging and narratives and psyops and banking and fake emergencies and harmful “solutions.” We’re being programmed to fight the last war with guns. That’s what they want so they can declare the next emergency. It’s a trap they’ve used over and over in other countries. Resilient communities will know when they’re being cheated and lied to and have their own better systems. I have no doubt they’ll be able to stand up for themselves. Theirs is a house of cards dependent on narratives of lies. Once enough people toss their belief in the lies, it’s presumed authority collapses. No one will follow their orders. The “solutions” will be seen for what they are and tossed out. It’s already happening in pieces and then it can happen all at once.
I believe you. There's a coordinated effort to cause food shortage. Few months ago, the UNGA voted on a resolution to declare food as a right. US and Israel voted against it! WTF, right?
In light of this, I identify 4 areas to achieve resilient and secure community:
1. Grow your own food. Diversify your food sources. Prioritize low water requirement ones. Protein source is more important than carb.
2. Generate your own energy. Link up the community into a microgrid. If possible, setup P2P energy trading arrangements with off-site facilities, especially the cold chain distribution network. Energy cost is one of the biggest cost to preserve food. Carbon tax follows wherever energy is involved. Greenwash it wherever possible.
3. Process your own water. Never rely on singular source. Flowing water may be cheap, but it's susceptible to pollution as pointed out by OP. If possible, setup several tube wells and rainwater retention ponds with its filtration system. The hostile bureaucracy will have a hard day to regulate it out of business.
4. Arm yourselves to protect all of the above. Organize the entire community into a well-regulated militia. Work together with the disenfranchised veterans of the armed forces.
In other words, integrate the key components of the agri-food supply chain and arm its owners. Learn from the Mexican drug cartels on how they setup pricing mechanism and settle disputes throughout their supply chain. Individual homesteads and small retailers can be crushed by Big Food (google on the fate of the white farmers in South Africa), but a consortium of homesteads and mom-and-pop retailers can put up a serious fight, both via legal means and against paid saboteurs
If civil conflict broke out in the US today it would be nothing like the Civil War. Despite what Southern romantics like to say, the Civil War was a complete one sided beat down where the South got manhandled by the North from Day 1. Pittsburgh alone had more industrial capacity than the whole Confederacy combined. The Union had at least 10x the amount of railroads as the South, maybe even 30x. The grand plan of the North to win the war was Operation Anaconda which was Step 1: Isolate the South via naval blockade. Step 2: Cut the South in half by seizing the Mississippi River. Step 3: Go and destroy everything in the South. The North executed Operation Anaconda perfectly and the South never made any significant resistance against it.
Today in a Red vs. Blue conflict things are much more balanced. Huge chunks of industry have moved to Red States and even in Blue States a lot of the industrial facilities are in red parts of those states. The Blue States have sever man power disadvantages of young men willing to fight. They will try to use foreign mercenaries but that likely will blow up in their faces. The Blue States can win by dividing the Red States against each other and using their insitutional control over the federal government which may very well be enough to win. In any conflict today things are a lot more balanced between red and blue and it's just going to be low grade nasty and brutal on a scale that hasn't been seen in a very long time.
On top of all that, oil and food production is concentrated in Red heartland. Cant do much war fighting without diesel and jet fuel. Blue team is very concentrated to the Northeast and West coasts, and I don’t mean the coastal states, but literally 50-mile urban strips along the coasts. The only thing they might have an advantage in is communications (social media for example) and tech.
On the other hand the South had the advantage that they were defending. By way of comparison the American colonies were even more behind Britain during the revolutionary war.
Good points. CW1 was an anomaly in many ways, largely due to cotton/ slavery requiring X number of frost-free days in a year. Currently only a single digit number of the 3000 or so counties in the US have more than a 70/30 split politically. Just like almost all CWs, A huge part of it is going to be neighbor vs. neighbor. CW1 had some of that in the border disputes, but it wasn't a large part and wasn't determinative except to radicalize each side more.
> Read: property confiscation. why do you think they’re pushing “unrealized capital gains”? they’re preparing to take your retirement fund and house in a budget crisis
Hah! Joke's on them! My "retirement fund" is a box of 10mm. Though, ideally, I'll only need the one round...
Where did all the PPP money go? What about the Fed keeping interest rates at 0 for 8 years longer than the GFC required? Those unrealized capital gains were due to the Cantillion Effect. Jaime Diamon. Peter Thiel, Bezos, all the hedge fund grifters, using free money to bid up the prices of every asset with the 99.99% of us got whacked? and his pals got fat. Read Rudy Havenstein's stuff. End the Fed.
No Fed, no NGOs, no campaigns, donor washes, patronage, modern umbrella Corporations, the DoD / Pentagon, the standing army, the drug war...
Income tax was created during the Hapsburg era so the citizens would repay war loans made to kings in perpetuity- a war loan was no longer a bet. That's why income tax was illegal under the Founders, they knew what the Banksters were up to: conquest and taking territory create an empire based on an economy of slavery and chattel asset loans as they did in Rome, Dark Age Europe, and as Islam.
A thought: If the government decides to target civilian infrastructure, that would basically crush its legitimacy forever in the eyes of the affected. I.e., suppose the government "wins", how is it going to rule over the broken? I cannot imagine any scenario other than an endless guerilla war. This would support the working hypothesis of entering a thirty years war, which erased between 70 and 100% of the population in some German areas.
Sodium hypochlorite solution aka liquid bleach is quite unstable and degrades too quickly to last through a prolonged conflict. Solid calcium hypochlorite aka pool bleach is better.
Honestly, I think most would be better if stockpiling life straws, I know I bought some for my household after reading this (I also have a lake/pond behind my house)
ag- Farming requires the delivery of hybrid seeds, diesel, and many other things that could easily be blockaded. Crops are brought to centralized storage areas that could easily be destroyed or seized.
hunting- During the Great Depression many game animals in many areas were quickly hunted to extinction. I remember my grandpa telling me about when he was young someone came into town excitedly telling everyone he'd seen a deer foot print, and everyone went out to look at it. Afterwards, states reintroduced game species and banned their hunting, waited till they established themselves, then opened up hunting. Those species were again quickly hunted to extinction, causing states to create the many limitations on hunting that we have today. This was with a population roughly 1/3 what it is now.
As another example, I did the math in my state some time ago on deer hunting. Rough numbers, but fairly accurate ratios: 5% of the state participates in the 9 day gun season which has many restrictions for sporting purposes. In that time about 1/3 of the deer population is killed... So 5% of the population hunting in a sportsmanlike manner for 2.5% of the year kill 33% of the population. I hypothetically know a guy who heard of a guy who talked to a guy in a bar who said that him and 2 friends with sub-velocity .22s can fill the bed of a pickup truck with deer in a few hours by shining.
Pretty much all COIN theory says that in order to stop an insurgency it is essential to sever the links between the insurgents and the civilians. Modern theory says you do this by being nice to the civilians, which almost always fails. History says you eliminate the insurgent's support base of civilians by eliminating the civilians, either through genocide or mass deportation. The "harrowing of the North" is one such example, where the north of England rebelled against William the Conqueror. If he sent his army to beat it, the south would have risen. So he sent small groups of his men after harvest to burn stored crops and villages. 20 years later in the Domesday book much of that land was still listed as unpopulated wasteland.
The Romans did this as well, as Tacitus states:
"They make a desert, and call it peace."
If our government stopped caring about world opinion, which it seems to have done quite some time ago, it could easily exterminate vast swathes of its territory, using false flags and control of the media to paint it as either necessary or Russian interference, or whatever they felt like. If Willy the C can do it with swords and torches, I'm sure our gov could with planes, defoliants, bombs, local forces on the ground (more on that later,) etc. etc. They fail against small nations now because their targets are either getting food smuggled in from outside and/or operate at a subsistence level anyway, and our gov doesn't really care much either way as their goal in war is mainly to churn profits and create refugees to later come to the US. When it's their jobs and even their lives on the line, they will succeed.
====
"a US civil war is virtually inevitable in the next 10 years…"
Between who? Peasant revolts are virtually always exterminated. Insurgencies can easily be stopped if you don't mind a bit of genocide. Grilla wars require most of the 7 or 8 items on a list, of which the US would have 0. All levels of government from state governors on up are swamp creatures, as are almost all generals. Even the reddest of states have a big blue county for a state capital. A vast majority of men with guns fight for a paycheck and a pension, and the ones who control paychecks and pensions are government workers in those blue counties.
When cities get hungry they will go to rural areas, probably in organized even government-sanctioned groups, to take it from farmers. Internet-rural people like to pound their chest about "muh gunz" at this point, but the fact is 100:1 odds means the first farmer to stand up will be killed and then the rest will fall in line. Just like in all of human history.
"Whatifalthist said he thinks we’re at the start of an era like the 30 years war…"
Great example. Pretty close to a Mad Max situation, and at the end of it the same noble families were still noble and the same peasant families were still peasants. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Personally, I think it will be more like the post-Alexander Wars of Succession. Even in that case, the Diadochi will be composed of existing swamp creatures: generals, governors, local political party leaders.
Whatever it is, if we aren't the bosses when something kicks off, we aren't going to be the bosses afterwards. We need to stop using Mad Max as an excuse for not pro-actively networking and building local and state influence. This has been a right-wing cope since forever: "if only the government disappeared, we'd totally win against the government!"
Peasant revolts are not nearly always exterminated. And America doesn’t have peasants, every rural American is both armed and in possession of land and transportation. Fundamentally different class
We have countless example of insurgencies and guerrilla wars being decided in the rebels favour.
In order for a CW or Rev of some sort to succeed it needs people of each class supporting it. Elites, middle, and lower classes. If it's only elites you get people arguing all the time and nothing gets done. If only the lower classes you might get a tactical victory, then they declare victory and go home. Then the gov raises another army and exterminates them. We have no elites on our side to provide a government structure to lead things.
As I said, insurr/grilla wars need most of the things on a list of 7 or 8 things, and we have 0. Nearby safe zones, outside government supporting it, government that is being rebelled against being unwilling to go full genocide for whatever reason, ~70% support of local population, I forget the rest.
Here's how insurr/grilla wars go: grilla forces attack and get wrecked, then the outside gov in the safe zone reconstitutes the force, which attacks and gets wrecked again. Repeat until either the outside gov or the rebelled-against gov quits.
Our government knows of these studies; it funded or wrote most of them, and was often an integral player behind or against those revolts. This is why they freak out about potential leaders (e.g., Trump) but don't much care about us peasants beating our chests online.
Its a basic literate person with the equivalent of a Bachelors degree and a 125 IQ.
Someone who can manage a bureaucracy and think abstractly. There's nothing special about being born to the right sub-ethnicity or social income. THE COMMUNISTS KILLED EVERYONE OF HIGHER SOCIAL CLASSES, some as much as 25% of the pre-revolution population, and the communist states functioned.
No it isn't. An elite is someone that believes they are elite, who non-elites will also think is an elite. Yes, it's recursive.
Lenin was upper middle class.
Trotsky was born into a family of wealthy land owners.
Of course they killed other wealthy elites, they were rivals.
You will not suddenly reveal your power level in a moment of crisis and be elevated to Supreme Leader. People will look to those they already recognize as leaders when crisis happens. Sheriffs, generals, governors, etc. If there are no such leaders who rise to the challenge we'll lose.
In reply to your hunting comment, I think alot of people forget non game animals, Hemingway(rest in piss) put meat on his table through most of the depression by killing pigeons in local parks, an old timer regailed me about how as a kid he made 5 dollars a week selling opossum, raccoon and porcupine sausage in Arkansas, l and he had it on good authority that rat gravey and corn cakes are a passable meal when you're hungry, my own bug out kit has a dozen aluminum rat traps and a minnow funnel, it's not good food but boil a half moldy onion carrots and a rat long enough and you can convince yourself it's squirrel.
Also farming could be achieved via the guerrilla method, burying potatoes and hurling seeds about randomly isn't efficient but it does produce food that is frightfully hard to round up and destroy. And American cities are uniquely suitable for this because they're huge and covered in green space.
In my country, back during the commie insurgency days, the govt forces relocate almost all of the rural folks into gated and patrolled "New Villages" to cut off supplies to the commie insurgents operating in the jungles (which border rural settlements and plantations)
Holy smokes, smart cities without all the fancy bells and whistles (they're just an advertising gimmick anyways). Can't do much farming in a smart city.
The main problem with the comparison to gaza is this: humanitarian aid. Pretty much every arab country has sent thousands of tons of food and medical supplies to gaza, which was than used by the local hamas administration as a means of securing support (you won't bite the hand that feeds you..), that's the main reason why the members of hamas have increased (as that's the best way to get the humanitarian aid for the average gazan). Would the struggling forces getting bogged down in Appalachia allow that much aid to pass as the israelis did in gaza (the only reason israel has allowed that is because they didn't feel threatened enough from that, and there was a strong international pressure to do so)? If the regime was truly insecure about its power they probably wouldn't do so, and they wouldn't need to appease the international court for human rights since the victor would trial the losers anyways ,unlike in gaza where netanyahu could realistically face trial if he would've tried a genuine siege without humanitarian aid. Also another point that you didn't mention is ports: miami and houston could probably buy their food from abroad and desalinate their water (gaza didn't have a real port so that's why they didn't do that). A much more realistic comparison to Appalachia is an arable afghanistan, rather than gaza simply because of that, which would still make the case,however note that the taliban government has fallen after 2 years and was than reorganized as a guerilla force that won simply because the american people had enough fighting in a foreign war. However here too there's a question: why would the forces trying to maintain rule over Appalachia have that same disinterest?
Just one minor niggle: Ireland is listed on those maps as a majority food importer, but I don't think they take into account exports. Ireland produces huge amounts of beef which are mostly exported as a luxury product, then we import brazilian beef to feed the locals. If there were a breakdown in global trade then we'd probably just revert to eating local food.
There's also the factor that ~+20% of our population right now are foreigners who came here for easy work visas and free stuff. They'd be gone in a flash if things turned bad. In fact a lot of us are hoping for a recession for that reason. Multinational investment is killing us.
You can get an H2Go for around $115. You put a few drops of salt water into the chamber and it uses electrolysis to make chlorine to disinfect water. It has a built in battery and solar panel as well.
Sawyer filters are like 20 bucks each also and are very good for filtering water.
A lot of camping kit like this you have to really read the fine print to see how many total gallons they're good for.
Remember across a siege you'd need to purify 1000s of gallons of water. For a Family of 4, 10s of thousands.
The ZeroWater system I keep in my fridge has filters that cost something like $20 each, and are only good for ~40 gallons before they fail... Now those are really good filters that remove microplastics, Zenoestrogens and trace metals... In a survival situation you're really more concerned about parasites and disease.... And I'm not bathing in 000pmm water from my ZeroWater....
But in a disaster or Seige? Ya you don't want to be bathing in crap water from the street or some ravine. And getting 10s of thousands of gallons across a siege of clean water is a real challenge.
Sawyer says they're good for 100,000 gallons each for 20 bucks a pop. Granted you need to back flush it with clean water periodically, and assume the gaskets hold up. But a 5 pack of gaskets is like 3 dollars also.
The h2go says it has a lifetime of 32,000 gallons, but I think thats based off the battery expected life. If you had extra solar battery backs you could probably extend that even more. I've got a creek and 150 gallons of rain barrels that I can filter/purify as well as 15 gallons (so far) of Jerry cans with clean water on standby. But the h2go was made for 3rd world countries so its pretty robust.
These are just tools, you can't really plan for infinite water. But these tools aren't very expensive and a great starting place if you have zero water contingency right now.
Realize that things are going to continually get worse from here on out, therefore today is as good as it's going to get! So enjoy it while you can! In 2030 you will look back on today and think, "wow, we really had it made back then, things were so good and we didn't even know it!"
This isn’t anything like Lincoln’s civil war. This one would be over quickly for several reasons:
* The left is largely unarmed and untrained
* The left is concentrated in the cities and dependent on just in time services & supplies
* The core of the military and most rank and file law enforcement are NOT left and would not fight other Americans for woke generals let alone politicians
One factor I would like to see expanded upon more in this manner is what the mobilization of the opposing sides would look like. If what you posit here is true and the advanced pre-war US military is rendered unable to sustain its systems or is too small to fight the war on its own, as was the case in the first civil war, then what would it look like for both sides raise new armies to fight each across the breadth of America? The US is rather unique for a potential civil war in my opinion simply the sheer numbers of small arms in the country (more than the number of people as you say) but a severe dearth of practically every other dedicated weapon of war, from planes to tanks to artillery.
Thus, I can easily see the war, in the beginning at least, being a race between the various militias and governments of each side to raise as many infantry as possible so as not to be overwhelmed by the rifles of the other side. The professional military I could see going in one of two directions.
First, I could see the patriot masses be recruited into the military itself, with the force being extremely watered down by new recruits, as even the pre-war privates would have to be thrust into NCO positions to ensure new divisions aren't made up entirely of the untrained, and the various force multipliers are also distributed shallowly due to limited numbers until production ramps up. This would ensure a minimally competent force, a large one that could be raised in a matter of weeks and would gain experience as the war continued into the months and years. This is the path the US army more or less took in both the first civil war and world wars.
The second option, and the less likely one in my opinion, as that the military retains its current form, a (relative to millions strong infantry hordes) small but elite force that retains its force multipliers within its own units and only expands when enough well-trained men and quality equipment come out of the pipeline. This version of the military couldn't be everywhere and would have to rely heavily on militias or infantry only citizen soldier units to hold lines, and thus be strategically vulnerable. However, as the wars in the Middle East and Ukraine have shown, these professional units, with actual training, experience, machine guns, night vision, artillery, command and control, medical equipment, mechanized vehicles, recon drones, and air support are absolutely dominant over those military formations that lack them, with each additional advantage layering upon each other until the modern US mechanized brigade could easily win crushing tactical victories against undisciplined infantry forces 10, 20 times their size.
The primary weakness of this method of course, is that many of those force multipliers go away rather quickly if logistics break down. They are not forces built for siege, attacking or defending, but rather tips of the spear that favor quick, decisive attacks or counter attacks where they either break against their equals or drive the masses before them. In short, an army that could prove decisive in ending the war early, overrunning the enemy before they are truly prepared, but one that would become less and less sufficient if the war dragged on and their vital equipment and personnel are attrite to shadows of their former selves or left to wither on the vine by broken supply lines.
Some interesting thoughts. That is the biggest question for me, who will be the opposing sides.
One thing I think we can say for sure is that CW2 is not going to have the obvious borders that CW1 did. CW1 borders were an historical oddity due to the fact that cotton requires X number of frost free days to grow. Missouri areas that allowed for cotton contained Southerner sympathizers, Missouri areas that did not had Northern sympathizers, for example.
Today, even the reddest states have a blue capital county. Other than a handful of outliers, almost all of the 3100 or so counties in the US have a 60/40 or 70/30 mix of red vs. blue support. This isn't going to be a CW1 redux, as at the local level it will be Rwanda X Yugoslavia. Which still leaves open the question of what the breakaway nation(s) will look like.
A very interesting missive and well thought out...the problem is that such scenarios never play out as advertised. Yes, we are a divided country and the Left eat their own,,,which is a major blessing. While one can definitely see political violence over the near-term (all done by the Left) there are far more people who remember what America was like and will fight (literally) to get us back to some semblance of order. I would argue at this juncture the Left will figure out they'd best go back into the shadows. I say this even if they control the enforcement arms of government. This group of enforcers are not as big as people give it credit and can be easily degraded. Regardless, I look forward to your other scenarios as I'm sure they will be captivating. Pax
"I would argue at this juncture the Left will figure out they'd best go back into the shadows."
I'd like to agree with you on this point, but that would require self reflection and some semblance of limiting principles on the Left. All evidence currently points to the Left trying to retain power against all other factors to the end.
Good point 👍
All the vulnerabilities of the population are much worse for the government. Bases need power, water, food, sanitation and fuel aa much as the towns need them.
Many if not most bases capable of launching aircraft are deep in the heart of what will be hostile territory.
It would be 100 times easier to take out their power, water and supplies. Supplies and I suppose some water can be flown in - on large, heavy and relatively slow transport aircraft. Then there is that pesky fuel problem. Delivered by trucks to bases. How long do you think the locals will let that go on?
Bases have emergency generation, gas or diesel if the local substation transformers are damaged or transmission line insulators (juicy targets) this backup capacity is very limited.
The military cannot even go after generation or transmission because anything they knock out will put them in the dark as well.
Base water supplies are generally municipal, and only one or two danaged valves or a pump VFDs away from being dry.
I wouldn't want to be one of traitors in the military who made war on us. What would you do to the pilot who bombed your house and killed your family?
If you looked at the resources of the US Federal government before the actual US Civil War, there were less than 20,000 Federal troops in the military. The best officers in the Federal army deserted to the Confederacy and the Confederacy captured / confiscated vast stores of Federal military supplies. The Confederacy was far more organized and committed and much larger compared to the Union forces than any US revolutionary movement would be today. Military and logistical technology for controlling territory and projecting force by a centralized government was far, far behind what it is today. Yet the Federal government still won the Civil War. Tells you something about what a determined central government with popular support can do, not based on pre-war imaginings of “do they have enough guys with guns right now to take out me and my hypothetical buddies” but based on mobilization capacity and popular support. The USG would have massive popular support today in putting down an insurrection. The US population as a whole does not feel anything like the way you, a Canadian right wing anarchist, do about the USG.
the situation has changed. its not longer about state's rights, it's about not wanting to be genocided out of existence by an occupied terrorist state. and it's not going to be waged by line infantry and skirmishers, but by anonymous autists using petn packed drone swarms and other untraceable methods in surgical attacks on key individuals. why get bogged down fighting hapless national guardsmen when you can bypass the pawns and send semtex delivered via drone directly into the offices of some globalist ngo executives sponsoring mass migration and their governmental counterparts? the only thing really stopping explosions going off is people's perception that things aren't as bad as it is. but wait until they find out.
"it's about not wanting to be genocided out of existence"
For you it might be. For the vast majority of people it's about getting a raise and how their sportsball team did last night. Government has a lot of power because it is organized; we do not have power because we are not organized. Also, internet debate doesn't count as organizing.
Why does internet debate not count as organizing? What did you think the bolsheviks and commies were doing when they got together in all their meetings, or shared all their pamphlets?
Agreeing? Taking action? No they were wasting time blathering.
Radicalization is organization
Not exactly. Online radicalization leads to a bunch of disconnected radicals. Who should then be organizing non-radicals IRL.
Bolshevik meetings turned out to be mostly irrelevant, as their uprisings were crushed in all places except Russia. Which succeeded because Lenin ignored all the marxist bullshit and stuck with what worked: tell the people at the bottom who've been pissed on that they can be on top and do the pissing if they just obey orders. Hence "Lenin's pragmatism" being a catch phrase used by marxists to excuse the fact that Lenin ignored most of what Marx wrote, and his disciples wrote and argued about in their interminable meetings and pamphlets.
Well, not if half the people in said online discussion are black-pilled idiots.
Ah yes the USG is going to arm and train 10s of thousands of dubiously loyal people them unleash them into areas where they can easily defect and bring arms, information, training, and personal to the anti government forces. You can't use conscripts to fight an insurgency of the same population. If even 5% of the urban population is possibly hostile the government has to assume everyone is because there is no good way to find those hostiles until they shoot at you.
What do you mean by "the same population?" We aren't the same population, which is by design for exactly the reason you say. You can't crush a revolt of People X by using People X, but if your empire is comprised of People A-Z, then you can pick and choose who you use to crush it. The Soviets did this a bunch of times, using forces from a satellite state to crush the revolt in a different satellite state.
By same population I mean American Whites, combat troops have to smart or they just die, so whatever the government deploys is going to majority white, America does have some cultural decisions but ethnically a whit dude is just a white dude. The soviets had big populations of at least 3 racial groups that were competent soldiers America has white guys(ethnically homogeneous with the rebles) and Latinos( ethnically homogeneous with a forgien enemy the cartels) Black dudes should be the obvious answer but they just aren't smart enough for modern combat, that means the government must rely on vetted professionals unless they want their intelligence and supply systems to look like colander. I suppose you could use the whites externally and the Latinos internally but that only holds if the cartels stay on their side of the border.
Unfortunately many Whites do not identify as White.
You may be right, but I think the globalists would agree w/ me. Which means the argument will likely be put to the test IRL . I hope I'm wrong.
Again this is exactly what was done in the actual Civil War
The Civil War was not an insurgency fought to overthrow the Federal government, but rather a rebellion fought conventionally where the South attempted to spilt away into its own nation-state. It must also be remembered that neither side used conscription from the beginning.
The South was first to implement it, in April 1862 (a year into the war) while the Union would follow suit with its own version in spring of 1863. This means that both sides were entirely volunteer armies for the opening year of the war, which means the core veterans of both sides were ideologically supportive of the war from the start and willing to fight it to the end.
In the actual civil war they were fighting a conventional ground campaign against what was for all effects a forgien nation. Union troops mostly had never been a hundred miles from their homes the south was as forgien as the moon to them, Americans today have normally lived in several different regions as children and certainly met and made friends with people from all over the nation. And again the Union was fighting an insurgency they were fighting a conventional feild army in a campaign that was functionality identical to the wars of Napoleon of Marlborough.
This really isn’t true. Most of the civil war was fought in border regions where people were intimately familiar with the South. Stories of families where some members fought for the Union and others for the Confederacy are legion. Even in non border states Americans were hardly peasants who were unfamiliar with the rest of the country. The North and South had huge commonalities. And the South put an army in the field because that is what you have to do to control territory instead of just engaging in nihilistic terrorist violence. Everyone from Russian Communists to the North Vietnamese relied on field armies to actually win the wars that gave them territorial control, even though they were fighting very weak to nonexistent central governments (which would not be the case in the U.S.)
Please Read "Jack Hinson's one man war" by Tom McKenney.
The Confederacy was one third the population of the North and about an eighth as industrialized. The split would be much closer to fifty fifty now and the blue states have regulated much of their industrial capacity out of existence or at least out of their borders.
Not to mention that now the Left would have disjointed territories in the Boswash corridor, Chicago, Atlanta, and the West Coast.
Everything our author is saying about sieges would be far more easily turned against them. Imagine a couple thousand rednecks encircling Atlanta and just cutting the power and water. You’d have mass panic in hours and mass death in weeks.
No, you'd have tens of thousands of city residents organized to kill those rednecks, with federal help.
Also, where are you going to get thousands of rednecks to besiege Atlanta? Young rednecks are too busy listening to rap, smoking weed, and reassuring everyone around them that they can't be racist because all their nieces and nephews are black.
I used to live in GA. The whole state is rednecks outside of Atlanta. Nearly all have guns and most have AR style rifles.
Right now that's very true, suppose it's 2035 though, the US is currently bogged down defending the scrap of war torn territory known as the former Israel, due to the increasingly dicy international situation Gas costs $12 dollars a gallon, the county has been in major recession/depression from the collapse of the student loan and commercial real-estate bubbles for 6 years. J.D Vance's named successor was just killed by a carbomb 2 weeks after winning the republican nomination. 50% of college graduates make 30k a year and remain totally unable to gain employment, even STEM graduates. People would be much more likely to commit violence. This is not an insane outcome this is infact a depressingly possible future.
That all seems like a very real and plausible future scenario, unfortunately.
I suggest Mxtyplk, you read Unintended Consequences by John Ross.
interesting to contemplate and then decide, nope, we don't need to do that again. We don't need to fall for the same-ole bankers' tricks and be psyoped into playing along with their actual war scenarios, which is exactly what they want us to do. We need to put our energies into building resilient communities and the globalist-free systems we need and deserve. Their house of cards is built on fear and deceit. Not buying into the narratives and turning our attention to ways we can thrive without them will win this war.
This is where Hamas is stronger than us.
They knew what would happen were prepared... and then launched an attack designed to make it happen.
Now Israel’s economy is bleeding out faster than the people of Gaza and instead of being slowly strangled, they might draw the entire world into their conflict
I believe all wars are bankers wars. That one included. The globalists engineer all war conflicts, without exception.
Sure... Troy, Teutoburg forest, and the Iroquis genocide of the Huron were bankers war.
20-30% of all people in human history died violently. War is the normal condition of mankind.
There are no banker wars, only banker expeditions.
They have a disproportionate involvement in most major wars post napoleon or so. Most peaces are also banker peaces. When they don't want war to happen any potential combatants get smacked down hard.
Hamas drew in the IOF into a Stalingrad-cum-Vietnam urban hellscape tunnel warfare. After a year, it surely looks like the Battle of Kursk for the IOF. The defender gets stronger as time passes by...
To those who claimed Bibi orchestrated the attack: The kamikaze drones blitzkrieg by Hamas blew a massive hole in the IOF's automated perimeter defense during the early days. This is preceded by a coordinated barrage of mortar strikes on the early warning sensors... One hell of a prison break
> and then launched an attack designed to make it happen.
I'm very open to the possibility that mossad engineered that one. It was politically extremely convenient to Nyetenyahu. It mostly served to eliminate political rivals (atheist jews who go to raves on jewish holidays) and galvanised what had been waning support for his regime.
It looks like he might have bitten off more than he could chew, but I definitely think he had a hand in it. If not it was an incredible cohencidence.
we really don't get to decide this. they will make it impossible to avoid war. they will rape your children(more than they already have), they will destroy your communities and force you to fellate transexual black cock metaphorically speaking. it's inevitable at this point. cultivate your gardens, but remember that it's better to be a warrior in a garden than a gardener in a war
it's never inevitable. They've been trying to gin up WWIII for decades. Hasn't worked. They rely on our consent on the basic tenets of their "authority" and "experts" and "emergency" and "threat" or they wouldn't spend trillions for propaganda. That's collapsing by the day. For example:
The bird flu / monkeypox / disease x scams have gone bust. https://birdflusummit.com/
Virtually no one is doing the jabs anymore, despite the continued propaganda. https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations
Entire countries are saying "game over" for the whole "covid" scam.
https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2867282/game-over-for-covid-despite-next-surge
People in the NC mountains are rescuing their own people and going around FEMA to do it. https://www.instagram.com/aerialrecoverygroup/
Gardeners in your analogy can hold an energy that the entire war goes around. There are folks I know who never wore a mask, never bothered at all about the jabs, never got sick and just carried on as normal. They even enjoyed the quiet time with family as the world shut down and they made plenty of money. That too can happen. And we absolutely do get to decide. They're trying to psyop us into believing we don't.
I agree with both of you ;)
The only way to effectively fight back is by having communities like she speaks of. Lone wolves are irrelevant, only teams are going to make it through what is coming.
Local -> state -> regional
It's never an individual assignment. It has always been a group project
Yea this situation would be miserable. But we may not have the option of just going back to the way things used to be. We might have a choice between globo-homo gay race communism. Where you eat the bugs and live in a plutocratic panopticon technocracy. Deal with carbon credits and central bank digital currency and digital real ID - or fight.
Or do not comply and build a better system without them. Jab passes failed because there was a huge push back and noncompliance. If we have alternate exchange systems people will have other options besides their tokens. It’s really pretty simple. We just have been conditioned to believe they have all the power. We are the ones with the power. They need our consent.
In their haste to impose the authoritarian digital currency and greedily tokenizing every commodity, they inadvertantly create a loophole in the system. Any attempt to close such loophole will cast doubt over the entire derivatives market 🤭
If you want peace, prepare for war. When SHTF, what's gonna stop the govt from forcefully takeover your resilient communities using eminent domain? Without men bearing arms who are organized in well regulated militia, you're powerless against such tyranny. Freedom isn't free...
We’re already in a war. A silent war. This war slings messaging and narratives and psyops and banking and fake emergencies and harmful “solutions.” We’re being programmed to fight the last war with guns. That’s what they want so they can declare the next emergency. It’s a trap they’ve used over and over in other countries. Resilient communities will know when they’re being cheated and lied to and have their own better systems. I have no doubt they’ll be able to stand up for themselves. Theirs is a house of cards dependent on narratives of lies. Once enough people toss their belief in the lies, it’s presumed authority collapses. No one will follow their orders. The “solutions” will be seen for what they are and tossed out. It’s already happening in pieces and then it can happen all at once.
I believe you. There's a coordinated effort to cause food shortage. Few months ago, the UNGA voted on a resolution to declare food as a right. US and Israel voted against it! WTF, right?
In light of this, I identify 4 areas to achieve resilient and secure community:
1. Grow your own food. Diversify your food sources. Prioritize low water requirement ones. Protein source is more important than carb.
2. Generate your own energy. Link up the community into a microgrid. If possible, setup P2P energy trading arrangements with off-site facilities, especially the cold chain distribution network. Energy cost is one of the biggest cost to preserve food. Carbon tax follows wherever energy is involved. Greenwash it wherever possible.
3. Process your own water. Never rely on singular source. Flowing water may be cheap, but it's susceptible to pollution as pointed out by OP. If possible, setup several tube wells and rainwater retention ponds with its filtration system. The hostile bureaucracy will have a hard day to regulate it out of business.
4. Arm yourselves to protect all of the above. Organize the entire community into a well-regulated militia. Work together with the disenfranchised veterans of the armed forces.
In other words, integrate the key components of the agri-food supply chain and arm its owners. Learn from the Mexican drug cartels on how they setup pricing mechanism and settle disputes throughout their supply chain. Individual homesteads and small retailers can be crushed by Big Food (google on the fate of the white farmers in South Africa), but a consortium of homesteads and mom-and-pop retailers can put up a serious fight, both via legal means and against paid saboteurs
If civil conflict broke out in the US today it would be nothing like the Civil War. Despite what Southern romantics like to say, the Civil War was a complete one sided beat down where the South got manhandled by the North from Day 1. Pittsburgh alone had more industrial capacity than the whole Confederacy combined. The Union had at least 10x the amount of railroads as the South, maybe even 30x. The grand plan of the North to win the war was Operation Anaconda which was Step 1: Isolate the South via naval blockade. Step 2: Cut the South in half by seizing the Mississippi River. Step 3: Go and destroy everything in the South. The North executed Operation Anaconda perfectly and the South never made any significant resistance against it.
Today in a Red vs. Blue conflict things are much more balanced. Huge chunks of industry have moved to Red States and even in Blue States a lot of the industrial facilities are in red parts of those states. The Blue States have sever man power disadvantages of young men willing to fight. They will try to use foreign mercenaries but that likely will blow up in their faces. The Blue States can win by dividing the Red States against each other and using their insitutional control over the federal government which may very well be enough to win. In any conflict today things are a lot more balanced between red and blue and it's just going to be low grade nasty and brutal on a scale that hasn't been seen in a very long time.
On top of all that, oil and food production is concentrated in Red heartland. Cant do much war fighting without diesel and jet fuel. Blue team is very concentrated to the Northeast and West coasts, and I don’t mean the coastal states, but literally 50-mile urban strips along the coasts. The only thing they might have an advantage in is communications (social media for example) and tech.
On the other hand the South had the advantage that they were defending. By way of comparison the American colonies were even more behind Britain during the revolutionary war.
Good points. CW1 was an anomaly in many ways, largely due to cotton/ slavery requiring X number of frost-free days in a year. Currently only a single digit number of the 3000 or so counties in the US have more than a 70/30 split politically. Just like almost all CWs, A huge part of it is going to be neighbor vs. neighbor. CW1 had some of that in the border disputes, but it wasn't a large part and wasn't determinative except to radicalize each side more.
Rwanda X Yugoslavia
> Read: property confiscation. why do you think they’re pushing “unrealized capital gains”? they’re preparing to take your retirement fund and house in a budget crisis
Hah! Joke's on them! My "retirement fund" is a box of 10mm. Though, ideally, I'll only need the one round...
Where did all the PPP money go? What about the Fed keeping interest rates at 0 for 8 years longer than the GFC required? Those unrealized capital gains were due to the Cantillion Effect. Jaime Diamon. Peter Thiel, Bezos, all the hedge fund grifters, using free money to bid up the prices of every asset with the 99.99% of us got whacked? and his pals got fat. Read Rudy Havenstein's stuff. End the Fed.
No Fed, no NGOs, no campaigns, donor washes, patronage, modern umbrella Corporations, the DoD / Pentagon, the standing army, the drug war...
Income tax was created during the Hapsburg era so the citizens would repay war loans made to kings in perpetuity- a war loan was no longer a bet. That's why income tax was illegal under the Founders, they knew what the Banksters were up to: conquest and taking territory create an empire based on an economy of slavery and chattel asset loans as they did in Rome, Dark Age Europe, and as Islam.
End the Fed, end its weapon, the Tax Code.
fascinating read as always.
A thought: If the government decides to target civilian infrastructure, that would basically crush its legitimacy forever in the eyes of the affected. I.e., suppose the government "wins", how is it going to rule over the broken? I cannot imagine any scenario other than an endless guerilla war. This would support the working hypothesis of entering a thirty years war, which erased between 70 and 100% of the population in some German areas.
> I.e., suppose the government "wins", how is it going to rule over the broken?
Simple: "you want food and working infrastructure, submit to our rule". The same way every conqueror throughout history has imposed order.
Sodium hypochlorite solution aka liquid bleach is quite unstable and degrades too quickly to last through a prolonged conflict. Solid calcium hypochlorite aka pool bleach is better.
Instructions for using calcium hypochlorite:
https://theprovidentprepper.org/disinfecting-water-using-calcium-hypochlorite/
Tincture of iodine can also be used for water disinfection in a pinch and lasts indefinitely; get some.
Honestly, I think most would be better if stockpiling life straws, I know I bought some for my household after reading this (I also have a lake/pond behind my house)
Both.
Counter-arguments:
Food: it is very easy to starve the US.
ag- Farming requires the delivery of hybrid seeds, diesel, and many other things that could easily be blockaded. Crops are brought to centralized storage areas that could easily be destroyed or seized.
hunting- During the Great Depression many game animals in many areas were quickly hunted to extinction. I remember my grandpa telling me about when he was young someone came into town excitedly telling everyone he'd seen a deer foot print, and everyone went out to look at it. Afterwards, states reintroduced game species and banned their hunting, waited till they established themselves, then opened up hunting. Those species were again quickly hunted to extinction, causing states to create the many limitations on hunting that we have today. This was with a population roughly 1/3 what it is now.
As another example, I did the math in my state some time ago on deer hunting. Rough numbers, but fairly accurate ratios: 5% of the state participates in the 9 day gun season which has many restrictions for sporting purposes. In that time about 1/3 of the deer population is killed... So 5% of the population hunting in a sportsmanlike manner for 2.5% of the year kill 33% of the population. I hypothetically know a guy who heard of a guy who talked to a guy in a bar who said that him and 2 friends with sub-velocity .22s can fill the bed of a pickup truck with deer in a few hours by shining.
Pretty much all COIN theory says that in order to stop an insurgency it is essential to sever the links between the insurgents and the civilians. Modern theory says you do this by being nice to the civilians, which almost always fails. History says you eliminate the insurgent's support base of civilians by eliminating the civilians, either through genocide or mass deportation. The "harrowing of the North" is one such example, where the north of England rebelled against William the Conqueror. If he sent his army to beat it, the south would have risen. So he sent small groups of his men after harvest to burn stored crops and villages. 20 years later in the Domesday book much of that land was still listed as unpopulated wasteland.
The Romans did this as well, as Tacitus states:
"They make a desert, and call it peace."
If our government stopped caring about world opinion, which it seems to have done quite some time ago, it could easily exterminate vast swathes of its territory, using false flags and control of the media to paint it as either necessary or Russian interference, or whatever they felt like. If Willy the C can do it with swords and torches, I'm sure our gov could with planes, defoliants, bombs, local forces on the ground (more on that later,) etc. etc. They fail against small nations now because their targets are either getting food smuggled in from outside and/or operate at a subsistence level anyway, and our gov doesn't really care much either way as their goal in war is mainly to churn profits and create refugees to later come to the US. When it's their jobs and even their lives on the line, they will succeed.
====
"a US civil war is virtually inevitable in the next 10 years…"
Between who? Peasant revolts are virtually always exterminated. Insurgencies can easily be stopped if you don't mind a bit of genocide. Grilla wars require most of the 7 or 8 items on a list, of which the US would have 0. All levels of government from state governors on up are swamp creatures, as are almost all generals. Even the reddest of states have a big blue county for a state capital. A vast majority of men with guns fight for a paycheck and a pension, and the ones who control paychecks and pensions are government workers in those blue counties.
When cities get hungry they will go to rural areas, probably in organized even government-sanctioned groups, to take it from farmers. Internet-rural people like to pound their chest about "muh gunz" at this point, but the fact is 100:1 odds means the first farmer to stand up will be killed and then the rest will fall in line. Just like in all of human history.
"Whatifalthist said he thinks we’re at the start of an era like the 30 years war…"
Great example. Pretty close to a Mad Max situation, and at the end of it the same noble families were still noble and the same peasant families were still peasants. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Personally, I think it will be more like the post-Alexander Wars of Succession. Even in that case, the Diadochi will be composed of existing swamp creatures: generals, governors, local political party leaders.
Whatever it is, if we aren't the bosses when something kicks off, we aren't going to be the bosses afterwards. We need to stop using Mad Max as an excuse for not pro-actively networking and building local and state influence. This has been a right-wing cope since forever: "if only the government disappeared, we'd totally win against the government!"
Peasant revolts are not nearly always exterminated. And America doesn’t have peasants, every rural American is both armed and in possession of land and transportation. Fundamentally different class
We have countless example of insurgencies and guerrilla wars being decided in the rebels favour.
There have been many studies done.
In order for a CW or Rev of some sort to succeed it needs people of each class supporting it. Elites, middle, and lower classes. If it's only elites you get people arguing all the time and nothing gets done. If only the lower classes you might get a tactical victory, then they declare victory and go home. Then the gov raises another army and exterminates them. We have no elites on our side to provide a government structure to lead things.
As I said, insurr/grilla wars need most of the things on a list of 7 or 8 things, and we have 0. Nearby safe zones, outside government supporting it, government that is being rebelled against being unwilling to go full genocide for whatever reason, ~70% support of local population, I forget the rest.
Here's how insurr/grilla wars go: grilla forces attack and get wrecked, then the outside gov in the safe zone reconstitutes the force, which attacks and gets wrecked again. Repeat until either the outside gov or the rebelled-against gov quits.
Our government knows of these studies; it funded or wrote most of them, and was often an integral player behind or against those revolts. This is why they freak out about potential leaders (e.g., Trump) but don't much care about us peasants beating our chests online.
What the hell do you think an elite is!?
Its a basic literate person with the equivalent of a Bachelors degree and a 125 IQ.
Someone who can manage a bureaucracy and think abstractly. There's nothing special about being born to the right sub-ethnicity or social income. THE COMMUNISTS KILLED EVERYONE OF HIGHER SOCIAL CLASSES, some as much as 25% of the pre-revolution population, and the communist states functioned.
No it isn't. An elite is someone that believes they are elite, who non-elites will also think is an elite. Yes, it's recursive.
Lenin was upper middle class.
Trotsky was born into a family of wealthy land owners.
Of course they killed other wealthy elites, they were rivals.
You will not suddenly reveal your power level in a moment of crisis and be elevated to Supreme Leader. People will look to those they already recognize as leaders when crisis happens. Sheriffs, generals, governors, etc. If there are no such leaders who rise to the challenge we'll lose.
Agreed.. CCP won the Chinese Civil War when they focus on peasant revolts
In reply to your hunting comment, I think alot of people forget non game animals, Hemingway(rest in piss) put meat on his table through most of the depression by killing pigeons in local parks, an old timer regailed me about how as a kid he made 5 dollars a week selling opossum, raccoon and porcupine sausage in Arkansas, l and he had it on good authority that rat gravey and corn cakes are a passable meal when you're hungry, my own bug out kit has a dozen aluminum rat traps and a minnow funnel, it's not good food but boil a half moldy onion carrots and a rat long enough and you can convince yourself it's squirrel.
Also farming could be achieved via the guerrilla method, burying potatoes and hurling seeds about randomly isn't efficient but it does produce food that is frightfully hard to round up and destroy. And American cities are uniquely suitable for this because they're huge and covered in green space.
In my country, back during the commie insurgency days, the govt forces relocate almost all of the rural folks into gated and patrolled "New Villages" to cut off supplies to the commie insurgents operating in the jungles (which border rural settlements and plantations)
Holy smokes, smart cities without all the fancy bells and whistles (they're just an advertising gimmick anyways). Can't do much farming in a smart city.
The main problem with the comparison to gaza is this: humanitarian aid. Pretty much every arab country has sent thousands of tons of food and medical supplies to gaza, which was than used by the local hamas administration as a means of securing support (you won't bite the hand that feeds you..), that's the main reason why the members of hamas have increased (as that's the best way to get the humanitarian aid for the average gazan). Would the struggling forces getting bogged down in Appalachia allow that much aid to pass as the israelis did in gaza (the only reason israel has allowed that is because they didn't feel threatened enough from that, and there was a strong international pressure to do so)? If the regime was truly insecure about its power they probably wouldn't do so, and they wouldn't need to appease the international court for human rights since the victor would trial the losers anyways ,unlike in gaza where netanyahu could realistically face trial if he would've tried a genuine siege without humanitarian aid. Also another point that you didn't mention is ports: miami and houston could probably buy their food from abroad and desalinate their water (gaza didn't have a real port so that's why they didn't do that). A much more realistic comparison to Appalachia is an arable afghanistan, rather than gaza simply because of that, which would still make the case,however note that the taliban government has fallen after 2 years and was than reorganized as a guerilla force that won simply because the american people had enough fighting in a foreign war. However here too there's a question: why would the forces trying to maintain rule over Appalachia have that same disinterest?
Very interesting essay.
Just one minor niggle: Ireland is listed on those maps as a majority food importer, but I don't think they take into account exports. Ireland produces huge amounts of beef which are mostly exported as a luxury product, then we import brazilian beef to feed the locals. If there were a breakdown in global trade then we'd probably just revert to eating local food.
There's also the factor that ~+20% of our population right now are foreigners who came here for easy work visas and free stuff. They'd be gone in a flash if things turned bad. In fact a lot of us are hoping for a recession for that reason. Multinational investment is killing us.
@Matt_Bracken48 sent me.
He said it was brilliant.
He's right.
You can get an H2Go for around $115. You put a few drops of salt water into the chamber and it uses electrolysis to make chlorine to disinfect water. It has a built in battery and solar panel as well.
Sawyer filters are like 20 bucks each also and are very good for filtering water.
A lot of camping kit like this you have to really read the fine print to see how many total gallons they're good for.
Remember across a siege you'd need to purify 1000s of gallons of water. For a Family of 4, 10s of thousands.
The ZeroWater system I keep in my fridge has filters that cost something like $20 each, and are only good for ~40 gallons before they fail... Now those are really good filters that remove microplastics, Zenoestrogens and trace metals... In a survival situation you're really more concerned about parasites and disease.... And I'm not bathing in 000pmm water from my ZeroWater....
But in a disaster or Seige? Ya you don't want to be bathing in crap water from the street or some ravine. And getting 10s of thousands of gallons across a siege of clean water is a real challenge.
Sawyer says they're good for 100,000 gallons each for 20 bucks a pop. Granted you need to back flush it with clean water periodically, and assume the gaskets hold up. But a 5 pack of gaskets is like 3 dollars also.
The h2go says it has a lifetime of 32,000 gallons, but I think thats based off the battery expected life. If you had extra solar battery backs you could probably extend that even more. I've got a creek and 150 gallons of rain barrels that I can filter/purify as well as 15 gallons (so far) of Jerry cans with clean water on standby. But the h2go was made for 3rd world countries so its pretty robust.
These are just tools, you can't really plan for infinite water. But these tools aren't very expensive and a great starting place if you have zero water contingency right now.
Mhmmm, exactly what I needed, a little black pill with my coffee this morning.
Just to perk you up:
Realize that things are going to continually get worse from here on out, therefore today is as good as it's going to get! So enjoy it while you can! In 2030 you will look back on today and think, "wow, we really had it made back then, things were so good and we didn't even know it!"
You are welcome.
This isn’t anything like Lincoln’s civil war. This one would be over quickly for several reasons:
* The left is largely unarmed and untrained
* The left is concentrated in the cities and dependent on just in time services & supplies
* The core of the military and most rank and file law enforcement are NOT left and would not fight other Americans for woke generals let alone politicians