Is a second civil war realistic? And if so what do you think will set it off?

[Total Crica]

People are talking about a second civil war. Is it even realistic this early?

I feel like this is all just gonna die down and go away. I also feel that anything Trump does to stop the protests will be the fuel the protesters need to continue.

What do you think?

Civil war will happen when enough people are oppressed to the point that their numbers allow them to believe a civil war is worth fighting the oppression. Until then, people will accept the oppression.

[schwarzkopf]

If the two sides of politics keep pushing their extremes - then yes, that's what causes a civil war.

The left and the right need to do some solid meeting in the middle to 'do the zipper up' on civil war.

This should be fairly simple in a country like the US, all it requires is to follow the ideals of the constitution and the ideals of Christianity.

I mean - assuming common sense won't convince people, then falling back on the two US holy books will achieve the result.

[Deleted]

you just had one, but instead of guns and bullets, people used pens and ballot papers.

[Deleted]

Civil Wars aren't bred out of ideology clashes.

Without an economic factor nobody will raise an arm.

Check out: "Panem et Circenses"

[Deleted]

Not even close to the mark. Democrats have both the money and body count. It would literally one bunch of skilless idiots fighting another group of skilless idiots. With one side having more money and more idiots it is clear who will win.

You're not familiar with guerilla warfare are you?

[Sirfailalot]

I meant they are more likely to go a bit emo than full on Tibetan protester, but you're in the right ballpark.

Yeah that's basically what I was thinking. That was just the most similar story I could think of off the top of my head at the moment.

[Total Crica]

You're not familiar with guerilla warfare are you?

They are forgetting that just because you have money doesn't mean you know how to do everything your life requires.

America makes it's money by specializing, not by generalizing.

The average American doesn't know how to do more then 2 or 3 things well at most, this ensures they MUST rely on others in order to accomplish everything in their lives.

If you are not ready to unite, which even the parties today are not since there are people within each side who still want to oppress each other, you won't win a civil war in America.

[ati87]

The people in the military aren't left wing for the most part, the silent majority in America hates the left wing. I think a left wing revolt would end in a lot of dead left wing people.

The what majority? Pretty sure more people voted for the left then for the right-wing candidate.

[Clevername]

The left is too fat and lazy to do anything besides whine, cry and break some windows. I chuckled when they kept talking about the lack of support for Trump at the inauguration in comparison to the obama turnout... methinks it's because trump supporters work for a living and can't just take a friday off to run up to the capital for the pony show.

[Nadiru]

There's no galvanizing issue to get the left to smack the right around. You think some schmuck from Portland is going to give up his shoebox apartment to go pick up an M16 and occupy Biloxi? Because that's the sort of event that a second civil war implies.

[Clevername]

Rofl. Mate, guns decide battles. They don't decide wars. Economies do. Just ask the USSR--OH WAIT, YOU CAN'T. Because we outspent them into oblivion. The Red States simply don't have the cash to maintain a camapign of any respectable length. It doesn't help that several states that might help the Red's economy are now what you might call "purple", and that the largest Marine and Naval bases are both in sunny 'ol California. A civil war would never happen in the US again (the advent of nuclear technology has rendered that sort of thing obsolete here), but if it did, I wouldn't put my money on the dust farmers and angry hicks just because you think they own a few more rifles.

I love how you think those massive bases in cali and their personnel would side with the the left... newsflash from former military. We hate democrats and would gladly smash you into compliance if we were allowed.

[Kiri]

The left is too fat and lazy to do anything besides whine, cry and break some windows. I chuckled when they kept talking about the lack of support for Trump at the inauguration in comparison to the obama turnout... methinks it's because trump supporters work for a living and can't just take a friday off to run up to the capital for the pony show.

But if all the Trump supporters are working people that can't come because they are working, who were the people that came?

[Total Crica]

The what majority? Pretty sure more people voted for the left then for the right-wing candidate.

Pretty sure the majority do not have the training, the fortitude, the discipline, nor the access of the armament our US Military does.

So, if the majority of the Military personnel are Rightwings without empathy, the Leftwings are going to be screwed without intervention from Leftwing military help, such as Canada.

- - - Updated - - -

But if all the Trump supporters are working people that can't come because they are working, who were the people that came?

People who's job's don't matter to the economy everyday? I dunno, it's almost like the rich don't have to work everyday like the poor do.

[Kiri]

People who's job's don't matter to the economy everyday? I dunno, it's almost like the rich don't have to work everyday like the poor do.

I was just applying logic to some extremely partisan sweeping statements, actually.

[zephid]

No, the fear of a second civil war is not a realistic one.

[Total Crica]

I was just applying logic to some extremely partisan sweeping statements, actually.

As was I, people tend to forget the beginning of the clash is between the economic classes, not if someone is working or not.

[Clevername]

I was just applying logic to some extremely partisan sweeping statements, actually.

was an obvious exaggeration but I'm pretty sure you got the point.

[Total Crica]

was an obvious exaggeration but I'm pretty sure you got the point.

Nope. The rich working people can afford to take the day off to go watch an inauguration, the poor working class can not afford to take the day off to do so.

The majority of average Americans who supported Trump are not rich.

[Kiri]

As was I, people tend to forget the beginning of the clash is between the economic classes, not the parties.

Possibly, yeah, though it is muddied due to the classes being present on both sides. I mean there was like grand accusation about corruption against the democrats, while the republicans stuff their cabinet with billionaires. Parties just try to sway the economic classes to their side, like Trump with all his 'common man' rhetoric, but ultimately they neither represent them, nor identify with them. Ultimately, politics is more the rich (politicians and their backers) trying to get segments of the at least relative poor on their sides every four years. It is not really a clash between economic classes as much clashes within those classes that try to paint it as a clash between classes (since there are more than two economic classes, that is possible).

Edit:

was an obvious exaggeration but I'm pretty sure you got the point.

Yes, I do get your point. You want to deride the left by omitting the hard working people and the rich there and prop up the right be omitting the rich and the unemployed there. Sure, one side may have more than the over, but with your 'harmless exaggeration', you try to reduce each side to a stereotype, which obviously is insulting towards one side.

[Total Crica]

Possibly, yeah, though it is muddied due to the classes being present on both sides. I mean there was like grand accusation about corruption against the democrats, while the republicans stuff their cabinet with billionaires. Parties just try to sway the economic classes to their side, like Trump with all his 'common man' rhetoric, but ultimately they neither represent them, nor identify with them. Ultimately, politics is more the rich (politicians and their backers) trying to get segments of the at least relative poor on their sides every four years. It is not really a clash between economic classes as much clashes within those classes that try to paint it as a clash between classes (since there are more than two economic classes, that is possible).

Yes, there are more then two.

You don't have enough money and need hand outs.

You have enough money but not enough to give hand outs.

You have more then enough money and can give hand outs.

But there is only one that is rich: The one that has more then enough money and can give hand outs.

That is the only class that makes the rules and the only class that can ensure the non-rich are treated humane.