Next American Civil War

[PC2]

if you mean give it's citizens the tools (education) they need to be productive members of a work force then I'm all for that. I'm all for overhauling our k-12 education to not be one big wank before you get to college. and for that matter make it so college doesn't chain people with crushing amounts of debt.

Free online programs and MOOCs. That way we don't waste money on people who don't want to learn.

[The Oblivion]

I don't see how so many people are against the possibility of a violent uprising. Corporations and the rich have a strangle hold on the American political system. As long as politicians keep getting money from those sources, then there will be no change. Wages will not rise, immigration issues will not be solved because corporations like cheap labor, and work will keep being outsourced to other countries. Instead of standing up, violently if necessary, and demanding change in our political system we just let it slip by? I just cannot accept that sentiment, and I don't think my sentiment of needed revolution makes me a horrible person, especially considering the corruption of our system currently. More people should look up the gini coefficient for the United States because it has been increasing over the years. The gini coefficient indicates how unequal a society is and third world countries have the highest gini coefficient. So do we simply sit by and let the United States fade into third world country status because people are afraid of some violence that comes with revolutionary change?

- - - Updated - - -



There is no other way to change the current corruption of the system without burning it down. Politicians are in the pockets of those with money and the general public really has nothing to offer politicians so they are going to stay in the pockets of the wealthy. We are beyond the point of democratic change. Only a violent revolution against those in power will change things now.

you are unstable and should be on a watch list

[Macaquerie]

Mostly because it is fun- as many live a pretty easy and safe life.

Not a lot directly threatens that ease or safety. As I said in another thread on a similar subject- for the most part people can still go to the mall wheneverthefuck, have more cereal options than all of history combined, the internet, GTX 1080s, cellphones, Snapchat, hoverboards, 24/7 cheap public transport, cheap ass gas in luxury vehicles history's Emperors of old could only imagine but a fraction of the opulence of a Toyota 4Runner.

Bro. In this world. In this country, The Untied States of America. One can order a car pick-up to take them halfway across town for $10 and order a second car to bring delivery from a restaurant that doesn't even offer delivery to the bar or club the first car drove you to- for like $15-20.

We are in the future, bro.

It is interesting to see how societal attitudes have evolved though. If you think about, much of what we think of as culture was a coping mechanism devised to deal with the drudgery of day to day life, and find some meaning in the constant struggles that people had to go through just to survive. Nowadays, most of that is long gone and so we have people who far too much time on their hands trying to find anything worthwhile to do with that time, and just feeling frustrated with life even though by the metrics of the past they're living in absolute luxury compared to their ancestors.

And that's not to say that the current attitude is wrong even, there's no reason that people today should just shut up and be happy because they have so many consumer goods to enjoy - most of those things only had value because they were scarce and mean little now that they are plentiful. But it does sort of raise the question of just what the hell people are going to do with their time as technology makes life ever more convenient.

[Fencers]

It is interesting to see how societal attitudes have evolved though. <snip> But it does sort of raise the question of just what the hell people are going to do with their time as technology makes life ever more convenient.

Yea, it's super interesting!

I often think, maybe because I am old, how remarkable the time I live in right now is- especially as a comfortable American. There are many social and political issues I think the US (and world frankly) could improve upon or otherwise we the people can change for the better. However, in overview it is shocking just how comfortable and easy life is for the majority of people in the 'western world'.

This week I got an app that allows one to book and pay for a hair stylist, nail technician, massage and make-up artist on the fly from anywhere to go to your current location and provide service.

Reflect on this for a moment. I can be at work, look at my nails, decide I want to have my nails done and get a full body massage at the same time. In the space of 5 minutes and literally 4-5 clicks on my smartphone (which has 24/7/365 internet as fast as my home connection!) I can arrange for a tiny Asian woman to come to my work office. From fucking anywhere.

No one is going to start a civil war when we have a life of quite shocking luxury and ease when you step back from it all.

[Wildtree]

The thread really shows how detached from reality some people are, and how they lack any grasp on the atrocities war actually brings to the people.

Even though WW2 was long over when I was born, I still grew up with remnants of it. Seeing and playing in the bombing ruins, that's something I'll never ever forget. It was fun, in some way. But without anyone telling me, without even understanding where I was, I still soaked in a strange threatening vibe.
If you really have thoughts about war, I suggest you take a trip to a war zone. Experience that for a few days. Then you might come to senses again.

[Shadowferal]

The people you want to stage the revolution won't OP, the people you don't want to stage the revolution will.

This.

However things will have to be far worse before anything happens anyway.
Just look at the prior turn of the century when "communism" was a good word.

- - - Updated - - -

US government vs The Civilians

Like that could ever be a real fight

Over 300 million weapons in the country, not including illegal ones.

Pretty sure this could be messy since some of those fighting would be ex-military.

[nyc81991]

A modern day Civil War would be terrible and would probably lead to other countries getting involved. America would also be drastically weaker against outside threats, which can not be afforded.

[Beazy]

Im pretty sure we have our bellies full of civil wars here in the states.

There isnt ever going to be another civil war in America, life is too good, even if you hate the current gov. No one is going to give up their Tesla because they hate gay rights or free healthcare.

[Theinquisition]

Who is exactly going to be doing the fighting?

Far lefties millennials with dreadlocks and Birkenstock sandals?

lol

They can't go a day without wireless internet, how on earth would they fair in a actual battles.

Nanook, take it from me, a guy who has actually been in combat and shot at people. You don't have the courage for war.

[Detritivores]

None of this actually contradicts anything I said. The American election system is still wide open. Pretty much anyone can run. It's just that the Democrats and Republicans have such a lock on the popular vote that it's near-impossible for any other candidates to get any traction.

That doesn't mean they can't. It means there's no popular will to do so. Complaining that other people don't vote the way you want really isn't a valid criticism of democracy.

You said that we had the opportunity to vote for candidates not taking corporate money, every time. I can't parse your statement in any other way except to tell you you're wrong. Just because a non-corporate sponsored person could have run, doesn't mean we have that choice. You seem to be blaming the voters that no competent people of conscience run for office, when it is very clearly not the average voter's fault.

[Gheld]

My financial overlords have assured me that indefinite peaceful and non disruptive protesting is the way to go.

[Grym]

Massive income inequality ~check

Large scale political corruption ~ check

Rules tipped in favor of the ruling class ~ check

Declining wages ~ check

Most expensive healthcare system in the world ~ check

People having food on the table - check

People having a job - check

People have all the basic necessities in life - check

People have some form of goods that is more than basic like phone, internet, computer and such - check

For people to start a civil war, it has to be to the point where large percentage of people, are without basic necessity, therefore risking their lives to fight for it is worth while because it cannot be any worse.

As it currently stands, prople still have way too much to lose, they won't be starting a war for a while.

- - - Updated - - -

Who is exactly going to be doing the fighting?

Far lefties millennials with dreadlocks and Birkenstock sandals?

lol

They can't go a day without wireless internet, how on earth would they fair in a actual battles.

Millenials : we want this, we want that, give us or prepare for war!!!!!

Government : war it is. Internet is now for government military use only.

Millenials : we surrender.....

[Detritivores]

People having food on the table - check

People having a job - check

People have all the basic necessities in life - check

People have some form of goods that is more than basic like phone, internet, computer and such - check

For people to start a civil war, it has to be to the point where large percentage of people, are without basic necessity, therefore risking their lives to fight for it is worth while because it cannot be any worse.

As it currently stands, prople still have way too much to lose, they won't be starting a war for a while.

This is the sad truth of the situation. The standard of living, even for those getting fucked the hardest, isn't low enough to provoke actual action, and won't be, basically ever. Takes nothing for them to leave the unwashed masses with shitty jobs and wifi.

[Endus]

You said that we had the opportunity to vote for candidates not taking corporate money, every time. I can't parse your statement in any other way except to tell you you're wrong. Just because a non-corporate sponsored person could have run, doesn't mean we have that choice. You seem to be blaming the voters that no competent people of conscience run for office, when it is very clearly not the average voter's fault.

The bar for entry as a candidate is not so high that you can't qualify without heavy corporate backing.

http://www.fec.gov/press/resources/2..._form2nm.shtml

You need $5k in backing. That's it. That's five thousand, not even fifty thousand, let alone millions. There's currently a little over 1700 candidates. The money you're referring to is for advertising, not to become a valid candidate and get your name on ballots. If you can gain popular support through some other means, without spending that money, that's just as valid.

Yes. I absolutely blame the voters for making the easy choice for the most convenient candidates. It's like saying you can't get a better burger than McDonalds' or Burger King, because those two are the most heavily advertised and thus the only real candidates. Sure, they probably win on overall sales, but that doesn't mean you can't make a better choice.

[May90]

Millenials : we want this, we want that, give us or prepare for war!!!!!

Government : war it is. Internet is now for government military use only.

Millenials : we surrender.....

Pretty much.

This is the sad truth of the situation. The standard of living, even for those getting fucked the hardest, isn't low enough to provoke actual action, and won't be, basically ever. Takes nothing for them to leave the unwashed masses with shitty jobs and wifi.

But why is it sad? When the vast majority of people are okay with the quality of life they are receiving, and for a good reason (you will hardly find any place on this planet in which an average citizen lives visibly better off than an average US citizen), then why crush the system with ghostly perspectives of a better world afterwards (more likely, a much worse world)?

It is different in case of, say, India or China: while people still don't rebel there, the average quality of life is pretty atrocious, compared to the leading countries, so there is a real perspective of taking the best from the leaders and getting on their level, or close. But in case of the US, what are the perspectives in case of change? Since no one else has managed to build a significantly better country, there is a good reason to believe that it is not as simple to do as to just scream, "REVOLUCION!!!!!", depose the government and live happy lives afterwards.

If it works, and works pretty darn well, then why change it, when the vast majority of alternatives are much worse, and those that are significantly better - are very hard to achieve? It is like being a millionaire and saying, "Okay, I will invest everything I have in a company that is with 10% chance is going to make me a billionaire. 90% chance that I will lose everything and become homeless, but that's okay!". It is just not how it's done. Change is needed, but not the drastic change the OP is talking about - just certain fine tunings here and there, and possibly significant revamp in a few selected fields (healthcare, welfare, anti-monopoly laws).

[lockedout]

The bar for entry as a candidate is not so high that you can't qualify without heavy corporate backing.

http://www.fec.gov/press/resources/2..._form2nm.shtml

You need $5k in backing. That's it. That's five thousand, not even fifty thousand, let alone millions. There's currently a little over 1700 candidates. The money you're referring to is for advertising, not to become a valid candidate and get your name on ballots. If you can gain popular support through some other means, without spending that money, that's just as valid.

Yes. I absolutely blame the voters for making the easy choice for the most convenient candidates. It's like saying you can't get a better burger than McDonalds' or Burger King, because those two are the most heavily advertised and thus the only real candidates. Sure, they probably win on overall sales, but that doesn't mean you can't make a better choice.

How do you vote for someone other then McDonalds or Burger King if you never heard of them, you know because they have no money to advertise?

[May90]

How do you vote for someone other then McDonalds or Burger King if you never heard of them, you know because they have no money to advertise?

You are confusing cause with effect. How did McDonalds and Burger King get enough money to advertise so aggressively? They offered something, a product which people liked. Every business started as a small enterprise with a lot of debt and no money to make any kind of significant advertisement - yet people liked going there and eating there, and that's what got them where they are now. Open a new restaurant, that has certain features that make it stand out, invest a lot of time into its development - and, if it is really good, you will eventually have enough money to advertise and to get on the level of McDonalds and Burger King.

Same with candidates. If the candidate proposes something that people really like, then the candidate will be noticed, will start getting a lot of funding from people interested in them winning, will get money for advertisement, etc. Don't even need any money to advertise, really, nowadays when we have Youtube on which unknown authors upload a short video and get 50 million views a few months later.

It is MUCH easier to carry out a successful presidential campaign today than ever in the history of mankind. The fact that people choose the easy and convenient root and tend to choose between the most advertised candidates and not those they really like - they can blame only themselves for. If they are so lazy as to even go through the list of nominees and pick those they more or less support, then the blame is on them.

[Slant]

Spoken like someone who knows virtually nothing about politics. Money wins elections 9 times out of 10. That's a statistical fact.

Quoted for when I need it in November to watch someone eat his own words... *coughs*

[Berengil]

Racist - check
Massive stereotyping - check
Numerous spelling and grammatical errors - check
Nonsensical diatribe- check
Bitter jealousy of those better off - check
Flaming another poster- check
Toss in a little religion bashing - check

Pretty sure this is the worst single post I have ever seen on mmo champ. Surprised the numerous mods posting here don't seem to give a single shit.

Entirely accurate because I grew up among such people and I know them quite well - check

The rural areas of the US ( and in particular the states of the former CSA) are inhabited by some of the worst, most ignorant, backwards people I've ever met. Thank God demographics predict their end as a majority power soon enough.

My worthless racist hillbilly father among them. May he rot.

[Endus]

Spoken like someone who knows virtually nothing about politics. Money wins elections 9 times out of 10. That's a statistical fact.

Because people are happy enough with those best-advertised options.

If you gave people the choice between literal Hitler and a flesh-devouring sentient space fungus, they'd look for a third-party option, even if it gets less press.