Politically-related violence in the U.S. heats up as talk of “Civil War” goes mainstream. What would a “Civil War” in the U.S. even look like? Dan has some thoughts on this and ways to potentially avoid such a fate.
Show Notes
1. “Rage Is All the Rage and It’s Dangerous” by Peggy Noonan for The Wall Street Journal, June 15, 2017
https://www.wsj.com/articles/rage-is-al ... 1497571401
And the thing is, it's not merely we are suspected by The Government or The Conglomerates, it's also that we individual citizens suspect our fellow birth-right citizens (and they suspect us in return). I've had a friend tell me he doesn't feel his family trusts him anymore, and that he can't trust them in turn either. He half-joked about a "society where we all have a tip line on speed dial, ready to literally sell out our own mothers at a moment's notice."GrumpyCatFace wrote:Halfway through, but I am thoroughly enjoying this episode. Couldn't agree more, so far.
'What is the objective? What's the reaction from our manic government, if people really go nuts?'
Great quotes:
"We are not citizens, we are suspects."
The problem is there will always be the pressure, no matter the political, religious, ideological, or ethnic source, to unify and assert control over our fellow man. We are hierarchical animals. We, at some primal level, seek to either dominate or be dominated (or both, if you're into middle management). The enemy we fight against when trying to determine the best system of governance is basic human nature. Even if we temporally "shrink the fed," inevitably there will be those who seek to enlarge it again to assert control over the greatest number of people, and they will figure out ways to rally a percentage of the populace to that cause.de officiis wrote:Maybe the ultimate solution to the reduction of this division and hatred is shrinking the footprint of the federal government. Americans fighting for control of the federal government has become like the people of Middle Earth fighting for control of Sauron's One Ring.
If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.
It's been done before, and definitely seems to be a coming trend. I shudder to think of what that would look like from the inside.KerningChameleon wrote:I felt Dan is still too stuck in this old "Media Gatekeeper" way of thinking as he contextualizes the current atmosphere, which is ironic since he briefly mentioned the "Everyone's a Broadcaster Now" fact. You and I and everyone else can now directly connect our innermost Ids to each other, and refine and amplify them. The Internet has become The Great Mental Catalyst, and all the good, bad, and ugly things that implies.
The President or the Media Execs or whatever can't reign the fervor in anymore because advances in communications technology have decentralized broadcasting. That's what that whole business we heard about Youtube and Facebook trying to find a way to "filter out" fake news was all about: they're feeling pressure to find a way make their platforms gatekept and herd the barking dogs in again.
And the thing is, it's not merely we are suspected by The Government or The Conglomerates, it's also that we individual citizens suspect our fellow birth-right citizens (and they suspect us in return). I've had a friend tell me he doesn't feel his family trusts him anymore, and that he can't trust them in turn either. He half-joked about a "society where we all have a tip line on speed dial, ready to literally sell out our own mothers at a moment's notice."GrumpyCatFace wrote:Halfway through, but I am thoroughly enjoying this episode. Couldn't agree more, so far.
'What is the objective? What's the reaction from our manic government, if people really go nuts?'
Great quotes:
"We are not citizens, we are suspects."
it's not so much the footprint, when you have a confederation trapped within a republic, it only takes one thing to force the issue before it comes to Deo Vindice. How big was the federal government footprint, in 1861? Barely noticeable at all, except for one thing of course. No, not slavery; interstate commerce. One man's property was another man's contraband, which became the singular and irreconcilable issue, as soon as it crossed state lines.de officiis wrote:Maybe the ultimate solution to the reduction of this division and hatred is shrinking the footprint of the federal government. Americans fighting for control of the federal government has become like the people of Middle Earth fighting for control of Sauron's One Ring.
Solid point, actually. Slavers regularly crossed the Mason-Dixon, when we had our temporary 2-state solution in place...Smitty-48 wrote:Consider this though, even if it had been a confederation, even if it had been two sovereign countries, when has that ever stopped Americans before? The American polity of manifest destiny to spread the blessings of liberty, in the name of God himself, by terrible swift sword if and as necessary, puts you on a collision course with everyone and anyone, even across international lines, so what makes you think state lines could ever hold back the tides?
You can hold up a piece of paper, which says you have a state right, but even if it is signed Washington himself, that's not going to stop Americans, they will simply cross the line and come after you, invoking God as their vindicator, manifest destiny their creedo, bugger the state lines, and Washington himself, would not be able to stop them.
Absolution Style by Premium phpBB Styles
