Dark Days Ahead

[Xenophon]

Had my cousin over for dinner on Friday night. Had some good conversations. This one is my favorite line from the night:

Him: I'd never do anything to betray my country.

Me: You just said ten minutes ago when we were talking with my dad outside that in the event of a civil war, you'd commit war crimes.

Him: *talks into phone* On behalf of the US government, of course.

it's technically a war crime to wage civil war

the principle jurisdiction is the Hague Conventions, which restricts lawful warfighting to recognized state sovereigns

Makes sense.

I look forward to UN Blue Helmet Somalis patrolling the wooded paths of Appalachia.

[Smitty-48]

Had my cousin over for dinner on Friday night. Had some good conversations. This one is my favorite line from the night:

it's technically a war crime to wage civil war

the principle jurisdiction is the Hague Conventions, which restricts lawful warfighting to recognized state sovereigns

Makes sense.

I look forward to UN Blue Helmet Somalis patrolling the wooded paths of Appalachia.

the war crimes regime was written by the Great Powers at the end of the 19th century

it's entirely about limiting war to interstate conflict only

once you get into war amongst the people, everything is outside the bounds of the laws of armed conflict

this was case in the Civil War itself, like if you were a uniformed soldier, they'd take you prisoner

but at the same time, both sides were using unlawful combatants, so called Bushwacking

those were not privileged combatants, if they caught you Bushwacking they could hang you from the nearest tree

[Smitty-48]

America is deemed to have had two "revolutions" or a revolution followed by a counterrevolution

but they were not actually revolutions in the sense of a mass uprising to overthrow a sovereign

the Continental Army won the war at Yorktown, and they were professional soldiers

in the Civil War, it was state on state warfare with professionalized militaries

it's The War of Independence & The War Between the States

they were conventional wars fought by state sovereigns

[Smitty-48]

if you pan back to the geostrategic level it was proxy war between Britain & France

the British win the Seven Years War

the French then retaliate by inciting The War of Independence

then those Kings of Virginia are defeated when they attempt a Second War of Independence

the hope was that they could get the British and/or French to intercede again, but the British & French declined

the Union had reached the threshold of surpassing the British & French, becoming a Great Power unto itself

[Smitty-48]

everything looks a little different from Canada

Canada was founded by the French in 1601

most of the continent was Nouvelle France, France was the Global Hegemon, Britain was the challenger

British Major George Washington then incites a world war between the British & French at Jumonville Glen

so George Washington is the father of British North America, a Loyalist to the Crown

rather than become a revolutionary, he really just crowned himself a King of Virginia, sovereign in his own land

this is what Napoleon Bonaparte would come to do in France as well

[Smitty-48]

this is the only reason the American "revolution" worked and is the only successful "revolution" in history

the trick was that it simply wasn't a revolution, that's a myth

it was a foundation war

wealthy land owning aristocracy declares independence

then builds a professional army, appoints a military dictator to run it

that being said, it wasn't the Continental Army which decided the war at Yorktown

it was the French navy in the Chesapeake, George Washington had a global maritime power backing him up

the War Between the States was won at sea too, the Union became a maritime power, they won by blockade

the Union navy boxed the Confederates in while boxing the British & French out

everything is driven by geopolitics, and it is all about seapower, to this day in fact

[Xenophon]

this is the only reason the American "revolution" worked and is the only successful "revolution" in history

the trick was that it simply wasn't a revolution, that's a myth

it was a foundation war

wealthy land owning aristocracy declares independence

then builds a professional army, appoints a military dictator to run it

that being said, it wasn't the Continental Army which decided the war at Yorktown

it was the French navy in the Chesapeake, George Washington had a global maritime power backing him up

the War Between the States was won at sea too, the Union became a maritime power, they won by blockade

the Union navy boxed the Confederates in while boxing the British & French out

everything is driven by geopolitics, and it is all about seapower, to this day in fact

How would you describe the Cuban Revolution? That seems to have worked out ok for the Communists.

[Smitty-48]

this is the only reason the American "revolution" worked and is the only successful "revolution" in history

the trick was that it simply wasn't a revolution, that's a myth

it was a foundation war

wealthy land owning aristocracy declares independence

then builds a professional army, appoints a military dictator to run it

that being said, it wasn't the Continental Army which decided the war at Yorktown

it was the French navy in the Chesapeake, George Washington had a global maritime power backing him up

the War Between the States was won at sea too, the Union became a maritime power, they won by blockade

the Union navy boxed the Confederates in while boxing the British & French out

everything is driven by geopolitics, and it is all about seapower, to this day in fact

How would you describe the Cuban Revolution? That seems to have worked out ok for the Communists.

the question is not whether a regime can be overthrown by rebels, that is rather easily done

the question is are the rebels govern any better than the regime they overthrew

the reality is, revolutions produce only two probable results

new boss same as the old boss, or new boss worse than the old boss

so I would describe Cuba as being typical of revolutionary republics,

it's a basket case run into the ground by tyrannical philosopher kings

[Smitty-48]

the Kings of Virginia fought a war of Independence

they were not philospher kings, they were not the radicals

the British government had become increasingly radical against historical Western self government

taxation without representation, the British were the ones who became less British

the colonists were simply setiing things right, putting things back to how they were supposed to be

the war was in defense of property rights, for the purposes of becoming wealthy, and by those means free

this then lifted all boats, expanding these liberties to all as it evolved

the British Empire had upset the apple cart, the American founders were counterrevolutionary against tyranny

the Declaration of Independence was not actually acclaimed by the public, at first they were outraged by it

the vast majority of colonists were Loyalists at the outbreak of the war

it was not a popular mass movement overthrow the King, that's a myth made up after the fact

two wealthy British aristocracies fought with professional militaries for control of the colonies

the general public were largely spectators, passengers with little agency to intervene

in the War Between the States, two now Anglo-American aristocracies fought with professional militaries again

this time for control of the entire continent, and the America's beyond

in both cases, it was conventional war fought by professionals funded and led by wealthy landowners

[Smitty-48]

as opposed to the other model, which is the French Revolution

incited by the Jacobins perhaps, but none the less a popular mass movement legislating from the streets

that's a revolution, which of course quickly becomes a terror followed by a military dictatorship