A US civil war

[mooreupp]

I have been a long time reader of the website and first want to say the work is very appreciated.

One thing I wonder is about the possibility of a major civil war type of event within the United States during the upcoming generational war. Of the three American generational crisis wars (the American Revolution, the Civil War, and World War II), two were fought on American soil and heavily divided the population. I know the most recent example of a generational war largely united the whole country, but I could very much see the unification lines not being entirely at the national level this go round. In fact, given the much larger emphasis on multiculturalism (as opposed to Americanization as it was in the early 20th century) and the increasingly global nature of the elite in society, I think much more internal tension is almost guaranteed.

Thoughts?

[vincecate]

[...] but I could very much see the unification lines not being entirely at the national level this go round.

My own guess is that like the USSR faded away when it was bankrupt and losing influence, the US Federal government will also fade away. The states will become true states once again.

[John]

> I have been a long time reader of the website and first want to
> say the work is very appreciated.

> One thing I wonder is about the possibility of a major civil war
> type of event within the United States during the upcoming
> generational war. Of the three American generational crisis wars
> (the American Revolution, the Civil War, and World War II), two
> were fought on American soil and heavily divided the population. I
> know the most recent example of a generational war largely united
> the whole country, but I could very much see the unification lines
> not being entirely at the national level this go round. In fact,
> given the much larger emphasis on multiculturalism (as opposed to
> Americanization as it was in the early 20th century) and the
> increasingly global nature of the elite in society, I think much
> more internal tension is almost guaranteed. Thoughts?

As you imply, the fault lines from the Revolutionary "civil" War and
the Civil War no longer apply. I absolutely don't agree that the
supposed fault line between the "red states" and "blue states" is
going to lead to some sort of war. However, there is a significant
fault line between Latinos and Yanquis, especially in the south west.
I expect a coming new Mexican Revolution to spill over into the United
States.

John

[mooreupp]

I agree red states vs. blue states is far too simplistic and I don't expect that. At this point, I'd be surprised if it was really organized at the state level at all as I feel state pride/allegiance has been weakened are much for that to be realistic.

The fault lines have been different for every war. The Revolution wasn't really along a north vs. south axis (even if there was more support in the north). I agree there will definitely be an ethnic part to upcoming events as Hispanics will make a very open scapegoat given a) unemployment, b) the fact that we have encouraged them to maintain their culture rather than assimilate (makes them feel more like outsiders), c) overall changes in many areas because of immigration. Of the three reasons, I think b) was the missing key in the 30s (that and the fact that immigration had already started to decline thanks to actions in the 20s).

While not a blue vs. red state, I do wonder about heavy resistance/revolution from groups of Americans. I think the very big ideological gap which now exists certainly leaves us more open than most would expect. If the Great Depression could lead a large number of people in a very individualist/libertarian America to look at the socialists and communists, then aren't the potential fault lines now all that much bigger? Consider the following:

1. We will have groups yelling at the top of their lungs that too much centralization is the problem and that permanently cutting the role of government is the only solution. The federal government is eventually going to be forced to listen to some of this logic (as a bond market dislocation is likely to end deficit spending almost overnight), but most people probably aren't going to embrace it.

2. We will also have groups who will be arguing for much greater government control to solve the crisis. There are a lot of people out there that are completely reliant on the government, that number is only increasing, and it unfortunately also is not proportional to racial/ethnic lines. When life becomes hell, a great many in this group will want to give the government whatever power it asks for if it might mean stability.

3. We'll might get a popular leader or two who says that elections haven't made any difference and both parties have been puppets. The longer things keep going the way they are, the worse this possibility gets. In 2006 and 2008, Republicans were labeled as evil corporate representatives who didn't fight for the people. We gave the Democrats overwhelming majorities. Only 2 years later, we have started to turn back and I suspect the GOP will be the ones in power again in 2012. It could be argued that 2002, 2006, and 2010 were all key elections (elections that symbolized changes in the electorate). That is a heck of a lot in one decade and that type of instability is not healthy at all. Let's say we give power to the Republicans in 2012 and things keep going down hill. Maybe in 2013 the economy completely collapses. Then what? I'd argue you'd see a real chance for dangerous 3rd parties to emerge (in addition to some good ones). I'd say it's far from impossible that one or two of them (likely with a charismatic leader) might have a more totalitarian ideology. While I doubt the election would play out to make it seem like that was the choice, a large desperate part of the American population might be willing to ignore that feature after it became evident later.

[CrosstimbersOkie]

I doubt a civil war is probable. Civil unrest yes, especially in the Southwest where many Mexicans feel they have claims. But a civil war requires an organized government. The governments of California, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico are not going take up arms against the United States. Texas certainly isn't going to rejoin Mexico as a Mexican state. Most Latinos in Texas are Tex-Mex; Texans first and of Mexican descent. As a group they are possibly the most patriotic Americans, period.

The American Southwestern states certainly are not going to secede to fall into China's orbit, which would be the alternative.

Once the crisis deepens and war starts, the US will reorganize its currency and the value will be based on industrial and infrastructure production necessary to fight total war. America will become unified once again around certain social themes just like in every other crisis. Win or lose the war the US will be reborn something new, yet essentially the same. Which is why recent Libertarian advances in protecting individual rights are so important. Those will carry over into the new themes and will be the elements that are essentially American as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the writings of the period.

[Reality Check]

A civil war within the United States might occur as part of World War III.

There are a number of ways that could occur.

One is the way that specific Political Party Started by Lenin fought a civil war against all the other Socialists parties as well as the non-Socialist parties in Russia during the First World War.

The First World War being fought by Russia against Germany became an excuse for Lenin to use massive levels of violence against his political opponents on both the left and the right. At one point Lenin had all the male members of several other socialist parties rounded up and executed.

Such a United States civil war might also occur after the Third World War between the followers of different American leaders who were successful during the Third World War. The current politicians are just too dishonest and ineffective to be such leaders. So the moral code followed by each faction may be viewed by that factions followers as so superior and so important to the future success of the United States to be worth using force to avoid one of the alternative moral codes being used to replace the political system that existed in the United States prior to World War III.

[Reality Check]

Everyone in the United States seems to assume the United States would Win a Third World War with a China allied to the Sunni Muslim countries in the same way the United States won World War II, the Revolutionary War and the ( United States Government ) won the Civil War.

Instead the War might end in a tie ( or a marginal loss for the U.S. ) after a limited nuclear weapons exchange or a tie ( or a marginal loss for the U.S. ) after a pro-longed conventional war that stopped short of a nuclear weapons exchange.

Such a marginal loss might include the De-facto partitioning of the United States which could easily lead to a civil war between those partitioned regions of the United States over if, and under which political system and which political leadership, the United States should be re-united.

Third party countries would have an interest in aiding one side against the other in such a civil war which could make it more likely and more prolonged than it otherwise might have been.

[Marc]

Interesting insights, Reality Check, and others. While some no doubt disagree, I personally feel that a civil war in the United States in the relatively near future is improbable, no matter how polarized that America's politicians and body politic seem to be today. When the Regeneracy event in the US occurs, this will cause, due to the need for unity and survival, American leaders who have fought each other politically like cats and dogs (and who strongly distrust each other) to make common cause, I strongly feel. I further feel that there would have to be something highly unusual happen in the US to cause the conditions that would make a civil war possible (e.g., a Chinese nuclear/biological attack from North Dakota to Texas, which bifurcates the country, maybe?). All in all, I just don't see sectarian or ethnic rivalries present in the US — despite intense political polarization and anger over immigration issues — which could lead to a civil war in the relatively near future. But again, others can have different opinions here. Thanks again, all, for sharing. —Best regards, Marc

[Trevor]

I find China's civil war a lot more likely. One scenario I could see there is a revolution, similar to what happened in France, that allows a maniac to come into power and follow Hitler's path.

The United States... not 100% impossible, but very unlikely. You need a long-standing fault line for that; the civil war we actually fought was foreshadowed as far back as our country's founding and I don't see anything like that in our country. The political fighting is bitter, yeah, but it's hardly the first time that it's occurred. Not is it the only place; Europe is just as bad.

[Reality Check]

Interesting insights, .... I further feel that there would have to be something highly unusual happen in the US to cause the conditions that would make a civil war possible (e.g., a Chinese nuclear/biological attack from North Dakota to Texas, which bifurcates the country, maybe?).

Just to play the devils advocate here - I do not necessarily disagree with Marc's overall conclusion, but a much more likely attack on the U.S. would be a Nuclear or Biological or Chemical attack on the east coast and west coast population centers in the U.S.

This would result in martial law in California and the North East with a cultural divide between the heavily Hispanic Texas and Rural Hispanic Southwest, on the one hand, and the heavily European Plains State and Midwest on the other. The South East and the North West would themselves be bifurcated between the two cultures.

If the Political and Military leaders in California received assistance from Mexico/Latin America and allied themselves with Hispanic leaders in the U.S. you could have your civil war.

Granted there are a lot of if's in there... but I am just not seeing why any foreign power would attack the middle of the United States and leave the population centers on both coasts alone.