this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2024
491 points (98.4% liked)

politics

18894 readers
3108 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

This week, Republican governors across the country escalated their conflict with the Biden administration over the southern border by invoking the same legal theory that slave states wielded to justify secession before the Civil War.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, joined by 25 other GOP governors, now argues that the Biden administration has violated the federal government’s “compact” with the states—an abdication that justifies state usurpation of federal authority at the border.

This language embraces the Confederacy’s conception of the Constitution as a mere compact that states may exit when they feel it has been broken. It’s dangerous rhetoric that transcends partisan grandstanding. And as before, it’s being used to legitimize both nullification and dehumanization.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Civil War in the U.S. is highly unlikely in the current economy. Firstly because big business would never allow that kind of hit to the stock market, but also because you're not going to get people leaving their families and going to the front lines when everyone is living paycheck-to-paycheck without a draft and good luck with trying to institute a draft.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Also… ya know, a big mismatch in technology. Sure a lot of folks have ARs and shit, some folks have Barret .50 cal sniper rifles. None of them have a fucking AH-64E Apache.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You need an F-15, not an AR-15.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago

What about an F-150? There's plenty of those and last time I checked 150 is more than 15.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The usual comeback is "well, look at where the bases are!"

I don't think it's a coincidence they are located in the south.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Dude, there’s military bases all over the country…

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Ok so, re-reading my comment from 9 hours ago, I can honestly say I don't know what my train of thought was.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

No worries dude… I know I’ve been exactly in that spot

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

but also because you’re not going to get people leaving their families and going to the front lines when everyone is living paycheck-to-paycheck without a draft and good luck with trying to institute a draft.

Sure you are. One of the first things every civil war starts out doing is paying soldiery. What better way to lure those living paycheck-to-paycheck than offering them a paycheck AND a cause?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Pay them with what? What money do you think Texas has?

Texas is in the top five states that receive federal aid.

And before you say oil, how are they going to export it with the US Navy blockading them? They don't have the ships to go up against the US Navy.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

Plenty of businessmen who are absolute fucking loons. Just look at the Mypillow guy. Same way the American Revolution got started, and the US Civil War. Rich folk loan the rebel government money either out of idealism or as a bet on the success on the rebels.

My point isn't that it's sustainable. My point is that it's very possible to lure people who are living paycheck-to-paycheck to get involved in a war at the outset. The issue comes if the war drags on, and the rebel government starts to have trouble paying wages.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

That's really just a measure of population. Texas is one of the few red "giver" states

ETA: To answer your question, they could do the same as last time. They would issue confederate promissory notes, which would only have worth if they win. Probably at inflated numbers to appeal to greed and bypass the obvious problems with that idea

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

Probably some confedcoin crypto sham this time around!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Plus they would have to put down their iphones to go fight and give up their gaming.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago

Nah, my steam deck comes with me to the front