Could the US be headed toward civil unrest?

[redturtle806]

Anyone else think that the US could possibly be headed for civil unrest? It's not something I seriously believe will happen or would support, but I was just bored and wondering about it today. I know that sounds crazy but it seems like the nation has become more and more divided as of late. For example this map shows that the current election was pretty damn similar to the civil war lines:

I know that it's pretty far out there to suggest, (ok really far out there) considering that the US has been through a lot of changes peacefully since then, but when I'm listening to people in my town talk about the recent election I can't help but wonder. Currently I live in Lubbock Texas, a town full of less than rational people who are ready for violence. Our local judge even said he would form a militia and force out any UN integration/support/troops with the town.

"He's going to try to hand over the sovereignty of the U.S. to the United Nations, what's going to happen when that happens?" Judge Head told FOX 34 in Lubbock. "I'm thinking worse case scenario," he explained. "Civil unrest, civil disobedience, civil war maybe…we're not just talking a few riots or demonstrations."

The republican judge said that he himself will meet the enemy, "in front of their armored personnel carriers" to tell them they are not welcome, and has the county sheriff to back him up. "I don't want U.N. troops in Lubbock County," he said.

Source

Granted these could very well be the ravings of a complete lunatic, but I've traveled all over the south and statements like this aren't uncommon. Personally his comments really don't surprise me, as the town has a "wild west" feel to it. In fact it was ranked as the 6th most dangerous city in the US last year by Forbes. Source Also I grew up in a Texas hicktown shithole where minor violence (minor as in not going to the hospital afterwords) was common and not really a concern. I remember teachers would even ignore fights that broke out, as long as it looked like no one was gonna get killed. Additionally, Texas self defense laws are pretty lax. When a man shot and killed 2 people robbing his neighbor's house, he got off with no penalties whatsoever. Source Also I've heard way too many people claim that they'll go out guns blazing before the government takes away their fully automatic assault rifle away, rifles I should point out, that they are not legally allowed to have. Gun laws are not respected at all in the country, you wouldn't believe what people can get their hands on. Hell I knew a kid who was running around in the woods unsupervised blasting stuff with a rifle at 6 years old. My point is that there are bunch of ignorant people who are getting sick of government intrusion into their lives, and when you combine ignorance with guns things can get ugly really fast.

So basically does anybody else think that the shit might hit the fan soon? I understand that these views are probably limited to the south/midwest, but that's where I've lived my whole life and it's all I know. Also just to be clear, I have never owned a firearm, cowboy hat, or a horse nor do I condone violence except for defense of one's self or family.

[dondon151]

people claim to want to move out of the country all the time when an election in the US doesn't go their way

but obviously they never do

[Original Alear]

I'm not sure the north/south border thing is really a relevant map breakdown. Yes - there is a black dude as president. Yes - there are racist people. But I find it somewhat hard to credit a mass secession movement becoming popular along those states...that appeals to a majority of people (right-wing or whatever).

None of the things you are saying sound new to me - unless tere's actually evidence that the UN is plannign to send men into Texas. If the actual problems are more aggravated then before, I assume it's rooted in things like a weak economy - especially since the areas of the US with weaker economies seem to have mroe crime (oh wow). So yes - serious economic problems, especially those that get worse and worse, I think do contribute to unrest. But I don't think the US is "headed towards civil unrest" in a way that it's never seen it before, at least not as a result of the things you've cited. From my point of view, we're most likely to see problems if we see a breakdown in more essential material things (supply, production and distribution of essential resources and/or commodities), or any out-of-the-blue acts of god.

Also, that map image might not be correct...slavery still existed in some Union states listed as "free states" even during the civil war. Of course, I'm not sure of the exact definition of "free states," but I would suggest that it's probably a misnomer.

When a man shot and killed 2 people robbing his neighbor's house, he got off with no penalties whatsoever.

I actually can understand this kind of thing as a hypothetical, in some scenarios. If you're living in a remote area, the social contract may put you in a particularly severe form of jeopardy if it requires you to restrain you from using lethal firearms in self defense.

Of course, any restraints on your behavior are probably putting you in some kind of (not necessarily safety-threatening) jeopardy - though they may keep you out of it if you're on the other end. Obviously, there could be tragic and disastrous consequences from misunderstandings that result from this law, and (probably) the more aggressively vigilantism is pursued, the more we should give it askance.

Hell I knew a kid who was running around in the woods unsupervised blasting stuff with a rifle at 6 years old.

I think that's what you call a crackshot-in-training...to some extent it's pretty sad.

I remember in Having Our Say (I think) one of the two sisters would hunt squirrels with her dad or her grandad. She would be on one side of a tree, and she'd scare squirrels so they'd run around to the other side of the tree. Her guardian would be aiming at the ground on t he other side, and he'd shoot the squirrels when they ran around. This is a pretty vague memory of a recorded memory that probably wasn't very vague. She was probably around 10 at the time, so that would have been around 1890-1910.

And the southerners in the Civil War were apparently better shots, because they were more gun-centric and more of them were in the Mexican-American war.

And in terms of violence generally (but I believe the anecdote is specific to Texas) there was this quote, from a review of a movie

The cumulative effect suggests a world in which murder, desperation and operatic levels of tragedy are workaday (one town is actually called Cut and Shoot). As well as losing her brother and mother in the attacks, one woman tells how she also lost almost every other member of her family (plus dog) in a variety of colourful accidents, suicides and slayings in the six years beforehand. She unplugged her phone soon afterwards: "I just couldn't handle another call."

That movie was from 2012 - but I think the "six years" were around the period of 1995-2001. (incidentally, a man of faith in that film explains his emotional perspective on the mortality of squirrels and men)

Also just to be clear, I have never owned a firearm, cowboy hat, or a horse nor do I condone violence except for defense of one's self or family.

There's nothing wrong with the obverse of any of those things...certainly I think that if you condone violence in defense of one's family, you're wrong if you do not condone it in some other instances. Just saying.

people claim to want to move out of the country all the time when an election in the US doesn't go their way

but obviously they never do

I dunno about people moving out when an election goes a way they don't like.

But people do move out of the US as a result of political fallout. I think that's reduced significantly since we stopped using compulsory drafts. At the very least, there are/were some pretty visible draft-dodgers.

Edited November 9, 2012 by L1049

[tenkiforecast]

There is a break between genuine crazy and paranoia (UN Troops have not been effective at *anything* since the Korean War). A lot of FOX Commentators are, I think, genuinely crazy or paranoid. Most of these extreme cases are tied to mass hysteria or paranoia.

The idea of a mass secession movement does not worry me. For better or for worse, the country is too economically and culturally tied to allow that to occur. That is not what worries me. The worry is that our country currently resembles pre-empire Rome. The way things are right now, with our politicians acting like 10-year-olds and unwilling to compromise on anything means that nothing will happen. While some on the right see this as a good thing, when our policies expire or severe crises occur, this is a *really* bad thing. See the Debt Ceiling debacle from last year. The Republicans nearly ruined the US economy to try and make Obama look bad. No matter what any pundit says, going into default on anything is a terrible idea. In this environment, the only person who would actually manage to get things accomplished would be a dictator. Like Julius Caesar--that is why he came to power. More were in power before Caesar, Sulla was his mentor, but they rose in the same sort of environment. The fact that our country is setting itself up for a dictator is what scares me, not the idea of another civil war.

[Arch]

No. Anyone who claims anything of the sort is an idiot. It's just a bunch of ideologues unhappy with the election result, with a few of them being so extreme and vocal that they shout "secession" and "flee to Canada." There will be no civil unrest, no resistance against the lawfully elected President, or anything like that. Give it a few days for the butthurt to go away and we'll be right back to normal.

[Tangerine]

We've got a fantastic home waiting for you in Nunavut for anyone looking to move!

[Blademaster!]

Yeah, I think you're overreacting at this moment in time. WWIII is more likely to happen than a secession in the U.S.

[Phoenix Wright]

Civil unrest in this country will happen soon, I think, but not for this reason, and an outcome concerning secession won't be the goal.

Edited November 9, 2012 by Phoenix Wright

[Blademaster!]

It's happening.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20301477#TWEET356625

[redturtle806]

Granted I don't think the US is going to collapse anytime soon, but hopefully we see some true changes soon. I think if people don't stop playing into party and class warfare, the economy is just going to keep getting worse. I do think it's hilarious when conservatives talk about running off to Canada, Australia, or Europe for more freedom, as all of those governments are far more liberal.

Currently, the most popular petition is from Texas, which voted for Mr Romney by some 15 percentage points more than it did for the Democratic incumbent.

Haha this doesn't surprise me, in fact I'm pretty sure Texas is the only state which reserves the right to succeed. It's a law left over from when Texas was a Republic.

[Original Alear]

Haha this doesn't surprise me, in fact I'm pretty sure Texas is the only state which reserves the right to succeed. It's a law left over from when Texas was a Republic.

That's correct. All other states do not have the right to succeed. They are required to fail. That is why a state that actually moves towards secession will only be nuked if it seems to be at risk of succeeding (not just in separating from the US, but in being/creating a success story on the state level). Because the people are the state, the success of the state will be determined by the success of the people. If it is determined that the people are seceding because they have a passion for the idea of secession itself, then they will be nuked, because it will not be allowed for them to succeed in any endeavor as a state to the extent that the overall picture creates the impression of "success."

I am not sure if my nation has the right to succeed. Among other things it is supposed to be under god (presumably this refers to a hierarchical relation as opposed to god being located in a high building or existing through the material construction and continued existence of high buildings, since high buildings or perhaps the construction of continuously higher buildings are or is the symbols of capitalism as stated in somewhere around episode 22 of cowboy bebop). Only an embrace of deism as a guiding interpretation of god's nature can allow a nation to ignore seemingly divine interdicts from para-natural sources and yet claim it is still under god; incidentally this means that an embrace of an accurate deism allows a nation (within a picture where god's nature is unknown by definition) to succeed in spite of god's will (as we might suspect it to be but cannot prove it is) while acting within god's will. However, I do not feel that the existence of this potential on the level of the state or the nation is the fundamental question of ethics fostering force for success, at least not on the level of the state or the nation (i.e. an explicitly unified people).

EDIT-That's weird, one of the themes from "American Beauty" ("Any Other Name") came up after I made this post.

Edited January 4, 2013 by Mouse

[Lord Raven]

I never really liked these kinds of comments because I feel like a lot of those states had a close to 50/50 split in terms of democratic/republican voters