I think 2016 definitely rattled our confidence in definitively claiming anything, so I get that, but I also think 2016 was an outlier. I'm not going to let that fuck with my relative certainty that things will ultimately be a tense if not regular transfer of power.
The American bourgeoisie is split, perhaps, but it's the evangelical DeVos dorks versus the Bezoses. To your point, we have a huge fight ahead of us no matter who wins. But I think the majority of the business community is aligned with Biden with a fringe idiocy dedicated to Trump.
I think 2016 definitely rattled our confidence in definitively claiming anything, so I get that, but I also think 2016 was an outlier. I’m not going to let that fuck with my relative certainty that things will ultimately be a tense if not regular transfer of power.
I'm not trying to start a slap fight here but you've been going around saying people are libs for thinking a civil war could happen, while having the libbest take of all: that 2016 was an aberration. That shit is the new normal. There is no going back without major conflict because the contradictions are too pronounced. The GOP will never go back to being a respectable neocon party and the Dems are going to have to contend with major left wing sentiment in it's base. I really don't see any material basis for thinking that peaceful transfer of power is certain.
The American bourgeoisie is split, perhaps, but it’s the evangelical DeVos dorks versus the Bezoses. To your point, we have a huge fight ahead of us no matter who wins. But I think the majority of the business community is aligned with Biden with a fringe idiocy dedicated to Trump.
Trump represents the interests of not just DeVos freaks but the resource extraction, construction, and weapons industries while Biden represents tech, media, finance, and service industries. Finance kind of plays both sides though. That means there is very big money behind Trump but bigger money behind Biden. The right wing faction has loyalty from institutions like police and private right wing militias while the Liberals have way more money and some nascent loyalty from military leadership. This is a level of polarization in the bourgeoisie that we haven't really seen since the 1860s.
That's why people think there could be a civil war. It wouldn't be like the American Civil war with basically two countries' armies fighting each other though. You'd probably see stuff like right wing mutinies at certain military bases if the military backs Biden, police mass arresting Democrat politicians and terrorism from both sides. One thing I'd definitely expect is chuds blockading food imports into cities.
I think you have me confused with someone else. I don't call people libs unless they're literally liberals. And this thread, to my mind, is the first I've commented in talking about Civil War.
You may misunderstand me when I say that 2016 is an aberration. I mean it was an aberration in predictive polling. It was unique in that there were two deeply unpopular candidates running against each other too, and you'll probably see one side or the other put up a more palatable candidate next time around.
Do weapons industries back Trump? So far as I've seen they've peppered both sides pretty evenly with money. And the same with other heavy industry.
I can't speak to the rest. It sounds to me more like you're talking about an almost Cold War type of thing.
I think 2016 definitely rattled our confidence in definitively claiming anything, so I get that, but I also think 2016 was an outlier. I'm not going to let that fuck with my relative certainty that things will ultimately be a tense if not regular transfer of power.
The American bourgeoisie is split, perhaps, but it's the evangelical DeVos dorks versus the Bezoses. To your point, we have a huge fight ahead of us no matter who wins. But I think the majority of the business community is aligned with Biden with a fringe idiocy dedicated to Trump.
I'm not trying to start a slap fight here but you've been going around saying people are libs for thinking a civil war could happen, while having the libbest take of all: that 2016 was an aberration. That shit is the new normal. There is no going back without major conflict because the contradictions are too pronounced. The GOP will never go back to being a respectable neocon party and the Dems are going to have to contend with major left wing sentiment in it's base. I really don't see any material basis for thinking that peaceful transfer of power is certain.
That's why people think there could be a civil war. It wouldn't be like the American Civil war with basically two countries' armies fighting each other though. You'd probably see stuff like right wing mutinies at certain military bases if the military backs Biden, police mass arresting Democrat politicians and terrorism from both sides. One thing I'd definitely expect is chuds blockading food imports into cities.
I think you have me confused with someone else. I don't call people libs unless they're literally liberals. And this thread, to my mind, is the first I've commented in talking about Civil War.
You may misunderstand me when I say that 2016 is an aberration. I mean it was an aberration in predictive polling. It was unique in that there were two deeply unpopular candidates running against each other too, and you'll probably see one side or the other put up a more palatable candidate next time around.
Do weapons industries back Trump? So far as I've seen they've peppered both sides pretty evenly with money. And the same with other heavy industry.
I can't speak to the rest. It sounds to me more like you're talking about an almost Cold War type of thing.