Ask yourself the main question :In the final years of the Republic, the government was split between two factions called the “optimates” and the “populares.” During these culture wars, it became increasingly difficult for leaders to share power.
The optimates sought to uphold the oligarchy and keep power in the hands of the “best men,” i.e., conservative patricians. The populares were on the side of the people. They used assemblies to win over the plebeians."
This happened in Rome approximately 80 B.C. The results led to a bloody civil war. Should we expect things to be different this time and if so why?
Ask yourself the main question :
Who's in control of most of the weapons necessary to stop a civil war?
The end of the other side. Without an opposition, life in America would be a big rock candy mountain.I cant help but wonder, what with all the talk about a 'civil war'...just what is it that people are envisioning?
Spoken like someone that talks about civil war and cant even begin to fathom what it would actually look like.The end of the other side. Without an opposition, life in America would be a big rock candy mountain.
It's very simplistic to say that the populares were on the side of the people and were not cynically using them to attain power themselves. This is demonstrated by the fact that the fall of the Republic, and the rise of the Empire, was brought about due to populares.In the final years of the Republic, the government was split between two factions called the “optimates” and the “populares.” During these culture wars, it became increasingly difficult for leaders to share power.
The optimates sought to uphold the oligarchy and keep power in the hands of the “best men,” i.e., conservative patricians. The populares were on the side of the people. They used assemblies to win over the plebeians."
This happened in Rome approximately 80 B.C. The results led to a bloody civil war. Should we expect things to be different this time and if so why?
Which side are you talking about here and what does "big rock candy mountain" mean?The end of the other side. Without an opposition, life in America would be a big rock candy mountain.
If you are a democrat that equates to the GOP and vice versa. As for the big rock candy mountain;Which side are you talking about here and what does "big rock candy mountain" mean?
Ah...well, a Civil War wouldn't eliminate the other side, only suppress it, and only for a certain period of time. Also, the country would be in significantly worse shape than it is now, likely much more authoritarian. All of this isn't taking into consideration the possibility of an adversary coming in and taking it all in our weakened state.If you are a democrat that equates to the GOP and vice versa. As for the big rock candy mountain;
""Big Rock Candy Mountain", first recorded by Harry McClintock in 1928, is a folk song about a hobo's idea of paradise, a modern version of the medieval concept of Cockaigne"
The definition of “civil war” comes from the Latin phrase bellum civile, which translates to “war of or pertaining to civilians". It does not talk about the horrors or causes which throughout history are many. If you want a good recommendation for an American civil war book(s) try McPherson;Spoken like someone that talks about civil war and cant even begin to fathom what it would actually look like.
In the final years of the Republic, the government was split between two factions called the “optimates” and the “populares.” During these culture wars, it became increasingly difficult for leaders to share power.
The optimates sought to uphold the oligarchy and keep power in the hands of the “best men,” i.e., conservative patricians. The populares were on the side of the people. They used assemblies to win over the plebeians."
This happened in Rome approximately 80 B.C. The results led to a bloody civil war. Should we expect things to be different this time and if so why?
In the final years of the Republic, the government was split between two factions called the “optimates” and the “populares.” During these culture wars, it became increasingly difficult for leaders to share power.
The optimates sought to uphold the oligarchy and keep power in the hands of the “best men,” i.e., conservative patricians. The populares were on the side of the people. They used assemblies to win over the plebeians."
This happened in Rome approximately 80 B.C. The results led to a bloody civil war. Should we expect things to be different this time and if so why?
Wonderful. Now...what do you envision a civil war in the US will actually look like?The definition of “civil war” comes from the Latin phrase bellum civile, which translates to “war of or pertaining to civilians". It does not talk about the horrors or causes which throughout history are many. If you want a good recommendation for an American civil war book(s) try McPherson;
"He has written 12 books concerning the Civil War, including 1988's Battle Cry of Freedom , which in addition to a Pulitzer won the Christopher Award and the American Military Institute's Best Book Award"
Who the opponents are isn't the hard part if you're looking at this from a purely ideological and political perspective. What gets far more complicated is what this looks like on a map and how that would play out in terms of an actual war and what goals are realistic. The population is way too fragmented to look at the culture issues as the precursors to an actual civil war; you have states which are blue politically but also have large shares of red counties etc. I just don't see the civil war model working at all, but what is certainly within the realm of possibility is lone actors reacting violently against others.Why is it that all of the threads on the 'looming' civil war come to a screeching halt when the proponents are asked to actually draw battle lines and explain WHO it is exactly they think are supposed to be gighting against who?
If its not that hard, why dont you just say it? If you see a looming civil war, what are the 'sides'?Who the opponents are isn't the hard part if you're looking at this from a purely ideological and political perspective. What gets far more complicated is what this looks like on a map and how that would play out in terms of an actual war and what goals are realistic. The population is way too fragmented to look at the culture issues as the precursors to an actual civil war; you have states which are blue politically but also have large shares of red counties etc. I just don't see the civil war model working at all, but what is certainly within the realm of possibility is lone actors reacting violently against others.
In my comment I said that I don't see a looming civil war. I think anyone talking about looming civil wars know that the "sides" are the same ones defined in the culture wars: liberals and conservatives. That's a very simplistic view, but it's who the two groups are defined as.If its not that hard, why dont you just say it? If you see a looming civil war, what are the 'sides'?
Gotcha. I understand. I personally agree...I dont see it either. I just wish those that do would actually define the lines they see drawn.In my comment I said that I don't see a looming civil war. I think anyone talking about looming civil wars know that the "sides" are the same ones defined in the culture wars: liberals and conservatives. That's a very simplistic view, but it's who the two groups are defined as.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?