• HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Unironically yes, sufficient levels of violence will solve US divisions.

    Anyone that thinks that they genuinely want this though has never lived in a country going through a civil war.

    • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 months ago

      If anything happens it won’t be a civil war. There is no good geological line to use as a point to start. It will be much more akin to the Troubles of Northern Ireland. Which may be honestly worse.

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        The biggest difference would be that there isn’t an outside country that could or would step in. The US military would probably end up being divided, as many of the upper officers take oaths of loyalty to the country and constitution seriously, while a number of the enlisted people are much more partisan.

        We’re already seeing the beginnings of low-level terrorism, with threats of assassination against judges and other gov’t officials. Mostly–almost exclusively–from the political right. It’s not much of a step from there to actual violence.

    • Gaspar@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 months ago

      Or they lack a shred of empathy and/or imagination.

      I’ve never lived in a country going through civil war, but I don’t have to do that to tell you that it’s not something I want ever.

    • trafficnab@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah, the ammo box is literally the fourth box of democracy after the soap box, the ballot box, and the jury box, but it’s only to be used when the other three have failed

      At the end of the day, might makes right, so we better make damn well sure the side we believe in has more of it