What starts a civil war?

a reply to: jlafleur02

I think people that think we are headed for a second civil war should really educate themselves on what started the first civil war.

Spoiler alert: abolition of slavery had nothing to do with it.

originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: jlafleur02

I think people that think we are headed for a second civil war should really educate themselves on what started the first civil war.

Spoiler alert: abolition of slavery had nothing to do with it.

The forcing of the government to have southern cotton brought to the north. Blockade of the port of Charleston to stop sending cotton to Britain. All about money and forcing government will on a private business.

I think that's what happened. The slavery issue was just a justification.

a reply to: jlafleur02

The slavery issue was just a justification.

Have you read the Articles of Confederation?

In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.

The United States Constitution makes no such claim.

a reply to: azvol

An idiot would be a “who”. The OP asked “what”.

King Charles I of England startted The English Civil War because he usurped Parliament.

His action in doing so made him an idiot.

a reply to: Phage

Slave state and non slave state were the exact same as saying ‘red’ and ‘blue’ state today in the cutthroat politics of the day. Even though slavery still existed in both, This was a time when the country was expanding, Lincoln only wanted to add ‘red’ territories for statehood, and effectively made it illegal for a territory to apply for statehood as a ‘blue’ state. There were many many other causes that really had not much to do with cotton or slaves as well.

Abolishing slavery was not a catalyst for the war, not by a long shot. Lincoln himself said so many times.

You don’t have to take my word for it, many confederate soldiers recorded their exact reasons for signing up to fight in numerous diaries, letters, etc. I have yet to read an account from a single confederate soldier who wanted to fight in a war to preserve slavery, almost all of them talk about a federal government that was out of control and no longer served the interests of their citizenry.

Americans nowadays are too lazy and apathetic to start any kind of civil wars. Not gonna happen when so many are suckling at the government teat.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: jlafleur02

The slavery issue was just a justification.

Have you read the Articles of Confederation?

In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.

The United States Constitution makes no such claim.

I meant more of a rallying cry to get more people behind the war. You need support to go to war. The common man didn't own cotton mills that to this day are all over new England. Even to this day. They are housing projects now but most cotton was milled in the northeast. I may be misunderstanding what you said so can you clarify. I always take your post seriously as I think you are the best on ATS

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: jlafleur02

What starts a civil war?

Idiots usually.

Yeah, those damn founding fathers and revolutionaries!!

Idiots, the lot of them, right?

**facepalm into unconsciousness**

Do you even think before you write stuff here?? Or, are you just so 'woke' that you can't help yourself? Perhaps it's that in your country the abuses are even worse and so you feel good about trashing a country which you, deep down inside, aspire to be.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Yeah, those damn founding fathers and revolutionaries!!

Would you care to explain how you came to that conclussion from my reply ?

Idiots do start Civil Wars, like an example i gave later with King Charles 1 Of England.

You sound very defensive. Are you having a bad day ?

country which you, deep down inside, aspire to be.

Funniest comment i have read on here for a long time. And taken into account there have been numerous hilarious comments regarding the love of Trump.

a reply to: alldaylong

Well, this may be news to you, but I don't love Trump. I love this country, and the system of government set forth in the Constitution.

I'm sure there are many examples of civil war started by idiots, but my point to you was...not all civil wars are started by idiots, and the Revolutionary War was chief among these.

I'm not sure I really care too much about King Charles I of England. Any civil war he initiated was rendered irrelevant by the United States Declaration of Independence and ensuing American Revolutionary War.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Any civil war he initiated was rendered irrelevant by the United States Declaration of Independence and ensuing American Revolutionary War.

The English Civil War occured over a 100 years before US Independence. When North America wa still a colony.

a reply to: alldaylong

Yes, I understand this.

a reply to: jlafleur02

Politicians start wars at the bequest of the bankers and corporations.

Then have people fight in them.

And that all she wrote really.

a reply to: jlafleur02

In short, if people don't achieve representation and their other aims through the political process, there is the risk of opening up a massive can of worms. If people feel alienated, ignored and suppressed enough, they radicalise in their outlooks and means of achieving their goals.

Reforms in political systems or legislation require compromise from all the parties concerned. For the U.S., the New Deal 2.0 would involve rebuilding infrastructure, comprehensive immigration and health care reform. As a starting point, people across the political divided backing infrastructure projects provide a rallying point. People coming together for shared goals, and gaining post-COVID-19 pandemic employment, is the means to stabilise the political spectrum.

a reply to: xpert11

I thought people always felt alienated, ignored, and suppressed by their governments.

Our systems of government are there to oppress the people and collect taxes and monies.

Democracy is no different and as to people coming together for shared goals, well is that not communism of a sorts?

Politicians start wars, people just fight and die in them........for the politicians and their wet dream ideologies.

a reply to: jlafleur02

Some thoughts on that.

The link has some thoughts on that and also quotes portions of three other pieces that are also linked and also contain thoughts on that.

The fact of the matter is that large portions of the American public have zero faith that this was a fair election.

Couple that with the behavior of the now "winning" party and how they won, and that unity may not be all it's cracked up to be for them. They reap what they sow.

Democrats and their socialist ideology do not win debates. They do not win elections either. Which is why we have the massive fraud which is now bubbling to the surface.

Then there is social media. People go on social media to communicate and coordinate. It is the new town square. The people behind these psyops KNOW this fact. They use it to their advantage to sow disinformation and division for purpose of pitting us against each other.

If the US devolves into Civil War, who profits? If the US turns against each other, who might be waiting in the wings to swoop in and take control once we've nearly beaten each other to death? This is the REAL coup.....

You know, for many years I trained in close combat martial arts.... Our training facility was in a rather shady part of town. We all used to laugh and joke about it while speculating that if some thug tried to rob us as we were leaving class, we'd be so worn out and tired from sparring and fighting each other that we wouldn't have the energy to thwart a REAL attacker.

Some food for thought.

a reply to: Phage

Sorry Phage, the Civil War was far more complicated than slavery. Slavery was just the issue around which it all coalesced.

Look at our own times -- everyone says if they come to confiscate firearms it will touch off a shooting war. But let's be plain, if the coming commander in thief were to authorize something like that and touch off such a war, it would be wrong to teach the kids in the future that the only thing going on was a 2nd Amendment gun rights battle. The current issues and division leading to this are much more complicated and much deeper than that. It would just be the thing touching it all off -- the issue around which it all comes to a head.

a reply to: jlafleur02

To start a civil war in America would require much less than the numbers you posted.
1 to 3 million duck hunters without any clear direction would be useless.

You'd need only two things in America to start a civil war.

Technology systems to disrupt Main stream media, Military, and Alphabet agencies communication platforms.

Highly trained operatives following guerrilla warfare tactics that target and assassinate
key political leaders.

originally posted by: TheLieWeLive
One side coming out saying the other sides vote was fraudulent, proving it in court, reversing the popular thought that one president elect won.
Now the other side is enraged because they were told there candidate won for a month before stripping the win. Now they will scream fraud and the media will fuel the claim.
All hell breaks loose and elections have lost there trust.

Just as well that hasn't happened.

Nothing was proved in court other than the fact Team Trump has nothing.

A civil war surely isn't started by ad-hoc mobs of people in militia groups run by local yokels. The US Civil War's confederacy was highly organized, politically backed by entire state populations, which proliferated into like minded states coming together to fight a unified cause against the federal government.

Out resourced, the confederacy was defeated in 4 years. May have been sooner but generals wanted to draw it out for the love of war. Could this happen in today's US. I would say definitely not. It would be stopped very quickly.