https://twitter.com/phl43/status/13...

Did you see the three possible outcomes I listed?>

Yes, of course. That's why I replied as I did.

You mentioned 2 possibilities that I view as low probability. Then the only high probability outcome you mentioned was a huge civil war with millions of causalties.

IMO, there is a 4th possibility that is more likely than a huge civil war, and that is a relatively peaceful breakup of the USA.

That's because Louisiana is a Red State.

<The vast majority of protests this summer have been peaceful. >

Your perception is colored by the fact you live in a Red State, and you believe MSM.

While I do NOT at all accept the MSM at face value, I do indeed live in a Red State and EVERY SINGLE PROTEST has been peaceful here.

However, there are these things called Blue States, which I am confident you have heard of. Pray tell, how many riots have been declared in Portland, Oregon this year? Keep in mind, the Portland, Oregon mayor is a hard left [D]. Dem dem dem all the way.

How many riots have been declared? Over 60! Over 60!

Did you see the video I posted in Rogoff, of all the looted, bashed out, boarded up stores in Manhattan?

Let me give you a hint. <HMM> described it as a <handful> of stores, and I derided him for being innumerate. Anyone who watches the video will see DOZENS of looted stores in Manhattan.

These are NOT isolated examples. There was rioting and looting in over 200 Dem controlled cities this Summer, all strangely coordinated. Hmmm.... What could that mean, I wonder?

<If people destroy property or harm other people, they should be arrested and provided due process: Not shot in the street.>

Sounds like you are against self defense. If someone attacks me in the street, and his comrades with guns come after me too, should I sit by and let them shoot me?

When your goddam evil lib politicians order the police to stand down, are decent Americans then supposed to surrender to murderers? Goddam, what is wrong with you?

Kyle Rittenhouse is a kid! He was standing up for his community, and then was attacked by gun-wielding Commie revolutionaries. He is not obligated to be a murder victim so that you can continue to live in your Woke cone of ignorance.

Wake up, man!

<Not put to the sword.>

Evil criminals who attack a boy, while brandishing firearms, deserve whatever violence comes back their way. Do you realize you are defending a convicted wife beater?

Are you going to inform your wife you are on the side of the convicted wife beater? Does she know this yet?

<Besides bullets are famously non-discrimanatory;> Not at point blank. Your sweeping generalization fails when analyzed in the context of a point blank encounter.

<by shooting at a criminal in a crowded street, you might risk killing a kid two blocks away.>

That didn't happen. But the criminals WERE intent on killing a kid two feet away. FORTUNATELY the kid was armed and knew how to defend himself against the criminal scum that you are defending and excusing.

<Ohio>, it might be hard to accept, but the fact is that this site is never going to be like it was when Daniel ran it. We like to think that things will go on as they were in the good old days, but those days are gone forever. >

Exactly. No woman could ever measure up to the magnanimous and liberty-loving man that Daniel was.

Daniel was patient, kind, friendly, open-minded and, most of all, thick-skinned. No one was going to move him off his moral stand, or rile him. Though sometimes his patience wore thin. He was human, after all.

But that fool Mark F. tried his hardest, and could not get Daniel's goat. Heh heh. I'll never forget that. Don't forget, Mark F. got comfort in life to no end, from his AK-47.

Wherever these people congregate in large groups, the area turns into a 3rd world sheeethole.>

Let them congregate. Blacks are buying up a bunch of acres in Georgia. They will have a black town built on those acres. They will consider accepting whites who are "pro black". No others.

That is fine by me! Let them do it! Sell it to them. A safe space away from Whitey. A safe space free of white systemic racism/oppression.

<If people ... harm other people, they should be arrested and provided due process: Not shot in the street.>

What if the police are ordered to stand down, so that the people harming other people are not at risk of arrest? THEN WHAT???

In that case, which is exactly what has played out across the country, all Summer, in Lib-run cities, please anwer me this:

How much "harming other people" should the victims tolerate?

Three federal officers were blinded by lasers in Portland. IS THAT OK BY YOU?

Gun-wielding rioters drew down on Kyle R. SHOULD HE WAIT TO BE SHOT?

I don't know what your stance is on these questions, so please elucidate for me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sP...

Just to clarify: it's the latest from the fascist state in Australia, i.e Victoria.

The good news is that the more these videos are getting into the public domain, the more Victorians are waking up to what's happening in their state.

They also serve as a warning to the rest of Australia.

IMO, there is a 4th possibility that is more likely than a huge civil war, and that is a relatively peaceful breakup of the USA.>

Ahhh yes, the "Two-state" solution.

Will there be a requirement we learn to speak Hebrew?

<the "Two-state" solution.>

Of course, it will only be temporary, until China/Russia take them down.

I don't have a lot of faith, in Supreme Commander, Barack Obama, or his military leaders like, 5 star generals, George S. "Hunter" Biden, or Andrew "Il Duce" Cuomo.

Ahhh yes, the "Two-state" solution. >

Maybe more than 2.

<Of course, it will only be temporary, until China/Russia take them down.>

Maybe. I am skeptical that Russia is our enemy. Ever since the collapse of the USSR, Russia has ceased to aspire to being a globally dominant power.

Their focus has been on <regional> dominance, with the goal of protecting their interests and their sphere of influence.

China has definitely built up their military, and has also worked to become a global <economic> power. So why would they "take down" their biggest customer? As long as we don't go to war on behalf of Taiwan, what would be the point of a take down?

They might seek to supplant the US dollar reserve currency status with the Yuan, but if the US breaks apart then that goal could be achievable without war, which of course would be much more appealing than peer-to-peer war (or peer-to-near peer). But then that would be counter productive as long as we are their biggest customer.

I look at variety of print media, including right, centrist and some mainstream publications. I view them all with skepticism and watch very little television. Television is too visceral; it appeals to the emotions and not the intellect. A little bit of craftily edited film footage can convince people, particularly those already inclined toward a particular viewpoint, of just about anything. My analysis of current events leans heavily on historical precedent.

and Democratic mayors in both New Orleans and Baton Rouge.>

Of course!
It's already been pointed out it could be <a better situation.>

<saffuna: remember he made a choice to stay in New Orleans, which is 60% black.

The situation is complex, given our immense debt. I don't really want to get into the myriad of fine points right now. >

There is also the fact that these folks:

<I have many - and I do mean MANY - liberals in my family (all with advanced degrees). Their liberal beliefs and views are deeply held convictions, which are as much a part of their character and humanity as your beliefs and views are a part of you.>

won't like what they've hitched their wagon to when their open sewer unfolds.

They've liked being brilliant libs, with my God, my capitalism, my law and order, my freedoms.

This is what it means to be a Red State:

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2...

Over 58% of the votes went for Trump.

<We have a Democratic governor, and Democratic mayors in both New Orleans and Baton Rouge.>

Boise has a Dem mayor too. Idaho is still a Red state.

Plus, there are exceptions. IIRC, Sacramento has a GOP mayor but has had violent "protests". But such exceptions are rare.

< I look at variety of print media, including right, centrist and some mainstream publications. I view them all with skepticism and watch very little television. Television is too visceral; it appeals to the emotions and not the intellect. A little bit of craftily edited film footage can convince people, particularly those already inclined toward a particular viewpoint, of just about anything. My analysis of current events leans heavily on historical precedent.>

I take you at your word.

<For a cogent explanation of why your division of the Union into two or more countries won't work , I refer you to the first inaugural address of that well known Marxist, Abraham Lincoln.>

Of course it can work. The Soviet Union broke up. Yugoslavia broke up. The Roman Empire broke up. Austria-Hungary broke up. Germany was forcibly broken up. The Irish broke free from the British. The Ottoman Empire broke up. Alexander the Great's Empire broke up. The Spanish Empire broke up. The Portuguese Empire broke up.

The British Empire broke up (that break up was wildly successful, spawning India, Pakistan, Australia, Canada, the US, and quite a few other nations around the glove). India and Pakistan broke up. For the sake of brevity, I will stop here.

Probably the most "just" way to divy it up is apportion the debt by Electoral College votes, or by state GDP. Therefore we can predict in advance these 2 options will never happen. In any event, we are getting ahead of ourselves in the discussion. Let us cross this bridge when we get to it.

<Which states get what weapons systems?>

Probably the best way to go is to have an "American Union" type arrangement, where the new nations share responsibility for maintaining DOD, at least for a time. Sort of a "NATO 2", where NATO is "North American Treaty Organization". Again, this is a bridge too far to focus on at this time.

<How do you divvy up cutting edge technology? Much of it resides in blue states right now, and I suspect none will willingly give it up.>

Wait until they see what their atrocity/fascism/diversity actually looks like.>

saffuna replied by asking me if I knew ANYTHING about the Chicago Seven trial. His capitalization.

I replied that I had read the transcript of the trial, had read the Walker Report and had read Abbie Hoffman's autobiography in which he admitted they were guilty.

Smackdown!>

Some of you might have notice that that was a loaded question. It presupposes that everybody participates in identity politics and that all politics are, at least in some ways, identity politics.

In a democracy the politicians want something valuable from the plebs (that's us) and that is their vote. The plebs know that they have something valuable, so they ask, "What's in it for me?" and the politicians promise them something of value in return for their vote.

But when we ask, "What's in it for me", what do we mean by "me"?

"Me" is defined politically by which group you fall into. To a politician, "Me" means a white working class guy, or a "suburban mother" or a black man, or a Latino, or a senior citizen, or a pot head, or an illegal alien or etc...

Even when us plebs discuss international politics, isn't it still identity politics? For instance, if we talk about the conflict between the "Palestinians" and the Israelis, we're talking about different "thems." The Palestinians are one "them" and the Israelis are the other "them." It's about "them" instead of "me" in this case, but what do we mean by "them"?

Smackdown!>

I'm sure it was. However, just consider who you were debating.