It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A new American civil war

page: 11
57
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: Erno86

Man........ You really suck at this lol


Turns out, I can't refresh the page and like this post over and over without ATS still just allowing one star from me. But FWIW, I tried.




posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: LSU2018


There they're, theirs more important stuff to worry about like shootin'.






posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Hand cranked .45 gatling gun for home defense, and freaks out anti gun nuts, great for living rooms everywhere.

I have a 40 round mag and can get a 60 rd. they are legal most places, as long as you can own a gun, own a gatling!!!

Great for the screaming hordes of Dem... er Zombies, yeah flesh eating Zombies, flesh eating Seditionist Zombies, thats the ticket!



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

Funny things to point out on the chart

Libertarians are Laissez-Faire Liberals
Constitutionalists are Conservative Liberals
Johnson and Hillary are Neo-Liberals
Carter and Bill Clinton were Classical Liberals, Clinton a little more towards Social Reformist but not much.
Trump is somewhere between a Classical Liberal and Republican.
Democratic Socialists are almost as Authoritarian as the KKK, which is an Ethnic Nationalist.
The further left you go, the more Authoritarian you become as it requires more power to get other on board.
The further right you go also becomes more Authoritarian, but follows increasingly more regimental forms of traditional government.
Anarchial governments describe third world countries unless under a form of Totalitarian Dictatorship, left or right.



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting
Question.

Because our democracy typically involves two parties, and one party kills all the members of the opposing party, until there is only one party left, or survivors of the second party are forced to succumb to the beliefs of the 1st party in order to continue their lives and those of their children and loved ones, is what is left still a 'democracy"?


Yes.

Because this isn't "left" vs "right".

This is communism vs capitalism.

This is US Constitution vs Green New Deal.

This is freedom vs authoritarianism.


Ah. That's a good assist in the mindset. Thanks. The expression cognitive dissonance is so overly used on this site, I hesitate, but it does come to mind in this case.

On second thought, maybe I will buy a rapid-fire weapon and load it with fast-acting animal tranquilizers.

You'll thank me later.



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU2018

People switch 'sides' all the time.

Just because a movement falls under one wing of the spectrum doesnt mean you're bound to it.
And you're assuming and labeling me. I never once told anyone my political affiliations because its redundant.



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: thedigirati
Hand cranked .45 gatling gun for home defense, and freaks out anti gun nuts, great for living rooms everywhere.

I have a 40 round mag and can get a 60 rd. they are legal most places, as long as you can own a gun, own a gatling!!!

Great for the screaming hordes of Dem... er Zombies, yeah flesh eating Zombies, flesh eating Seditionist Zombies, thats the ticket!


Extermination of perceived enemies. Hasn't that been tried before? Hmmm. Let me think.....



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting

originally posted by: thedigirati
Hand cranked .45 gatling gun for home defense, and freaks out anti gun nuts, great for living rooms everywhere.

I have a 40 round mag and can get a 60 rd. they are legal most places, as long as you can own a gun, own a gatling!!!

Great for the screaming hordes of Dem... er Zombies, yeah flesh eating Zombies, flesh eating Seditionist Zombies, thats the ticket!


Extermination of perceived enemies. Hasn't that been tried before? Hmmm. Let me think.....


Would you like to buy a brown shirt from me?

Who knows, it just may save your life one day.....


As long as you don't run into Augustus, that man does not discriminate.



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU2018

The problem is that the mule wasn’t selected. Mules are sterile and could have eventually died out if those dirty donkeys would leave the fillies alone.



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

ladyinwaiting, No one is advocating for mass murder or a shooting war or otherwise. I am personally of the belief that the conflict itself is only only inevitable but may in fact already be here albeit in the very early stages. "Polarized" no longer describes this country

That being said, a 21st century civil war in a 1st world super-power may look like this. There is no precedent for this. It may be limited to information war, it may not be and devolve into an all out # show.

Either way, no one is suggesting targeting folks based on political party or ideology. The only point is that those forces who intend to come after our Constitution are going to have to get through us first. Any group. Far left, far right, communist China or imperial Mars (bad joke), That our Constitutional rule is not up for negotiation and those who seek to subvert it should probably plan for secession instead...which itself does not have to be violent

The far left (very generally) wants their popular votes/will to be unlimited (a democracy) and we want a majority of 99% to be constrained by clearly defined & strictly followed Constitution (a republic)

The party system has failed us and the 2 sides are irreconcilable. An amicable, peaceful split is very possible. Although the logistics of this would be much less clear. In the end, either 1) we agree to disagree and stop pushing things/opinions on others 2) we do in fact fight it out or 3) we split peacefully. Sadly we cannot compromise as doing so would infringe on our unalienable rights under the Constitution (which is not acceptable to us)



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Erno86

Ha! And there rises a Black Flag again.

This is not a battlefield, it's a collection of competitive ideologies in the fictional realm of positivism.


This is not Brooklyn, it’s a colony of wayward bees without a queen
And we’re not people, we’re like Sims controlled by childish deities
But see we’re alive now and it’s not time we’re wasting here
Nah this is life and you’re so (pretty)
Like the gleam off that blade when you slipped my ribs the shivy
This ain’t a break up, I like to think of it as a stay of execution
And that’s not the air I’m clearing, it’s the wispy trails of our cumulus pollution
And that’s not despair you’re feeling, it’s the petulant reaction of a wounded child
And that’s not the door I’m looking at, it’s an escape hatch to the zeppelin we’re inside




edit on 5-4-2019 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

DB is right about that, there are genuine socialist/communist elements that will stop at nothing to co-opt America's institutions and political forces to achieve their goals. they seek to impose these "fundamental transformations" on us, through force, deception or subversion, which is directly in conflict with our Constitution. A "Republic" is the only constitutional form of government in the United States, under Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution

Those elements have overplayed their hands, are out in the open and their intention is known. They are in a "now or never" mode. I personally believe the election of Trump forced their hand a bit, as they were quite happy to continue behind the scenes subverting and infiltrating. How often did you hear of open socialists/communists/antifa/etc before 2016?

I may have stupidly used wording such as "left" and "right" but I only do so because the generalization is easier (perhaps my own laziness). Instead, I should have been much more clear that it is subversion vs. constitution, tyranny vs. freedom which knows no political boundaries

The forces in question have chosen to co-opt and subvert the Dem party, only because it represents the most direct/easiest way to accomplishing their objectives. It is *not* the Dem party itself, merely elements within the party. And it isn't limited to just the dem party, there are also false flag waivers among the right wing, who claim to be for liberty and freedom and the Constitution but instead seek to co-opt our party to their own ends. These groups include "Nazis" "KKK" and the like - their goals are also incompatible with the Constitution. These actors, as a whole, represent a clear & present danger to the Republic and the notion of a self-government constrained by the Constitution

EDIT: No one is suggesting "extermination" of anyone! We will however defend ourselves, our nation and our Constitution from any enemy that is stupid enough to take a crack at it
edit on 4/5/2019 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: LSU2018

People switch 'sides' all the time.

Just because a movement falls under one wing of the spectrum doesnt mean you're bound to it.
And you're assuming and labeling me. I never once told anyone my political affiliations because its redundant.


It all depends on where your mind is at. Right now, yours is with that side far down the line on the left. Unless you're just on here to give a point of view you don't actually believe in.



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 12:27 PM
link   
With respect, the word "democracy" (which Jefferson himself said was nothing more than mob rule, the 51% ruling the other 49%) does not appear one time in our Constitution

usconstitution.net...
usconstitution.net...

The entire idea that a democracy equates to a Constitutional Republic is false

In a democracy, a majority of any size could simply vote to force its will on others. This is one of the most egregious forms of tyranny, as it done under the illusion of legitimacy

In a Constitutional Republic, we have a representative government compromised of duly elected citizens that are bound by a constraining set of rules. We can vote on just about anything, provided it does not conflict with the Constitution. However, the key difference is that when a conflict between the popular will and the constraining rules (Constitution) arises, the Constitution is supreme and has the final word.

In a democracy, you could vote on anything regardless of its conflict with the Constitution (which need not exist in a democracy). IE: In a democracy if 51% of the population votes to abolish the right to bare arms, then they could do that.

Democracy = mob rule = tyranny



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns




DB is right about that, there are genuine socialist/communist elements that will stop at nothing to co-opt America's institutions and political forces to achieve their goals. they seek to impose these "fundamental transformations" on us, through force, deception or subversion, which is directly in conflict with our Constitution. A "Republic" is the only constitutional form of government in the United States, under Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution


Well. And a green new deal wont touch on the constitution, nor would an UBI. You are astonishingly ill prepared for this fight.

It's worse, they'll eat you for breakfast with anything but force, deception and subversion.




posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

The green new deal infringes on the Constitution because it vastly expands the federal government, and gives the government powers not allocated to it by the Constitution

This is itself unconstitutional, and represents a "fundamental transformation" that we oppose. We are prepared to defend our way of life.

And as far as your UBI goes, how do you plan to fund this? With a UBI, why would anybody bother to work when they can get money for free? So everyone quits their jobs and has no money? Or are we just talking about devaluing the existing currency even further by printing more money? In which case, why should those who spent a lifetime working hard to amass financial resources accept that? Why should my money become worth less simply because others feel entitled to something for nothing?

I'm happy with my country the way it is. I intend to defend the current order. I do not think I am alone on that. Which is why I wholly reject prospects like "green new deal" and "UBI" which are on their face unconstitutional, if not because they infringe on self-determination, grossly expand the federal government and allocate powers to the federal government not specifically authorized by the Constitution

The Constitution, of course, was never intended to regulate citizens and instead exists to keep government in line. The document itself specifically says powers not assigned to the government are left to the States or the people.

Any attempt to force this stuff on us is a losing proposition. That I can guarantee. This is not a democracy, you can't do anything you want to just because a bunch of people vote for it.
edit on 4/5/2019 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

You missed the memo from the last State of the Union Address. Brown shirts are out, it is now white blouses.



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 01:20 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

JB, I'm not your enemy, and I never have been. I am someone with an opinion, just like you.


The party system has failed us and the 2 sides are irreconcilable.


This is only your opinion, which I see as untrue. You do realize it's the antithesis of the Constitution? We have a way, a legal and an intelligent way to solve our differences. It's called "voting".

Somewhere, somebody out there possesses the finesse and intelligence to put this humpty-dumpty of a country back together again.
We just need to find her/him and get them in the WH. When we are reduced to believing it can't be fixed without "splitting", or compromising, then we've lost the very foundations that make this country successful to start with.



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

"Representative democracy" is still a form of democracy.

The strawman you have set up is "direct democracy" and direct democracies can require greater than 51% of the vote to put things into effect.

The dumbest part about your argument is that you have less than 600 elected officials deciding for 327 million. That is 0.0001% and you want to claim 51% would be worse.

Also, you can have a Constitutional Democracy, where the Constitution is still the final word and not amendable unless more than 0.0001% choose to make changes.



posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker


Would you like to buy a brown shirt from me?


Nah. You can keep those. I think my animal-tranquiller-tipped rubber bullets should see me through.
When you all wake up, I'll buy you a beer.



new topics

top topics



 
57
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join