Why There’s Not Going To Be A Civil War

I was disturbed to hear from Steve Turley a couple of days ago that “American exurbs are preparing for civil war.” And he wasn’t the only person foreseeing civil war. So were Michael Savage and Alex Jones, and no doubt plenty of other people as well. All in the wake of riots and looting in multiple American cities, and a surge in gun sales.

But I bet there isn’t going to be a civil war.

Of course I’m not an American, and my perspective is from the other side of the Atlantic ocean, but I simply don’t see that America has become sufficiently polarised into two rival camps for there to be a civil war.

In the civil war of 1861-65 America had become divided into two camps – the Federal Unionist states and the Confederate southern states – each with their own president (Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis). There was a distinct geographical divide between the two camps.

The same is not true today. The United States of America has not recently divided into two geographically separate camps. Nor is it showing any signs of doing so any time soon.

Nor is there any distinct reason why it should divide, unlike in 1861 when there was a clear difference between Southern states which supported slavery, and Northern states which opposed it.

It’s true that there are strong differences in opinion between Progressives who seek all sorts of social changes, and Conservatives who resist such change. But are any of these differences in opinion of sufficient intensity to warrant civil war? The same differences in opinion also exist in Europe and elsewhere in the world without civil war looming. Is anyone going to fight a civil war to prevent Climate Change? Is anyone going to fight a civil war to get rid of Donald Trump? Is anyone going to fight a civil war to ensure that Black Lives Matter?

The answer to these and similar questions is: No, they’re not. They’re not sufficiently pressing problems, urgently requiring solutions. Climate change is something that takes place over decades or centuries. Donald Trump can be ousted by voting against him. Black Lives already Matter far more than they did in 1861, even if not enough. There’s no need for a civil war to resolve these matters. So there won’t be a civil war.

In addition, unlike in 1861, the US Army is the most powerful army in the world, and would be able suppress a civil war in days or weeks, in the unlikely event of one breaking out.

Furthermore, in the internet era, unlike in 1861, it is becoming increasingly difficult for public opinion to be shaped by broadcast media (newspapers, radio, TV). There is instead a  growing plurality of opinion rather than an emerging singularity. This means that people are less likely to unite rather than more likely.

And there’s more. In 1861 Americans were shocked at the scale of the casualties caused by accurate rifles and machine guns. And the world was shocked by the scale of the casualties in WW1 and WW2. We now live in the era of Mutual Assured Destruction. Advances in weapons technology are increasingly making war unthinkable. So that’s a reason why we won’t be seeing a WW3 any time soon. No doubt there’ll be plenty of small wars and riots and looting, but  overall we’re living in a peaceful golden age.

Of course it may all change. But that’s how it is right now, and it’s hard to see how it can change.

An historian’s related question: Why Is There War?

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Why There’s Not Going To Be A Civil War

  1. Clicky says:

  2. sokalowzki says:

    Tend to agree with you Frank, slightly different reason, nobody would believe the civil war as it would be on the internet and straight away debunked as fake )

  3. garyk30 says:

    Frank,
    You have been mis-informed.
    1. There were no machine guns in 1861
    2. The North did not oppose slavery, there were hundreds of thousands of slaves in the Northern states of Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and even legal slaves in Washington D C.

  4. Chester Draws says:

    The important feature of the ability for a civil war to start is whether the military are either a) divided geographically and politically, or b) controlled by personal attachment. Since neither of these is true in the US, it won’t happen.

    Also, if the progressives and conservatives were to have a war, what would their end point be? In both cases it would be more or less the same democratic system they have at present. Neither have any person who would be able to galvanise personal leadership away from that.

    Almost all civil wars start with an attempted coup of some sort. A successful overthrow of Trump — by impeachment say — would only start one if the Presidency was then taken off Pence. As mental as the worst TDS sufferers are, I don’t think there are many that would be happy to go that far.

  5. slugbop007 says:

    The latest news on anti-smoking laws that I just read a few minutes ago:

    Peers to ‘urge government to ban outdoor smoking at pubs’ Getty ImagesCopyright: Getty Images The UK government is facing calls to ban outdoor smoking at pubs and cafes in exchange for permission to serve “pavement drinks”, according to reports.

    The i newspaper says a cross-party group of peers will table an amendment to emergency legislation which will temporarily relax licensing laws to encourage eating and drinking outside in England and Wales.

    That amendment will seek to ensure pavement licences are only granted subject to the condition that smoking is banned.

    Liberal Democrat’s Baroness Northover told the paper the move to introduce pavement licences should not be allowed to “become an excuse for increasing smoking in public places”.

    A spokesman for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government told the paper that councils would be able to set local conditions for licences. Blackmail. Disgusting.

    slugbop007

  6. Александра Собина says:

    It is already more farther than polite. We should arrange revolt.

  7. Rose says:

    Last week, we booked lunch for three at one of the local country pubs (I’ve been really missing their chicken liver pate) having previously invited the non smoking third who seemed very pleased with the idea.

    Yesterday, they gave backword, apparently because it was too dangerous.
    It turned out that what they were really scared of was being with other people in the same place no matter how widely spaced and the excuses I heard included – staff serving us might have been anywhere that day and how would we know if the landlord had it, and what if it the virus was on the cutlery or someone had breathed on the napkin and we wouldn’t know and that I was very brave to go to the pub for lunch and they weren’t risking ending up dead just for the sake of lunch out for the first time in several months.

    I think they may have difficulty in keeping those pubs open for long.

  8. Александра Собина says:

    Poor people, they should switch off TV.

  9. Rose says:

    Everything comes to he who waits.

    Bellerophon Therapeutics Announces First Patient Treated in Phase 3 Clinical Study of INOpulse® Inhaled Nitric Oxide Therapy for COVID-19
    Initiation of the COViNOX Study Follows the Conclusion of the FDA Emergency Access Program Through Which 180 Patients with COVID-19 Were Treated in the United States.
    July 13, 2020

    “Under the recently completed EAP, 180 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from 18 hospitals across the United States received treatment with INOpulse under the care and supervision of their physicians. Preliminary data demonstrated that at day 14 from treatment initiation, recovery rate was 73.0% and mortality rate was 6.3%. Importantly, INOpulse was well-tolerated with no safety concerns related to the therapy.”

    “COVID-19 is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, which is approximately 82% identical to the severe acute respiratory syndrome related coronavirus (SARS-CoV) that caused a global outbreak between 2003 and 2004¹. Prior studies have shown that nitric oxide (NO) could provide benefit in treating SARS-CoV by preventing viral replication², improving arterial oxygenation, reducing the need for ventilation support and preventing the proliferation of pneumonia lung infiltrates³. Based on the genetic similarities between the two coronaviruses, the historical data in SARS-CoV support the potential for iNO to provide meaningful benefit for patients infected with COVID-19.

    Nitric oxide is a naturally produced molecule as part of the immune response to pathogens and plays a key role in preventing viral replication. The proprietary INOpulse delivery system from Bellerophon Therapeutics is an investigational system that is portable and designed to deliver nitric oxide in a targeted, pulsatile manner that ensures accurate drug delivery and allows for use in outpatient settings outside of the hospital.”
    https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2020/07/13/2061229/0/en/Bellerophon-Therapeutics-Announces-First-Patient-Treated-in-Phase-3-Clinical-Study-of-INOpulse-Inhaled-Nitric-Oxide-Therapy-for-COVID-19.html

    Though probably not as compact and portable as a lit cigarette.

    The confirmation of San Raffaele in Milan: few smokers among covid-19 patients
    July 13 2020

    “Or better than the fact that, as noted by last April by doctors such as Konstantinos Farsalinos, Raymond Niaura and Riccardo Polosa, smokers are drastically underrepresented among covid-19 sufferers, in contradiction with the first alarms launched by WHO and promptly picked up by health institutions around the world, including Italy.

    In addition to Landoni’s ( pictured ), the text bears the signature of ten other doctors and researchers almost all from San Raffaele in Milan, including Giulia Veronesi and Alberto Zangrillo. The Milanese researchers have observed in their structure what is now emerging all over the world. And that is that, unlike other coronaviruses, Sars-cov-2 seems to affect smokers less frequently.”
    https://www.sigmagazine.it/2020/07/san-raffaele-covid-19/

    H/T Phil on twitter.

    Unfortunately they still think that it must be the nicotine that’s something to do with the protective effect.

    • Joe L. says:

      Thanks for sharing yet another study which indicates smokers are less likely to be afflicted by SARS-CoV-2, Rose!

      Or better than the fact that, as noted by last April by doctors such as Konstantinos Farsalinos, Raymond Niaura and Riccardo Polosa, smokers are drastically underrepresented among covid-19 sufferers, in contradiction with the first alarms launched by WHO and promptly picked up by health institutions around the world, including Italy.

      This study doesn’t simply contradict the “first alarms” raised by the WHO. The WHO recently doubled down on their claim that smokers incur more risk, albeit without providing any evidence or figures to back it up, and in spite of now approximately a dozen independent studies from around the world suggesting the exact opposite.

      Nearly every single official statement from the WHO regarding this virus has been completely wrong, and this does not appear to be an exception. When they spend all their funding and time on controlling people’s lifestyles, it’s no wonder that when an actual novel contagion appears they have no idea how to handle it.

      I am very happy that President Trump made good on his recent promise, as the US formally withdrew from the WHO last week. It feels good to know that my taxes will no longer be funding a corrupt, inept organization of unelected globalist bureaucrats.

      • Joe L. says:

        And now CNN (surprise, surprise) is also joining the WHO in contradicting all of these independent studies:

        1 in 3 young adults vulnerable to severe Covid-19 — and smoking plays a big part, research finds

        (CNN) One in three young adults is at risk of severe Covid-19, and smoking plays a big part in that risk, according to new research published Monday in the Journal of Adolescent Health.

        Researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, looked at more than 8,000 participants ages 18 to 25 who had participated in the National Health Interview Survey to see what their medical vulnerability to severe Covid-19 was in relation to risk indicators that had been set out by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including health conditions and smoking habits.

        The researchers found 32% of the total study population were medically vulnerable for severe Covid-19. However, when the group of participants who smoked cigarettes or e-cigarettes were taken out of the analysis, the medically vulnerable percentage decreased by half, to 16%.
        “The difference between estimates is driven largely by the sizeable portion of young adults who reported that they engaged in past 30-day smoking (1 in 10) and past 30-day e-cigarette use (1 in 14),” the report said. “By contrast, relatively fewer young adults reported medical conditions identified by the CDC as conferring severe illness risk.”

        “Recent evidence indicates that smoking is associated with a higher likelihood of COVID-19 progression, including increased illness severity, ICU admission or death,” said Sally Adams, lead author of the study and a specialist at University of California, San Francisco’s National Adolescent and Young Adult Health Information Center, in a press release. “Smoking may have significant effects in young adults, who typically have low rates for most chronic diseases.”

        The study does have some limitations, including the lack of information about Covid-19 in the 18-to-25 population, and a chance that it could underestimate the vulnerability rates for certain ethnic or racial subgroups of young adults due to the data source.

        Note that final paragraph: “The study does have some limitations, including the lack of information about Covid-19 in the 18-to-25 population”. So they “determined” that smoking “plays a big part” in increasing risk among 18-to-25-year-olds from a dataset which has a “lack of information about Covid-19 in the 18-to-25 population”. That’s quite a “limitation.”

        Also note the university which conducted this “research”–the University of California, San Francisco–the home of notorious antismoking bully, Stanton Glantz.

        If this isn’t blatant pseudoscience just to keep the Antismoking message alive in the media, I don’t know what is.

        • Rose says:

          “Recent evidence indicates that smoking is associated with a higher likelihood of COVID-19 progression, including increased illness severity, ICU admission or death,”

          Nitric oxide is a short lived molecule, so if you catch Covid-19 in hospital where smoking is banned your smoking history counts for nothing and you are as vulnerable as anyone else.

          Useful knowledge from the horses mouth as it were.

          “The reason is that your nasal cavities produce the molecule nitric oxide, which chemists abbreviate NO, that increases blood flow through the lungs and boosts oxygen levels in the blood. Breathing in through the nose delivers NO directly into the lungs, where it helps fight coronavirus infection by blocking the replication of the coronavirus in the lungs.”
          “I am one of three pharmacologists who won the Nobel Prize in 1998 for discovering how nitric oxide is produced in the body and how it works.”
          https://theconversation.com/the-right-way-to-breathe-during-the-coronavirus-pandemic-140695

          Mountain climbers

          ‘Beeting’ high altitude symptoms with beet juice
          October 12, 2015

          Norwegian University of Science and Technology

          “In healthy people at sea level, production of adequate amounts of NO is not a problem, but with the reduced oxygen availability at high altitude it is a challenge, simply because natural NO production requires oxygen.

          But the body has a “back-up system” for NO production at altitude, and it is here that beet juice can help. The secret ingredient in beet juice is high levels of nitrate, which the body can then convert to NO.”
          https: //www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151012083808.htm

          Nitrate was one of those bad things that scientists, particulary anti-tobacco were carrying on about.
          Nitrosamines in tobacco? Bacon?

          2018
          “Previously, nitrate and nitrite were thought to be carcinogenic due to the potential formation of nitrogen compounds, whereas the beneficial functions of NO3–NO2–NO pathway were ignored. Under conditions of hypoxia and ischemia, the production of endogenous NO from L-arginine is inhibited, while the activity of exogenous NO3–NO2–NO is enhanced.
          Recently, a greater amount of evidence has shown that nitrate and nitrite serve as a reservoir and perform positive biological NO-like functions. Therefore, exogenous dietary nitrate plays an important role in various physiological activities as an effective supplement of nitrite and NO in human body.”
          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6147587/

  10. Smoking Lamp says:

    But there is a virtual civil war between antismokers (tobacco control) and smokers…

    “South Africa’s 9 million smokers were faced with cold turkey when the government banned cigarette sales in March as a coronavirus measure. Now Big Tobacco is fighting back.”
    https://www.insider.com/coronavirus-south-africa-4-month-long-cigarette-ban-challenged-2020-7

  11. waltc says:

    There already is a war here, a guerilla war, except only the guerilla side is fighting. At least if you’ve been watching the mob violence in the streets of most of our big cities. If the progressives take over the government and especially, but not only, at the point where they try to confiscate guns, there will be , if not war, armed battles, at which point it will depend on which side the army or the Guard or the cops decide to,join. …As for something as clear cut as an out and out civil war, those who oppose the progressive policies crammed down their throats are, for the most part, too geographically scattered to form a force and, like smokers, some will be cowed into agreeing with their oppression or simply afraid of being cancelled, socially and financially, if they object. OTOH, maybe there’d be something like the French Resistance or the Russian Underground.

  12. RdM says:

    A search on “why most revolutions fail” might illuminate.
    I was looking for a page I remembered, could be bookmarked on another PC.
    How easy it is to become scattered…

    I now use
    https://www.startpage.com
    as my default search engine, after the absurdly named duckduckgo I trialed after Google.

    There might of course be even better ones.

    An earlier fuzzy search brought up this 2014 book I haven’t read. Ideas that old, then.

    The Fourth Revolution: The Global Race to Reinvent the State Hardcover – 15 May 2014

    I agree though;- it’s got to break out some time, reaction against Tobacco Control !

    Hopefully recognized and taken up by governments as they divest from the WHO.
    _

    I totally missed the webinar, slept right through the 4:30am alarm, to wake late am.
    Too confident, drinking and commenting the night before.
    To my shame. Oh, well.

    In my teens, working on old valve radios, this song (the original) came through.
    I was impressed to discover this cover version!

    Haim performs Fleetwood Mac’s “Oh Well” live at T in the Park

    A calming bonus might be this:

    109-Year-Old Veteran and His Secrets to Life Will Make You Smile

    Have a cigar! ;=})

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.