A 21st Century American Civil War

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: twoanickel The only real solution is to eliminate the Federal government. This would not cause the problem some immediately imagine; and it should not require an armed rebellion.

[Clarence]

Why do away with the federal gov't? We could just fix it to fit the original plan by the founding fathers. It would have to meet modern problems but the essence and goals and attitudes would be the same.

This would take an armed revolt at this time. IMO. Too late. Hoodwinked!! Come on, Al Gore!!

[Kite]

Quote by: Clarence Why do away with the federal gov't? We could just fix it to fit the original plan by the founding fathers. It would have to meet modern problems but the essence and goals and attitudes would be the same. This would take an armed revolt at this time. IMO. Too late. Hoodwinked!! Come on, Al Gore!!

Although great and honorable and no doubt executed with the best of intentions in mind, obviously there was something wrong with the founding father's plan, otherwise the US government would not have taken this route. Look at the french revolution. After the king, who was hoplessly corrupted by power and money; they essentially had a dictator, that was also quickly corrupted and began decapitating those who did not aggree with him. We are in the same boat at the moment. Trying the same methodology again would most likely yeild the same result of a corrupt and oppressive government.

In short, trying the same thing again would probably be only a quick fix, trying something new would yeild different and possibly better results.

[talinh]

power and money are the maine cause of oppressive governments people are best off not knowing what others do

[twoanickel]

Quote by: Clarence Why do away with the federal gov't? We could just fix it to fit the original plan by the founding fathers. It would have to meet modern problems but the essence and goals and attitudes would be the same. This would take an armed revolt at this time. IMO. Too late. Hoodwinked!! Come on, Al Gore!!

Well, haven't we done that before? Isn't that the intention we started out with in 1789, and look at where we are at now. 'I think a government of such a wide reach is too large and would always, no many how many times we tried it, end up[ being corrupted. Cut it into the fifty sections and the crooks would have a hard time getting their greedy hands on all of it.

[puellamore]

The problem is not the Founding Fathers' plan, the problem is the general populace's execution of the plan. As the people became more affluent and comfortable, they became more selfish (a natural phenomenon) and more self-centered and more willing to abdicate their obligations as citizens to be informed and take an active role in their government. They were easy prey for people who knew how to exploit this for political gain. And now with this administration, we have seen this trend carried to its extreme.

Someone once said that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. This applies to within as well as without.

[brien]

Quote by: PatrickHenry A recently deleted topic broached an interesting question: Is a violent civil war likely in America in the near future? The original of this topic was deleted because it had been posted by a one hit wonder, and duplicates were found on other discussion boards, leading to the conclusion that it was spam. The original also seemed a bit rambling and not up to the quality of serious debate we often engage in here on Volconvo. However, it generated some thoughtful responses and its deletion spawned a discussion of how and why topics are deleted, as well as some members' regret that the topic was no longer in play. So here is another chance, folks. Has the US Federal power structure been undermined to an extent that we may have weapons drawn on a massive scale? Who would support the current regime and who would oppose it by force of arms? What are the trends and forces causing this discussion to be taken seriously? What would it take to restore balance and trust in the Feds? Is that even a possibility?

I first advocate peaceful change at the ballot box. If people are angry enough to pick up arms, they should be galvanized properly to vote the bums out and replace them with real servants of the people. The original thread was titled "Civil War" but this thread seems to be advocating a discussion of the possibility of armed rebellion. Armed rebellion will never work so long as the Armed Forces are the instrument of the current government. Even a guerilla type rebellion would probably be violently crushed by the current status quo. Habeas Corpus would be suspended and the Contitution would probably be transgressed many times over untill the rebellion was crushed.

As for a civil war, I would have some questions. A civil war between whom? The power elite and the working class of the nation? This would be a question of money vs sheer numbers. It probably wouldn't work. Whomever has the armed forces on their side would win. Therefore, imo, those who control the Armed Forces would be the victor.

[Osborn F Enready]

I really tend to disagree here Brien.

I think if I participated in a current rebellion, it would have to be to resurrect the Constitution, initiate fair-voting policy and standards, unseating all current "repubicans and democrats" and holding new national elections using new fair and accountable voting standards, and fair and open debate between all parties canidates with citizen question interaction. It would have to focus on bringing back justice through a Constitutionally Limited, Democratic Republic, and removing the bi-partisan corruption and the "lesser of two evils" option by adopting via amendment if it passed, Instant Runoff Voting.

I also think it should be clear from the amount of casualties sustained in Iraq, that a guerilla war with American citizens vs the U.S. government, would be a no win situation for them. We already control the land, the majority of the interstates and roads, as well as the overwhelming majority of the population. Much of that population is armed, some very, very well. Much of that population is ex-military, and much of the current military and government forces would be depleted by mass desertions once made aware they would be shooting their own famillies, friends and citizens. This would encourage U.N. intervention, which you know would mean absolute and defiant patriotism once foreign armed forces set foot on our shores.

There is already a large number of Sheriffs and military officers who are aligned against the NWO/PNAC.
http://www.patriotamerica.com/JackMcLamb/

The armed rebellion option in numbers of population also is a bonus in our modern age, vs our founding fathers times.

http://www.cwc.lsu.edu/cwc/other/stats/warcost.htm

In our current climate in the U.S., there is a large percentile of "disgruntled" citizens out of that 300,000,000 people. Our armed populace, outnumbers many national armed forces.

[twoanickel]

Quote by: puellamore The problem is not the Founding Fathers' plan, the problem is the general populace's execution of the plan. As the people became more affluent and comfortable, they became more selfish (a natural phenomenon) and more self-centered and more willing to abdicate their obligations as citizens to be informed and take an active role in their government. They were easy prey for people who knew how to exploit this for political gain. And now with this administration, we have seen this trend carried to its extreme. Someone once said that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. This applies to within as well as without.

I agree that there is no fault with the form of government established, with the exception that when they established the central government it provided a handle on power big enough for megalomaniacs to turn to their own mad dreams and they have been doing so. We would have been much better off to have rejected the idea of federalism as the anti-federalists recommended. At this point the megalomaniacs have ensconced themselves in power to the extent that the only way we can rid the country of them is for the people of this country to wake up and demand a return to decentralized government by rejecting federalism.

Anyone who thinks I am not serious should rethink. The federal power mongers have set their minds on the "New World Order" which will submerge the sovereignty of this once free nation into a one world government under the authority of the socialistic United Nations. This is not a joke. They are intent on getting this done, and there are few within the beltway who have better sense than to do such a thing. There are only two possibilites: either we will wake up and cast out the unconstitutional rule of the federal power mongers over us and thereby remain a free nation, or else their grasp for world wide power will succeed. All three branches of the federal government have gone so far in the mad dream of the New World Order that they now openly scoff at the constitution.

The strict observance by the federal government of the limits placed upon it by the constitution was absolutely necessary for the preservation of freedom by the states. Now the federal government willfully tramples upon the limits placed upon it. They have transformed this from a free nation into one ruled by themselves.

The sad thing is that most people think this is about republicans versus democrats when it is really all about federalists versus the free people of this nation. We do not have a two party system. We have Establishment Party A and Establishment Party B, both of which
are under the control of New World Order people. How derelict the people of this nation are in faiiling to understand the gravity of our situation!!!

[twoanickel]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I really tend to disagree here Brien. I think if I participated in a current rebellion, it would have to be to resurrect the Constitution, initiate fair-voting policy and standards, unseating all current "repubicans and democrats" and holding new national elections using new fair and accountable voting standards, and fair and open debate between all parties canidates with citizen question interaction. It would have to focus on bringing back justice through a Constitutionally Limited, Democratic Republic, and removing the bi-partisan corruption and the "lesser of two evils" option by adopting via amendment if it passed, Instant Runoff Voting. I also think it should be clear from the amount of casualties sustained in Iraq, that a guerilla war with American citizens vs the U.S. government, would be a no win situation for them. We already control the land, the majority of the interstates and roads, as well as the overwhelming majority of the population. Much of that population is armed, some very, very well. Much of that population is ex-military, and much of the current military and government forces would be depleted by mass desertions once made aware they would be shooting their own famillies, friends and citizens. This would encourage U.N. intervention, which you know would mean absolute and defiant patriotism once foreign armed forces set foot on our shores. There is already a large number of Sheriffs and military officers who are aligned against the NWO/PNAC. http://www.patriotamerica.com/JackMcLamb/ The armed rebellion option in numbers of population also is a bonus in our modern age, vs our founding fathers times. http://www.cwc.lsu.edu/cwc/other/stats/warcost.htm In our current climate in the U.S., there is a large percentile of "disgruntled" citizens out of that 300,000,000 people. Our armed populace, outnumbers many national armed forces.

Enready, isn't it true that we are in our present predicament because the centralizing of power in the federal government allowed megalomaniacs to grasp power?
I suggest we need to return to what this country was before the constitutional convention in the 1780s. Centralized power is too much power to grant to men in general. There are too many megalomainacs who will seize control of such a centralized system. Fifty free states would deny them such a grasp of power. What would be so bad about following the advice of Virginia's Patrick Henry ? Federalism has been tried and is a complete failure. The people of the beltway are so obsessed with their own power that they now believe that THEY are the nation, and that any movement against their rule is traitorous, when in truth, they are traitors against the constitution which they publicly swear an oath to uphold and defend against all enemies foreign and domestic. For them to honor that oath would require of them that they all return to reside in their respective states. That is the only measure that would sufficiently trim back their horns against the people of this republic.
Then, in the interest of preserving freedom, the constitution should be placed in a museum as a monument to a dream well drempt, but seriously flawed by the wickedness of megalomaniacs. Having placed the constitution in a museum, we could resusitate the Declaration of Independence and the freedom of fifty independent states loosely knit together by a mutual interest in freedom and liberty.

I am not exaggerating the seriousness of our present danger. Both branches of the federal government are under the control of megalomaniacs and the denizens of the beltway are dreaming of themselves as world rulers without realizing that once the New World Order is ensconced in power they will be terminated-- eternally eliminated by hard core socialists. Their dream of themselves in power over the whole world will come to nothing. The leaders of nations which have historically been socialistic would eliminate them as threats out of fear that they might wake up and realize that they have unjustly betrayed a nation to which they swore fealty.

[The Dag]

Being an outsider but subjected to all American TV news channels, It is my view you spend more time flogging yourselves over idiotic sensationalised subjects, allowing only monied people to aspire to government who are only interested in getting richer at public expense, whilst Americans have no free universal aged/healthcare programs. Australia is "the" lucky country.

[Avixious]

I think a revolt is in order, but if we look to Bill Maher for wisdom (paraphrased from memory) - "the idea of a revolt if the government got uppity may have worked when all they had and all we had were muskets. Now the government has cruise missiles and napalm."

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: twoanickel The federal power mongers have set their minds on the "New World Order" which will submerge the sovereignty of this once free nation into a one world government under the authority of the socialistic United Nations.

I think you are wrong. The federal power mongers have no intentions of submerging sovereignty to anyone, let alone some amorphous "United Nations". Rather, their idea is to use the military and economic power of this country to force the rest of the world into sub jugation by us. We will lead the "New World Order".

[twoanickel]

Quote by: Zeebadee I think you are wrong. The federal power mongers have no intentions of submerging sovereignty to anyone, let alone some amorphous "United Nations". Rather, their idea is to use the military and economic power of this country to force the rest of the world into sub jugation by us. We will lead the "New World Order".

And you think that is just peachy keen!

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Avixious I think a revolt is in order, but if we look to Bill Maher for wisdom (paraphrased from memory) - "the idea of a revolt if the government got uppity may have worked when all they had and all we had were muskets. Now the government has cruise missiles and napalm."

I think very few inside the circles would be inclined to fire upon their own with such weapons. I also think the ones that did would inspire many aligned with them to switch sides, and become our most effective weapon against those who did. ( Since the ones changing sides are already inside the defensive perimeter, and in the best position to compromise the defense.)


I find it very difficult to believe that people inside Washington would be willing to bombard the city with tanks, missiles, and napalm attacking Washingtons rightful owners.

[twoanickel]

Quote by: Avixious I think a revolt is in order, but if we look to Bill Maher for wisdom (paraphrased from memory) - "the idea of a revolt if the government got uppity may have worked when all they had and all we had were muskets. Now the government has cruise missiles and napalm."

The immediate thought that comes to the minds of the American people at the mention of our regaining our freedom is that the federal government would wage war against the people of this country. That in itself shows that Americans in general believe that the federal government is reigning over a formerly free nation and that they don't intend to lose their grasp on their rule over us. Well, at least we agree on the viciousness of the feds. They identify themselves as the ones the constitution was meant to protect rather than the constitution being a document to preserve the freedom of the people against the tendency of government to corrupt itself to tyranny over the people.

That reaction--the idea that the federal government would engage in war against the people rather than follow the people's sentiment that we need to return to freedom and liberty--demonstrates clearly that the people realize they are really enslaved and reigned over by the central government.

In this day, those who fancy themselves to be "leaders" speak often of their "vision" for the country. Too many Americans listen with rapt attention as such "leaders" speak of their "vision." Where are the people who once understood that this nation was founded with a unique vision of freedom and liberty? That is still the only proper vision for this country. The federal government did not build this nation. It has been a plague upon us rather than a means for this nation's growth and empowerment. This nation has been built by the initiative and ingenuity of decent, hard working Americans; and the federal government has no right to rule over such free people. The proper vision for this country is the freedom good men and women have carved out of a wilderness--freedom and liberty which has as its first principle government limited to the restrictions placed upon it by the constitution in order that we might be free rather than reigned over by megalomaniacs.

[Osborn F Enready]

Well twoanickel, I have a question for you.....

I often see you claiming the Constitutionalist Party, and I have to wonder why them and not the Libertarian Party?

You do know that the only essential difference between the two is the views on religion, and birth control issues?

When I view the two parties side by side, one is clearly less restrictive to liberty, and based on the Constitution, while one puts more emphasis on the "speech" about creators and Gods than law and justice.

I liked Peroutka, but I still think the motives behind the Constitutionalist Party are against the Constitution, especially when being interpreted as it should be, in the words intended under true originalism.

I would like to ask you, in YOUR opinion, what are the 5 biggest moves of government to remove power from the people in this nation?

I will give my answer in reply to yours.

[Osborn F Enready]

The DAg said: Being an outsider but subjected to all American TV news channels, It is my view you spend more time flogging yourselves over idiotic sensationalised subjects, allowing only monied people to aspire to government who are only interested in getting richer at public expense, whilst Americans have no free universal aged/healthcare programs. Australia is "the" lucky country.

I say:
While I respect your viewpoint, I disagree. Many Americans, from rich to poor, don't want universalized, socialist healthcare, and for damn good reason.

It is Un-Constitutional #1
It is anti-free market #2
It removes choice from the consumer #3
It empowers yet another monopoly based on bottom line, not results #4
It can only be employed through direct taxation of the people #5


I earned barely over $5000.00 last year, and I don't want socialist healthcare, thanks.

[bob60292]

I won't say one way or the other; but I think if the behind the scenes, ruling, international and subversive military industrial establishment doesn't give us back our country soon we will soon see quite a large number of patriotic Americans willing to try. The beloved constitutional republic that the founding fathers gave life and limb for does not give the Fed and its elitist bankers the right to enslave us through the dept.They have used socialist policies, foreign intervention and facilitated and orchestrated excuses for empire building, bloody wars that are killing the innocent young, making the poor poorer, the elitists richer, and the middle class disappear. The Federal Reserve, the Trilateral Commission, the CFR, the United Nations and all the "do good" tax exempt foundations that are invading our schools and universities, government, and media must seriously consider removing their greedy claws from the minds, liberty and authority of individuals. Government, in any form, must not continue to be the master of the people.Neither subversive domestic infiltrators nor nonamerican, non representative foriegn governments like the United Nations must ever be permitted to supercede the Constitution of The United States of America. We must not continue to permit ourselves to be sold to the highest bidder by devious, greedy politicians who have themselves been bought and sold. In our republic the people are to be the masters of government. We must demand the recognition of our self ownership as individuals,of our personal property, and of our sovereignty as a nation. Government is only legitimate when it enjoys the support of the populace.
I hope we will always resort to peaceful and legal means to restore and reclaim what is ours; but it is interesting to recall that the founding fathers of our republic, prophetically struggled with the idea of a powerful standing army for fear that government in the US would become strong enough to overpower a freedom loving nation.

[Osborn F Enready]

Look at my signature bob.

The peaceful, diplomatic revolt has already started, as has the civil discourse.

Once these are cast aside as "rhetoric" officially by the government, marching orders for revolt will follow.

The ball is in the governments court right now, and we shall see how seriously they take the challenge.