Come Nov 5 – hopefully a hypothetical – suppose the general discontent and riots give way to regional armed skirmishes, then state battlegrounds, then eventually a full-blown civil war. Violence ravages the United States, with hundreds of thousands dead in the first few days. Into the second week, you and a few people you’re close to are survivors. What do you think you’d do in such a circumstance?
That’s not going to happen, silly
This poll is un-American
Escape to a neutral or relatively uncontested territory (state or region) and hope to wait it out
Escape to a doomsday shelter that you’ve built / will build / will find
Give up and die
Keep on keepin’ on, participating in whatever economy remains and hoping that noncombatants would be spared
Pick a side and join the fray
Try your luck with a third side / guerillas / warlords / foreign invaders
Secretly support one side or another, providing refuge and resources
Escape to another country that you are already a citizen/resident of
Escape to another country and plead asylum
Binge-watch as much Netflix as possible before it shuts down
I chose “watch netflix”, though to me more accurate it would be “watch DVDs until the power cut out. And then when the power came on again watch some more.”
I consider the chance that the battle will take place in my city to be near-zero - we’re not a “battleground state”, so to speak. Obviously if I’m dragged out and shot then that’ll be that, and if society collapses then I shift to the “give up and die” option because Mad Max wouldn’t be as fun as it looks, prepper fantasies aside.
Won’t happen. In a normal confrontation you have ‘those people over there’ versus us right here. Territorial divisions along with ideological divisions. Although there are ideological divisions there are not territorial or geographical divisions.
The ‘other side’ might be Bob sitting next to you in the office, who talks about his cats and you know the names of all of his children and have a mutual hobby with his wife. You like him but avoid talking politics. Or the other side might be your own children. Or your wife. Things just aren’t that black and white, so to speak.
Without territorial divisions how will the battles be fought? Blowing up your neighbor’s infrastructure means blowing up your own. You have trouble getting along with your right foot and favor your left. Do you shoot your own right foot? It is not quite that simple but you get my point.
The red state/blue state maps often seen on the news are a vast over simplification of reality. Oregon is a solidly blue state. But a county by county map will show a great sea of red. The urban population votes mostly blue and so they carry the state. I know that regardless of who I vote for the electoral votes will go the Democratic candidate, and I am fine with that. It hasn’t always been that way and could change in the future. But even within the blue voting counties are numerous red voters.
Each ideology is interwoven in the communities with the other. Who are you going to shoot? Your friends, neighbors, and family? Whose infrastructure will you take out, your own? If you live in a like-minded community of mostly correct thought, as you see it, you may think that civil war is possible. I really don’t think that it is.
And then there is that whole government thing that probably won’t allow it, cause that is kind of their job to prevent such things. But it really boils down to the people. And the people you hate could be sitting right next to you.
It is a somewhat interesting question about who the “sides” would be here. The OP cites the current riots as the start - that presumes that it’s the citizenry (or a portion thereof) against the government - which wouldn’t be so much a civil war as a standard “dictatorial government slaughters dissidents” situation.
As noted, there’s nothing about the current conflict that suggests there’s any sort of coherent entity that could secede (and thus provide neat borders to line up troops against). “The cities” can’t band together and secede - they’re not geographically coherent. The “blue states” aren’t geographically coherent either. And neither “side” wants to go anywhere anyway.
So yeah, the only coherent model for “civil war” at the moment is “Militant leftists attempt an armed coup, get mowed down by the military. MiIlitant rightists show up hoping to help the military and get told to go home.” The scenario that murderous rightists envision where they get to rise up against the tyrannical leftist government can’t happen because the tyrannical leftist government is fictional.
Oh, I’m sure there are gobs of people who would kill me if given the chance, and not just because of my questionable personal hygiene. But a genocide is not a war, even if it’s a politicide and not a genocide. I think to have a war you have to have two sides who have (a) an established area of physical territory that they’re fighting to defend; (b) a reasonable level of organization (a government, or at least clear leaders); and ( c) at least several dozen people. The problem with there being a real civil war in America is that the non-US-government side is going to be hard pressed to establish turf and a leadership hierarchy.
Oh, yes. In fact, civil wars are sort of known for that sort of thing.
My druthers would be to escape with a couple of close friends I know to some property they own on an island accessible only by boat or airplane. It would involve some rough camping, but I can bring supplies and tools and between all of us we could probably survive until the noise outside dies down. It will be rough, but doable.
Unfortunately, I don’t think I’ll be able to bring my birds. I’ll either have to re-home them quickly, take the risk of them dying in the new location, or put them down before I go.
This is all very much “last resort” territory. I doubt it will get that bad, but I could be wrong.
I’ve got small kids, realistically we would have two options we could run or we can hunker down and try to be normal. I voted we’d go with normal once it isn’t possible to pretend things are normal we’d try running. If something happened to my family I could see taking up arms Patriot style but I’m not going to leave my wife to be a single mother while I go kill nazis.
Based on where I live, my best option would be to flee to Mexico and then try to request asylum some place that still has a democracy. Failing that, I’d apply for asylum in Mexico.
I voted “Keep on keepin’ on”. I’m not clear who would be on what side, what the objective of fighting would be, and have nowhere specific to go that might be better than where I’m at.
I picked “escape to another country I’m already a citizen/resident of,” because even though I am not ALREADY a citizen/resident of Israel, I can claim it under the Law of Return.
Honestly, if I didn’t have a teenaged son, I’d be in Israel right now.
Yeah that his best case scenario is just the American Civil War 2 is absurd. He reeks of the people who thought within a year of Trump taking office in 2016 we’d already have Brownshirts in the streets lining up minorities against the wall and getting shot.