2nd American civil/revolutionary war

#1
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".

JJH & co., given the above & the belief that the US citizenry should remain armed in order to counter "Tyrants", under what circumstances would you take up arms against the government in a 2nd Civil/Revolutionary war?
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#2
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".

JJH & co., given the above & the belief that the US citizenry should remain armed in order to counter "Tyrants", under what circumstances would you take up arms against the government in a 2nd Civil/Revolutionary war?
If you are describing it as such it could be construed as a Fourth Civil War

1st being, The Civil War (1642-51) - the American Colonies split along Royalist & Parliamentarian lines, in some ways a similar geographic division as the Third Civil War:

English Civil War - New World Encyclopedia

The Civil Wars also impacted on the English colonies in the Americas. One result of the wars was an increase in the number of Puritan migrants to America, whose policy of church-state separation and of religious freedom became enshrined in the constitution of the United States. However, just as there were advocates of different forms of “church” in Britain during the Civil War and Commonwealth period, so there were in the American colonies. Some favored Episcopalianism, some Presbyterianism, some Congregationalism. Phillips (2005) records that some Congregationalists held very strong convictions about the war: “hundreds of men from Massachusetts and Connecticut … sailed back to England in the 1640s to fight on the Puritan side against Charles I.” On the other hand, royalist Virginia, where the Episcopalians were strong, “welcomed Cavalier émigrés and expelled its Puritans.” Fighting even broke out within the colonies themselves—in 1655 a battle took place near Annapolis in Maryland between Puritans and Anglican-Catholic forces saw the Puritans win (Phillips 2005, 134). Phillips also points out how the same sides opposed each other during the American Civil War, when many Southern Episcopalians supported slavery and most Northern Congregationalists opposed it; the South tended to see society as hierarchical and the North in more egalitarian terms.
2nd, The American Revolutionary War
3rd, 1861-65 or The War of Northern Aggression as JJH describes it as.
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#4
OK then Rampant, I'll cut out the Civil & say 2nd Revolutionary War.
You don't have to, I was just being whimsically pedantic with a soupçon of smug for good measure.

In reference to your post, I think it would take a lot more than you might think to have the States warring with each other again.

American political rhetoric is the equivalent of emo kids painting their faces, moping around listening to loud music about topping yourself and self harm, whilst screaming "I hate you, you don't undertand me!!!" at their parents.*







*Britain, patronising everyone since..... oooooohhh just about forever.
 

jim24

LE
Book Reviewer
#5
Read "The Winter Soldiers" by Richard Ketchum. at the time the Americans did not intend to have a standing Army,
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#7
Bit of cod psych here: there are 4 or so stages, IIRC, for a person to go through before commiting a crime or breaking a taboo, I'm adapting Finklehor to an extent here, but as a pattern of progression it works ok.

1. Thinking About the Act
2. Overcoming the Internal Inhibitions to Commiting the Act
3. Overcoming the External Inhibitors to Commiting the Act
4. Commiting the Act

Almost all people fall into the first category, we have all thought of commiting an act of crime or breaking a taboo at some stage or another, and by and large this falls into the realm of research, daydreaming, ranting or simple discussion between people.

The second stage is where the percentages start to fall massively, we all have an internalised moral or ethical code by which we live and by and large for the vast majority of people will not pass this stage. If we look at in the scenario you propose, people would have to overcome the internalised ideals of good behaviour, law and order, patriotism, the prospect of violence, fear of failure or being caught and so forth.

A tiny percentage will move to the third stage, these are the people like Loughner et al, having overcome their internal inhibitions they then have to set up the act and overcome the external inhibitors - Legislation, Police, Security, Miltary etc etc, the weight of preventative measures and controls sweeps up most of these types.

An even tinier percentage will overcome these obstacles and move on to commiting the act, but in the scenario you suggest I see this as a long way off or near impossible at this current time. Mainly due to the fact that most people at will n ot get past stage one: backwoods miltia types have passed stage two and are at stage 3 but will never progress beyond that. Stage 4 types, well there was Loughner.

The ties that bind within American society are still too strong for the majority of its citizenary to progress beyongd the stage 1 scenario, though rhetoric and circumstance may ease the passage past stage 2 onto 3 for a few. The current climate precludes that on the whole.
 
#8
Imagine living in a State where freedom of speech is suppressed, and the culture of gun violence is at
epidemic proportions. What could relieve the population from their yoke of Tyranny and establish the
rule of law? What type of military intervention could effect regime change, and restore Democracy?

... and when the dust has settled ... would the map of the continent look something like this.

Not bad, but could you place the Gulf Coast of Mississippi and Alabama in the British Territory please? Some of the best sea fishing in the world there. The spicks can keep Florida and the Frogs are welcome to Nawlins.
 
#9
Patronising? Us, the British? Oh don't you worry your pretty little Septic heads about that...
 
#10
Imagine living in a State where freedom of speech is suppressed, and the culture of gun violence is at
epidemic proportions. What could relieve the population from their yoke of Tyranny and establish the
rule of law? What type of military intervention could effect regime change, and restore Democracy?

... and when the dust has settled ... would the map of the continent look something like this.

Or possibly even this.....

 
#12
Imagine living in a State where freedom of speech is suppressed, and the culture of gun violence is at
epidemic proportions. What could relieve the population from their yoke of Tyranny and establish the
rule of law? What type of military intervention could effect regime change, and restore Democracy?

... and when the dust has settled ... would the map of the continent look something like this.

That bit shown as "unexplored" (Washington State, Idaho, Oregon etc) used to be British as well ! (Until we gave it away in 1846(?))
 
#13
I was more interested in how "tyrannical" a US regime would have to be, for it to spark a violent uprising amongst the population, this being one of the principle justifications given by our cousins for the 2nd amendment.

In other words, a tyrannical regime cannot occur, supported by police/military & the force of arms, as the population is also armed.
 
#14
That bit shown as "unexplored" (Washington State, Idaho, Oregon etc) used to be British as well ! (Until we gave it away in 1846(?))
54 degrees 40 minutes or fight!

29b. 54° 40' or Fight

The West
Map showing the Oregon Trail, Oregon Country, and northern Mexico
The southern boundary of the United States with Mexico was not the only western territory under dispute. The Oregon Territory spanned the modern states of Oregon, Idaho, and Washington, as well as the western coast of Canada up to the border of Russian Alaska. Both Great Britain and America claimed the territory. The Treaty of 1818 called for joint occupation of Oregon — a solution that was only temporary. Led by missionaries, American settlers began to outnumber British settlers by the late 1830s. But Britain was not Mexico. Its powerful navy was still the largest in the world. Twice before had Americans taken up arms against their former colonizers at great expense to each side. Prudence would suggest a negotiated settlement, but the spirit of manifest destiny dominated American thought. Yet another great showdown loomed.

Wagon tracks leftover from the Oregon Trail pioneers still crisscross the American midwest.
Oregon fever swept the nation in the 1840s. Thousands of settlers, lured by the lush Willamette Valley headed west on the Oregon Trail. Families in caravans of 20 or 30 braved the elements to reach the distant land. Poor eastern families could not generally make the trip, as outfitting such an expedition was quite expensive. The Conestoga wagon, oxen and supplies comprised most of the cost. The families fought Native Americans at times, but often they received guidance from the western tribes. It took six months of travel at the speed of fifteen miles per day to reach their destination.

[FONT=Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,helv,sans-serif] Friday, May 6th — Pleasant. We have just passed the Mormon graveyard. There is a great number of graves on it. The road is covered with wagons and cattle. Here we passed a train of wagons on their way back, the head man had drowned a few days before, in a river called Elkhorn, while getting some cattle across, and his wife was lying in the wagon quite sick, and children were mourning for a father gone. With sadness and pity I passed those who perhaps a few days before had been well and happy as ourselves. Came 20 miles today.
Excerpt from Diary of Mrs. Amelia Stewart Knight, 1853
[/FONT]

Oregon Territory

Should the U.S. have compromised and divided the Oregon Territory with Great Britain at the 49th parallel?
Yes
No


In the east, the subject of Oregon was less personal and more political. In 1844 the Democrats nominated James K. Polk, an unknown candidate from Tennessee. It appeared as though the Whig Party candidate, Henry Clay, would win in a landslide. Very few Americans had ever heard the name Polk, but Clay's illustrious career was widely known. However, Polk was an excellent strategist. He tapped into the public mood and realized that manifest destiny was the very issue that could lead him to victory. Polk called for expansion that included Texas, California, and the entire Oregon territory. The northern boundary of Oregon was the latitude line of 54 degrees, 40 minutes. "Fifty-four forty or fight!" was the popular slogan that led Polk to victory against all odds.
John Mix Stanley
Oregon City, along the banks of the Willamette River, the final stop along the Oregon Trail as it appeared in 1848.
Claiming the territory in an election campaign was one thing. Acquiring it from the powerful British was another. Although Polk blustered about obtaining the entire territory from Britain, he was secretly willing to compromise. Trouble was brewing with Mexico in the south. Surely the new nation could ill afford to fight Mexico in the southwest and the British in the northwest simultaneously. Nevertheless, Polk boldly declared to Great Britain that joint occupation would end within one year. The British were confident they could win, but by 1846 they were vastly outnumbered in Oregon by a margin of greater than six to one. In June of that year, Britain proposed splitting Oregon at the 49th parallel. Polk agreed to the compromise, and conflict was avoided.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top