I delayed responding to this comment because it deserved more than I could type from my phone, which is what I was using last night.
You can't put a revolution back in the box.
Revolution? Do you mean a shooting war or the slightly-elevated anti-government sentiment that possibly exists in a number of segments of the country right now? Those already disaffected and fed up?
A revolution is psychologically transformative. Once revolution starts, it introduces a new model of government public interactions. People start asking themselves, "If they can shoot us, why can't we just shoot them back? If they round up us, why can't we just round up them? If they pick us off one by one in our homes, why can't we pick them off one by one in their homes?"
I'm not one to speak for the rest of the country as I have no insight into what anyone else is thinking. I suspect that's also the case here. Maybe people are asking themselves those questions. Maybe they're not. I have no way of knowing. As I said just before, I've seen some evidence of a few pockets of resistance but I doubt the average Normie is ready to raise the black flag and slit a few throats, as the saying goes.
The USA needs a sweeping corruption purge, a purge of foreign agents, and there are no two ways about it if the beast of revolution isn't to be awakened, which will surely claim the lives of all the billionaires, all the media heads, most of the Federal employees and their families, and USA's position in the world geopolitically, financially, economically, and, most importantly, technologically.
There are very few instances where I will say that something will not happen, but that will not happen. You're talking more like a communist than an American. And that's where you lose me, and likely many other potential allies.
I think I understand your perspective on the issue, but I also think your conclusions are limited by a few preconceptions about the situation and the ways to address it.
What I mean is that sometimes problems seem unsolvable when your solutions are artificially constrained by familiarity, even if it's just familiarity with media fiction.
The idea that a revolution has to take the form of guerrila fighters or mobs as in the era of the American and French Revolutions, for instance.
The weaponry and other relevant factors like the ability to travel or exchange information quickly have significantly changed. The American and French Revolutions occurred in regional bubbles, where as the USA has globalized to an extent that there is virtually no obstacles to importing weaponry, operatives. The communication system and talentless intelligence agencies, talentless because they cannot gain support from the high IQ people necessary, mean that the entire theater of a revolution could be conducted abroad.
In addition, an unhinged economy means that money can be fabricated using the financial scams built into our economy to fund any operations. In an environment where moral sentiment is so low and the USA having no mechanisms to keep politicians in the country and accountable that any official, any politician, would sell out their peers for a mansion somewhere and a harem.
As I said just before, I've seen some evidence of a few pockets of resistance but I doubt the average Normie is ready to raise the black flag and slit a few throats, as the saying goes.
This is something I often see come up when discussing revolutions and their likelihood, but it really doesn't apply since it doesn't take many people to wage a successful revolution, especially in a situation where the state employees themselves are on one side or another solely for a very small pay check. If a revolution pays $2 more per hour, considering a reformed country is in the employee's best interests, what are the chance of defection, perhaps defection where they stay in place to disrupt the state's operations? They seem pretty high to me.
The USA does not have ideological commitment by its soldiers, by it's employees, by the general public, or by the high IQ people that are necessary for this state to keep moving forward. Whether it's the Left or the Right, their grievances are mostly the same and so incredibly severe that many lose their composure just thinking about it.
They stole our future and I for one am not going to bow to such a weak enemy. And why would I? These cronies and foreign agents are on their way out one way or another. If the USA doesn't just collapse first it will have a revolution, and if it doesn't have a revolution it will be invaded or just waves of assassins, organized by other superpowers, will flood through the open borders to remove whoever is in charge of this catastrophy.
I might have lost you with my discussion about this. I don't see the situation in terms of Left or Right, Communism or Capitalism. I have a much more primitive, or maybe clear, perspective that there are good guys and there are bad guys, and the bad guys have to die.
Here's how I look at it in as few sentences as possible.
The United States of America as existed in its original form and as we're taught about in school is dead. (If it ever really existed at all.) While less than 3% of the population actively participated in the rebellion against the English, the world (as you pointed out) was different then. China, Russia, et. al would LOVE to see another civil war in this country. We'd be ripe for takeover. The only way this works out well (IMHO) is for a peaceful divorce into two or three smaller nations. Anything else results in mass casualties and destruction.
Russia and China should be aware that the USA has too many WMDs of various kinds for a civil war to benefit them.
And the USA can't balkanize realistically because there are things underground that can't be moved and can't be put into a jurisdiction that Whites don't control. South Africa couldn't have nukes after the end of Apartheid, the world wouldn't accept that. The situation in the USA is like that, except the nukes are stationary and can't ever be retired safely.
I think that if the USA collapses, Russia and China will have an existential reason to invade, capture key personnel, and take over as fast as humanly possible. Russia is probably the more likely to succeed without triggering some sort of doomsday scenario since it would be less anxiety inducing due to their ethnic and cultural similarities.
How come you don't consider that the US government reforms in time to repatriate the non-Whites without violence? I still think it could be done, but at the moment the USA government is still trafficking in thousands of Meso American children.
The USA has a policy of breaking up ethnic enclaves to prevent a mutually beneficial balkanization scenario besides. It would require massive relocation of people and if you're going to do that you might as well repatriate them.
(post is archived)