Only 70%?

Found here:

new national poll has found that upwards of 70 percent of Americans, if you can believe it, are now fully convinced that the formerly United States of America is on the brink of a second civil war.

While I probably agree with the conclusion, I have to ask the following questions of it, because the conditions under which revolution may occur in this country are quite different, depending on the political philosophy of the would-be revolutionaries.

1)  Which proportion of that 70% are conservatives, which are Marxists, and which are sorta-undecided?

2)  What are the different scenarios, for each respondent group, for a revolution to take place?

Taking the second question first, there are a couple of situations in which a group would say “Fuck that shit” and go for the guns.

a)  Trump is reelected as POTUS in 2020. The Left, having failed to remove him through bullshit Russian-collusion and even-more bullshit impeachment processes, goes to volume 11 on the hair-on-fire lunacy scale, and takes to the streets in the cities (mostly Marxist enclaves like Portland), rioting, looting and causing general mayhem as seen in Ferguson MO a few years back.  Call this the “Antifa” scenario.  While these anarcho-Marxists scream loudly, I don’t see that this would be a credible threat, at least not for long because there aren’t that many of them — maybe a few thousand — and frankly, if martial law were declared (National Guard response), these fools would be squashed like bugs.  Now, even if (say) 50% of that 70% would react badly to Orange Man Reelected OMG!!!, while there would be massive outcries by the mainstream media, academia and other assorted Commies, only a tiny percentage of those would actually start a revolution.  And forget Blacks and Hispanics taking to the streets en masse ;  the Trump economy has given them jobs and income, and the loony-Leftist policies (like rampant abortion, wokeness and high taxes) put forward by the passengers in the Clown Car have disenchanted those two groups, or at least the more-conservative members thereof.  Don’t expect some Black or Hispanic guy who’s been working at a series of new construction sites for a couple years (thanks to Trumponomics) to down tools and join the Pantifa Parade, either in person or in sympathy — and especially not if he actually voted for Trump in 2020.

b)  Trump is defeated in 2020 by one of the assorted Commies in the clown car.  And let’s just say for the sake of argument that there is credible evidence of massive voter fraud by the Commies in places like Texas, California, Illinois, Florida and so on — I can’t see there being a conservative revolution even if we think that voting skullduggery is deserving of it.  (History is on my side here;  the typical conservative response to an unfavorable electoral outcome is to vote in greater numbers the next time.)

Where I think there would  be a conservative revolution is if the new Comrade President immediately embarks on the usual tired Marxist agenda of raising taxes, installing Medicare For All, oppressive ecological policies like bans on fracking, defunding the military  — you know, all those stupid initiatives that would kill the U.S. economy (pace  Venezuela).  That would not necessarily ignite a conservative revolution by itself, but it would certainly make a foundation for one.

So what could trigger a conservative revolution?

Property confiscation — say, when Comrade President and his/her Politburo lackeys appropriate savings accounts, IRAs, “excessive” wealth and so on — would cause a firestorm of not only anger, but resistance.  If you look at all instances in our history where people started shooting government agents, it was in response to property infringement.

And then we come to the Big One, the one that would guarantee a conservative populace to start shooting from the rooftops…

Gun confiscation.  I am pretty sure that the Beto Plan would not only fail, but fail spectacularly, and with massive bloodshed.  Even an incrementalist move towards confiscation of, say “assault weapons” (through “buybacks”) as the thin end of the confiscation wedge would be met with massive non-compliance.  And if the Commies then were to move to coerce compliance, that  would be when the SHTF, in no uncertain terms.

I also think that if the Marxists do take over, and their little Youth Brigades continue to riot — no bets, of course  they will — such riots would increasingly be met by armed conservative resistance.  And attempts by law enforcement to stop the conservatives shooting would end in more bloodshed than I think the authorities could handle — always assuming that the police would obey their orders, that is.  (And that is a HUGE, and so far unknown “if” — ditto for door-to-door confiscation, a.k.a. the Feinstein/O’Rourke wet dream.)

My guess, in the end, is that the “70% of the population” number is correct.  The composition  of that 70%, however, is going to depend on the circumstances.

And now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to the range.


  1. I plan to avoid other people’s conflicts as much as possible. If anyone ever tries to come into the compound and force their views they won’t like what awaits them.

  2. I think the proper question would be, what percent of that 70% is willing to take the first shot, and what percent is waiting around for someone else to take that first shot?

    Most of the people I know are willing to shoot back, but that’s about it. I guess I’m in that same boat.

  3. Figuring out the trigger event is impossible. Consider that Lenin and Trotsky spent their entire lives trying to trigger the revolution and when it happened, they were both out of the country.

    It is a mistake to assume the violent leftists will continue to use the same tactics. Rioting is not terribly effective but what about terrorism or assassination. Both have been widely used by the Left before. As we have seen with Muslim terrorism it is most difficult to stop a lone wolf. The media is certainly providing the raw material for self radicalization. This could kick off they cycle of non-action by the authorities and private actions by the Right except there would be no obvious people to retaliate against. Then what?

    Churchill, as always said it best. This is the essential dilemma of the Right. As a South African, you have seen this in action.
    “If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed;
    if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may
    come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

  4. One of the problems with identifying the composition of the 70% is that many (most?) conservatives earn the label by being indifferent , rather than antagonistic, to most political considerations. They’ve rigged their phones to screen out robocalls, they trash mail that doesn’t contain a bill or a check, and they walk down a street with a destination in mind, unprepared to stop and chat with strangers. Warriors of the working day, not political paraders.
    So whom are we supposed to shoot at? Postal inspectors? Game wardens? The Viewer of Fences? Those who yearn to tangle assholes with antifags are not conservatives, imho, but merely Sharks&Jets who really need to pray for a productive vocation.

    1. Conservatives don’t do “street violence” — actually, we don’t do violence per se very much at all, unless it’s taking down deer and such.

      Socialists need to be aware, however, that just because we don’t, doesn’t mean we can’t.

  5. “….what percent of that 70% is willing to take the first shot”

    Better still; need a volunteer; who wants to catch that first shot between the running lights? Second-third shots? Com’on people step up, “off & on”!

    Composition of the 70% is indeed an interesting question. Some will be scared while others mightily glad of that. To be sure though, all won’t be on our side.

  6. I heard the term “Cold civil war” and I think that might be close to what happens. No gun shots or violence from the right. When a disaster (i.e. earthquake) hits the liberal coast instead of a “let’s help our fellow Americans”, the prevailing red state attitude will be a shoulder shrug and not much in the way of disaster relief.

  7. While the question of the composition of the 70% is interesting, it’s nowhere near as crucial as the percentage of LE and military that will (and won’t) participate in confiscation, and restrictions on other fundamental rights either. We know many LE hold “civilians” in contempt, and regard protections such as warrants, surveillance restrictions, and other protections as personal affronts to their authority. Given that the military has seen fit to arm them with surplus tanks, guns, and other tools used to quell restless populations, I’m VERY curious to know whose side they will be on.

  8. Kim, the whole point of the “assault weapons ban” with mandatory buyback is that they won’t HAVE to come door to door. All they have to do is pass it, and they turn your “assault rifle” into a paperweight.

    1. You will not be able to maintain it, because your purchase is recorded and “why are you buying parts / ammo for a weapon you aren’t allowed to own”. Oh, and for the people who say “I use cash”, does your gun store use inventory tracking software? Do you have a customer account? Lots of ways your buying history can be tracked, and I guarantee that “woke” businesses like will have no compunction about handing that data over to law enforcement. You were in this business, Kim; you know how much could be tracked then. I assure you it hasn’t gotten better.

    2. You will not be able to practice with it, because the gun range will be required to report any unauthorized shooters, and most of the US population doesn’t have access to private land to shoot on, and the drive to it will provide ample opportunities for some woke citizen, or just the cops, to spot it and turn it in. After all, you only have to be unlucky once.

    3. You most especially won’t be able to use it for self-defense, when a few Democrat Party troopers show up at your door, like they did on Halloween at journalist Andy Ngo’s house. Aside from being arrested when the cops show up, you’ll be on the hook for murder charges, under the “actions performed while committing another felony”, like possessing the banned weapon.

    4. Of course, you and I are going to be on the “red-flag” list. NRA members, Trump donors, you name it.

    Any and all Democrat policies involve selective enforcement. They won’t be going door to door; they’ll just wait until they need an excuse for going after an individual.

Comments are closed.