Impossible? I don’t think so, and nor does this guy, in a very thoughtful and clear essay:
Talk of insurrection, secession, civil conflict and civil war is no longer the chatter of the gullible and the mentally ill.
The year 2021 has thus far been a spectacular year for signs of political decline: the US has now seen all the notable “horsemen of the apocalypse” that historically herald strife and revolution appear, one after another. Political division among its elites, increasing loss of legitimacy in the eyes of the population, military defeat abroad, and a new and very ominous crisis in the real economy, with no end date in sight.
Any one of these crises would be bad enough on their own; taken together, they represent a truly serious threat to the stability of the current order.
Read the whole thing.
To my mind, the question is not whether the U.S. would survive a civil war (because it would); it’s what it would look like afterwards. The situation is nowhere close to the First Civil War of 1860, the end of which simply restored the country to the status quo ante. That’s not going to happen this time.
I don’t need to remind anyone on this website that National Ammo Day is in two days’ time, do I?
About once a month, the Fiend Mr. Free Market sends me listings of guns which he (rightly) thinks will make me drool. Here’s one, from Holt’s Auctions, an exquisite double rifle in .303:
However, what grabbed me was not the gun, but an anecdote and observation (bold) from its onetime owner the Duke of Portland:
The Portlands received Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria at Welbeck Abbey for a week in 1913 when the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne visited England. During the stay he took the Archduke shooting on the estate when, according to Portland’s memoirs, Men, Women and Things:
“One of the loaders fell down. This caused both barrels of the gun he was carrying to be discharged, the shot passing within a few feet of the Archduke and myself. I have often wondered whether the Great War might not have been averted, or at least postponed, had the Archduke met his death there and not at Sarajevo the following year.“
Over the years, many people have written to me asking about early South Africa, and more specifically about the Boer War (or, as the Boers called it, the Vryheidsoorlog, or [Second] War of Freedom) from 1899-1902.
A few days ago, I found an old 1992 documentary on BoobTube, and it’s not bad — only just a tad over an hour — and it covers the period quite well, and impartially. So that’s your weekend viewing assignment. (There will be a test.) If any questions of history remain, write to me and I’ll put the answers up in a follow-up post next weekend, when I’ll talk about my family’s relationship to the war.
There are three books I’ve always recommended on the topic: Rags of Glory by Stuart Cloete, and the book it’s partially based on, a campaign journal called Kommando written by Deneys Reitz, a wartime Bitter-Ender (you’ll get that explained in the video above) who went on to become the Deputy Prime Minister of the unified South Africa. Both are absolutely brilliant — Cloete’s book also incorporates a view of the Boer War from the British perspective, and it’s both accurate and illuminating.
The third — an actual history book — is The Boer War by Thomas Pakenham, generally regarded as the sine qua non of historical sources for the conflict. Written during the late 1980s, it’s devoid of any hint of the political correctness which infests later works on the topic.
Pearl Harbor Dec 7, 1941
And just so we can also be reminded of the end result:
Nagasaki, August 6, 1945