The Ron Paul Institute suggests that the United States may be on the verge of civil war. Unfortunately, I agree. As Paul suggests, it is indeed entirely due to a press that is statistically 100% propagandists.
I’m fairly certain that The Hitchhiker’s Guide To the Galaxy has this to say on the subject of 21st Century “journalists”:
A bunch of mindless jerks who were the first against the wall when the Revolution came.
However, I worry about this less than my urban friends should. It’s because I’ve looked at the county voting maps and know where the battle lines would be drawn.
It would be between rural and urban areas: largely the coasts and a few big cities, versus everyone else.
If that’s how it falls out, everyone else wins. Why? Because most of that land area grows food. It grows it not just for the US’ cities, but also for the entire world.
Want to go to war with those of us in fly-over country? I’m guessing it would be the Seven Days’ War. That’s how long it would take for the cities to want their food from us.
Then, of course, there are the literal billions overseas who’d be ready to nuke Washington to get their food back.
When you start thinking about war, you have to start thinking strategically. I’m barely capable of it, and that simply because I’ve lived my life in the Upper Great Plains and know the general geography for about a 500 mile radius of Lincoln, Nebraska.
Strategically, here are the problems with Civil War in the 21st Century:
First, if the cities go to war with fly-over country, they instantly lose everything between the Mississippi River and the Rocky Mountains. They’re both natural barriers. They both have a limited number of places they can be traversed — all of which can be easily destroyed.
Right off the bat, the cities lose some of the largest land area containing some of the most productive agricultural area in the world. Crop farmers, dairy farmers, cattle-ranchers, and all the associated processing infrastructure would be lost to fly-over country.
Also a lot of the Internet, not that starving people would care much. However, terrestrial links between the territories could be destroyed with ease.
That’s food and comms the cities wouldn’t be getting.
One might suggest the military might take it, but you’re talking an enormous land area. Urbanites can’t draw a map and so don’t know, but you could fit all of America’s cities into South Dakota’s land area — and SD isn’t even a very big State.
A military would only be able to take a fraction of the food. There’s too much land area, and the locals that know the terrain backward and forward.
American Indians would fall on the fly-over side. They’ve hated the Federal Government ever since it chucked them into internment camps.
Indians go better-armed than most South Dakotans — and all South Dakotans own hunting rifles and shotguns at the very least. The Indians have everything legal: that’s just how they roll.
Nor would I assume the military would automatically go to one side or another. One thing urbanites also miss is that a bunch of the military hails from fly-over country. I bet some of them would go that way, if not the majority.
This analysis isn’t rocket science. I’m no general, I just know the terrain. No doubt the next Eisenhower, MacArthur, or Patton would think of things that would never occur to me.
If the time comes, think long and hard before you go out with a baseball bat. The people in fly-over country you’ve been denigrating my entire life hold your life in their hands.
– 30 –