People keep saying this and I personally don’t really believe it, I think there could be a couple riots, but not like a full on civil war. What does everyone think?

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Groups “in” and groups “of” are two very different things. The militias that exist are pretty wimpy, and pretty fractured. I’d guess 90% of militiamen are also full of shit, but with more merchandise.

    If there was a power vacuum they’d get bigger, but that seems unlikely with so many various established authorities in the mix. I could see them getting coopted into whatever hypothetical faction, though, or just doing terrorist attacks.

    Unfortunately, I can’t actually see that video.

    • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      How do you define the destinction? I assume you’re only counting ‘in’ as officially recognized by the republican party, the political entity?

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        There’s no way those guys vote Democrat, so it’s fair to say they’re “in” the Republican party, but they’re not a paramilitary “of” the Republican party, because none of the organisation and centralisation which makes the Republican party a force crosses over. They’re totally separate, and very unofficial - if a pastor or a local politician supports a militia group, they’re going to be doing that quietly on their own time. As a result, they all have a kind of “startup” thing going, and don’t really have logistics the way a viable insurgency would.

        Sorry, I should have expanded a bit more there. Brevity vs. clarity is always a tough balance.