How would you make America a dictatorship?

[Razgovory]

The problem with Raz's argument is that it presumes any revolution would be fighting a fully-capable U.S. military.  Unless the presumed dictatorship were very subtle, and enjoyed massive widespread support...there is a fair chance that many in the military would support the revolution (a lot of it probably fits well in that redneck-hillbilly category). 

The ACW comparison is also flawed, in that both sides had (in their own views, at least), pretty substantial, region-based support of their ideals.  Opposition to a  theoretical U.S. dictatorship is likely to be far more splintered, widespread, and geographically diverse than the north-south divide.

Most dictatorships enjoy widespread support.  We like to think dictatorships rule by in spite of the public, but the sad truth is that they usually have public support or at the least indifference.  For military men joining a revolution to really damage the army they would have to require mutinies of entire units and bases.  If a third of all air force pilots leave their jobs the military will be a little short handed by not crippled.

[Jaron]

So long as the dictatorship had an element of being white and Christian the militias and hillbillies would stay in them thar hills.

[11B4V]

 

[11B4V]

I don't get your first statement.

The second one is somewhat murky because it reflects governments in different time periods, but I'll give it a go.  Mexico had a right bear arms in it's first Constitution.  It was not exactly effective in staving off dictatorship.  Hitler liberalized the gun laws in Germany (guns were heavily restricted in the Wiemar Republic in large part to keep the Nazis from overthrowing the government. 

Saying the continental army started out as Militia is misleading.  It started out as a national effort that allowed militia officers and men to enlist in a national army.  It was always a standing army, not a militia.  When the war ended, the army disappeared.  When it was again discovered that militia failed to meet the military needs of the country a new army was created.  The US would go through this process a few times.

Now, can you stop being stupid?

Raz, it seems like you are frustrated. I don't think Ton really deserves that at this point in the conversation. Usually the name calling, spin offs, and general thread shenanigans happens 100 posts later here on languish. You appear to be derailing you own thread.

[Tonitrus]

I don't get your first statement.

The second one is somewhat murky because it reflects governments in different time periods, but I'll give it a go.  Mexico had a right bear arms in it's first Constitution.  It was not exactly effective in staving off dictatorship.  Hitler liberalized the gun laws in Germany (guns were heavily restricted in the Wiemar Republic in large part to keep the Nazis from overthrowing the government. 

Saying the continental army started out as Militia is misleading.  It started out as a national effort that allowed militia officers and men to enlist in a national army.  It was always a standing army, not a militia.  When the war ended, the army disappeared.  When it was again discovered that militia failed to meet the military needs of the country a new army was created.  The US would go through this process a few times.

Now, can you stop being stupid?

Raz, it seems like you are frustrated. I don't think Ton really deserves that at this point in the conversation. Usually the name calling, spin offs, and general thread shenanigans happens 100 posts later here on languish. You appear to be derailing you own thread.

I think he was referring to your post. 

(not that I agree with his final assesment...no need for the name calling...grumbler hasn't posted yet) 

[Tonitrus]

I don't get your first statement.

The second one is somewhat murky because it reflects governments in different time periods, but I'll give it a go.  Mexico had a right bear arms in it's first Constitution.  It was not exactly effective in staving off dictatorship.  Hitler liberalized the gun laws in Germany (guns were heavily restricted in the Wiemar Republic in large part to keep the Nazis from overthrowing the government. 

Saying the continental army started out as Militia is misleading.  It started out as a national effort that allowed militia officers and men to enlist in a national army.  It was always a standing army, not a militia.  When the war ended, the army disappeared.  When it was again discovered that militia failed to meet the military needs of the country a new army was created.  The US would go through this process a few times.

Now, can you stop being stupid?

Raz, it seems like you are frustrated. I don't think Ton really deserves that at this point in the conversation. Usually the name calling, spin offs, and general thread shenanigans happens 100 posts later here on languish. You appear to be derailing you own thread.

I don't think that post was responding to my post, but an earlier one of sombodys...he addressed mine in the one after it.

He quoted you.

In his next one, not the one you quoted.

[11B4V]

I don't get your first statement.

The second one is somewhat murky because it reflects governments in different time periods, but I'll give it a go.  Mexico had a right bear arms in it's first Constitution.  It was not exactly effective in staving off dictatorship.  Hitler liberalized the gun laws in Germany (guns were heavily restricted in the Wiemar Republic in large part to keep the Nazis from overthrowing the government. 

Saying the continental army started out as Militia is misleading.  It started out as a national effort that allowed militia officers and men to enlist in a national army.  It was always a standing army, not a militia.  When the war ended, the army disappeared.  When it was again discovered that militia failed to meet the military needs of the country a new army was created.  The US would go through this process a few times.

Now, can you stop being stupid?

Raz, it seems like you are frustrated. I don't think Ton really deserves that at this point in the conversation. Usually the name calling, spin offs, and general thread shenanigans happens 100 posts later here on languish. You appear to be derailing you own thread.

I don't think that post was responding to my post, but an earlier one of sombodys...he addressed mine in the one after it.

He quoted you.

In his next one, not the one you quoted.

Ahh posting on a kindle I have a limited view.

[garbon]

B4, I think you are the one derailing it with the odd notion that hillbillies would prevent a dictatorship from happening. Would there be pockets of local resistance? Sure but has that been the case with many regime changes?

[11B4V]

B4, I think you are the one derailing it with the odd notion that hillbillies would prevent a dictatorship from happening. Would there be pockets of local resistance? Sure but has that been the case with many regime changes?

Possibly, but he started it.

IMO, it would take some major leaps to allow a dictatorship to even take root in this country. Best I read so far was the post about external threats. Collectively the public would have to give it up voluntarily so to speak or tricked, but the U.S. public is not that stupid. IMO far too many free thinkers in this country. And again you would need the military to solidify and keep a dictatorship.

[The Brain]

You'd have to get rid of the masons/Jews/lizards.

What did the mason's do to you.

[Martinus]

I gotta agree with Raz on this one. The idea that members of the public armed with personal arms could stand up to the military of the technological level the US government has is laughable.

[11B4V]

You'd have to get rid of the masons/Jews/lizards.

What did the mason's do to you.

[Martinus]

IMO, it would take some major leaps to allow a dictatorship to even take root in this country. Best I read so far was the post about external threats. Collectively the public would have to give it up voluntarily so to speak or tricked, but the U.S. public is not that stupid. IMO far too many free thinkers in this country.

I find this kind of reasoning to be baffling. I don't think there are more "free thinkers" in the US today than there were in Germany in 1930s or in France prior to the Napoleonic period.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

You'd have to get rid of the masons/Jews/lizards.

What did the mason's do to you.

probably messed up construction of his house...

[11B4V]

IMO, it would take some major leaps to allow a dictatorship to even take root in this country. Best I read so far was the post about external threats. Collectively the public would have to give it up voluntarily so to speak or tricked, but the U.S. public is not that stupid. IMO far too many free thinkers in this country.

I find this kind of reasoning to be baffling. I don't think there are more "free thinkers" in the US today than there were in Germany in 1930s or in France prior to the Napoleonic period.

You're stupid.