Why Democrats Would Lose the Second Civil War, Too
Kurt Schlichter Kurt Schlichter |Posted: Mar 12, 2018 12:01 AM
It’s obvious that the central tenet of the Democrat Party platform is now hatred and contempt for Normal Americans. Taking their cue from the elites in Europe and Canada who are stripping dissenters of their free speech rights and religious freedoms, the leftist elite is moving to solidify its hold on power here with the eager assistance of tech companies and the moral support of the Fredocons who yearn to return to pseudo-relevance as the ruling class’s slobberingly loyal opposition. In California, the leftist government is practically firing on Fort Sumter. And nationally, these aspiring fascists are especially eager to disarm Normal Americans – doing so would be an object lesson in who’s the boss, as well as solving that frustrating problem of the Normals having the ability to resist.
Probably because I’ve spent time where they actually had a civil war, many people ask me – people whose names you know – whether I think this turmoil will all end in a Second Civil War. They are seriously concerned, and not without cause – the left’s hatred for Normal Americans and its dedication to totally stripping the people who are the backbone of this country of their ability to participate in their own governance is threatening to rip the country apart.
Do I think there will be a civil war? No, but there could be. This is the Age of Black Swans, and anything is possible – we could easily see the country split into red and blue. Civil war is unlikely, but never underestimate Democrat stupidity and hatred. The Schlichter family learned that lesson a century and half ago, the last time the Democrats decided to try to impose their hatred of basic human rights on the rest of the country, when an army of Democrats burned our family hometown.
Oh, they paid for it. And they would pay again. Democrats are 0-1 in insurrections, and if they went for another round, they would be 0-2. It’s a matter of terrain, numbers, and morale.
Democrats, who think history began when Obama was elected, don’t understand the dangerous game they are playing when they talk about how they want to impose their brown shirt vision upon red America. The keyboard commandos of the left seek to hand wave away the massive strategic challenge of imposing control by force upon a well-armed, decentralized citizenry occupying the vast majority of the territory, so they babble about drones and tanks as counterinsurgency trump cards. But there are no trump cards in war. There are men, with rifles, standing on patches of dirt, killing the people trying to push them off. That’s the ugly reality of war. And multiply the usual brutality of war by ten when it’s a civil war.
There are two Civil War II scenarios, and the left is poorly positioned to prevail in either one. The first scenario is that the Democrats take power and violate the Constitution in order to use the apparatus of the federal government to suppress and oppress Normal Americans. In that scenario, red Americans are the insurgents. In the second scenario, which we can even now see the stirrings of in California’s campaign to nullify federal immigration law, it is the blue states that are the insurgents.
The Democrats lose both wars. Big time.
Let’s talk terrain and numbers. Remember the famous red v. blue voting map? There is a lot of red, and in the interior the few blue splotches are all cities like Las Vegas or Denver. That is a lot of territory for a counter-insurgent force to control, and this is critical. The red is where the food is grown, the oil pumped, and through which everything is transported. And that red space is filled with millions of American citizens with small arms, a fairly large percentage of whom have military training.
Remember what two untrained idiots did in Boston with a couple of pistols? They shut a city down. Now multiply that by several million, with better weapons and training.
Let’s look at the counter-insurgent forces in the Democrat oppression scenario should they attempt to misuse our law enforcement and military in an unconstitutional manner to take the rights of American citizens. There are a lot of civilian law enforcement officers, but the vast majority of the agencies are local – sheriffs, small town police departments. They will not be reliable allies in supporting unlawful oppression of their friends and neighbors. The major cities’ police departments are run by Democrat appointees, so the commands would be loyal. But the rank-and-file? A small percentage would be ideologically loyal. More would be loyal because that’s their paycheck – they could be swayed or intimidated to support the rebels. Others would be actively sympathetic to the insurgents. This is true of federal law enforcement agencies as well.
And the military? Well, wouldn’t the military just crush any resistance? Not so fast. The military would have the combat power to win any major engagement, but insurgents don’t get into major engagements with forces that have more combat power. They instead leverage their decentralized ability to strike at the counter-insurgents’ weak points to eliminate the government’s firepower advantage. In other words, hit and run, and no stand-up fights.
For example, how do a bunch of hunters in Wisconsin defeat a company of M1A2 Abrams tanks? They ambush the fuel and ammo trucks. Oh, and they wait until the gunner pops the hatch to take a leak and put a .30-06 round in his back from 300 meters. Then they disappear. What do the tanks do then? Go level the nearest town? Great. Now they just moved the needle in favor of the insurgents among the population. Pretty soon, they can’t be outside of their armored vehicles in public. Their forces are spending 90% of their efforts not on actual counter-insurgency operations but on force protection. Sure, they own their forward operating bases, and they own a few hundred meters around them wherever they happen to be standing at the moment, but the rest of the territory is bright red. As my recent novel illustrates, American guerillas with small arms are a deadly threat to the forces of a dictatorship.
But the military is so big it would overwhelm any rebels, right? Well, how big do you think the military is? And, more importantly, how many actual boots on the ground can it deploy? Let’s put it in terms of brigade combat teams, which total about 4,500 troops each. There are about 60 brigades in the Army, active and reserve, here and abroad, and let’s give the Marines another 10 brigades, for about 70 brigades. Sounds impressive. But that’s deceptive.
Let’s put aside a big consideration – the existence of red states that would provide for an insurgent government structure and possibly attract the loyalty of some National Guard and even federal brigades. For example, if President Hillary Clinton put down her chardonnay long enough to sign a ban on privately owned guns, it’s not unreasonable to expect the governor of Texas to reject federal authority – after all, California just taught us that this is totally cool. But in this case, look for several brigades located there to hoist the Lone Star flag.
So, now the blue states are facing unconventional and conventional forces.
Let’s ignore that problem and focus on a different challenge. Even a normal unit has about 10% non-deployable members. Now, if these troops were assigned to combat operations against other Americans, you would have significant additional losses through desertion. Many of the senior leaders would participate – the Obama generation – and there is a certain type of junior officer only too happy to curry favor by sucking up in defiance of their oath (which is to the Constitution, not to some leftist president). You can identify them because they usually have “strategist” in their Twitter bios. But a lot of key, capable officer and NCO leaders, and enlisted troops, would vanish. That is proper. It is a violation of their oath to unconstitutionally oppress fellow Americans; their duty would be to refuse such unlawful orders.
So, you have significantly understrength units going in. Now, how many of the troops in a brigade are actually even front line combat troops? About a third – the rest are support. So a brigade is really about 1500 riflemen tops before you count losses. Cut those in half for sleep, training, and refitting at any one time (which is very generous) and your brigade is really 750 troops on your best day with everyone showing up. Realistically, it’s 300.
That holds one mid-sized town. And there are hundreds of mid-sized towns. Plus there are millions of Normal Americans who would fight back. Nothing would move without their permission – a few guys shooting up big rigs along the interstate would shut down the entire trucking industry. Bottom line: there simply are not enough military forces to clear and hold red America.
What about drones and bombers? Both are useful. But the minute a bombing strike kills some red civilians the families of counter-insurgent drone operators and pilots will be knocking at the base gates to be let inside. Now you’ll need many of those brigades to protect the civilians you now need to protect from retribution.
Civil wars are harsh. That’s why you avoid them.
How about the blue insurgency scenario? That goes even worse for the Democrats. You have the federal government apparatus in the hands of red America, and the insurgents are the opposite of decentralized and armed. They are conveniently centered in gun-unfriendly blue cities. In other words, the blue civilian population is much less of a threat.
A red counter-insurgency avoids the problem of a decentralized insurgency and insecure logistical lines. In the case of California, whose secessionist antics are approaching the point where President Trump could legitimately employ his power to crush insurrections, the tactical problem is relatively simple. For example, San Francisco is a hotbed of treason, but the populace is largely unarmed and is trapped in a confined area. You put a brigade on securing the Golden Gate and Bay Bridges, then put a brigade on the San Francisco Peninsula to cut off the I-280 and US-101 corridors. Next you go to the Crystal Springs Dam and cut off the water. Then you watch and wait as the tech hipsters run out of artisanal sushi rice and kombucha.
After about a week, they surrender. After all, you can’t eat and drink smugness. LA is just bigger in scope – more corridors to cut off, but in the end the population concentrations in large liberal urban areas that are their strength also make them extremely vulnerable to logistical pressure.
Then there’s another factor, an intangible but a crucial one. It’s commitment. The Democrat threat to peace is based on its policies designed to deprive Normal Americans of their right to speak freely, to worship freely, and to defend themselves and their rights with firearms. Make no mistake – millions of Normal Americans are willing to risk death to defend those rights. In fact, many swore to do so when they entered our military and law enforcement. But who is the leftist big talker willing to die to impose the fascist dream of censorship, religious oppression, and disarmament on Normal American citizens? Is the screeching SJW at Yale going to suit up in Kevlar? Is the Vox columnist going to grab a M4? Is the Hollywood poser going to switch her gyno-beanie for a helmet?
No. Hell, we just heard our liberal opponents explaining why a cop shouldn’t be expected to go fight a scumbag murdering kids because it’s scary. America might split apart, but it’s highly unlikely Team Kale n’ Vinyl would fight should their big talk finally push Normal America too far.
© 2026 – SoulSequel
25 responses to “Why Democrats Would Lose the Second Civil War, Too”
Tribal Warfare is just so lame!
It actually plays right into Marxist communism my pitting one identity Power Group against another.
This article should be title: RAGE PORN
One question: This article mentions “normal Americans”. In your opinion, what is a “normal American”?
@Gina
A “normal American” is an American that isn’t mentally ill. Which assumes a “normal American” can’t be a liberal.
@Weenis I’m sorry, are you really suggesting the mentally ill are not normal Americans?
@saintcharlie
Yes.
@Weenis Approximately 1 in 5 Americans suffer from mental illness. What you’re saying is nothing short of idiotic – and I don’t mean that in a way that assaults your character, I mean legitimately without logic.
Maybe you’re not the normal American. Maybe there’s no such thing as a “normal” American. It’s a weird proposition anyway. Are you suggesting normal Americans are superior to abnormal Americans?
@saintcharlie
This is according to the APA’s every changing guidelines around what qualifies or does not qualify as a mental illness.
Everyone can now qualify as having a mental illness, I’m surprised your number is so low.
In terms of constitutional rights, we’re ready to strip rights away from American citizens with a mental illness. We’re wanting to put our new definitions of mental illness onto many groups of people to deny them gun ownership. Some people deemed mentally ill can’t live by themselves. Some deemed mentally ill are forced to give over power of attorney.
When I say “normal” American, I say “normal” in terms of a normal person, and then “normal” being a qualifier of a person who has American citizenship.
I could say the same thing about a mentally ill Italian, Russian, Australian, whatever you want. “Normal” assumes “normalcy” and being mentally ill isn’t normal.
And liberalism is a mental illness.
@Weenis Please cite your source where you got Liberalism is a mental illness.
@Gina
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/presenting-one-most-humiliating-academic-mistakes-ever/
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajps.12216
@Weenis Aaaah, I see. We really can find whatever you want on the internet. OK then. If I believe what these “fine” people say and I am not normal, and you are the Normal American – call me crazy, call me insane. I don’t really care what you and your horde of “normal” freaks think. What I know is a fact, I am the opposite of you. I know I am a good person who cares about ALL people….”normal” or not. So feel smug for the moment. I will say it again, I bet you are a really lonely guy with few friends.
@Gina
It’s not about finding anything on the internet, it was an actual study done by the American Journal of Political Science.
lol, and yes, you’re correct, I’m a lonely guy with few friends. Keep that mental picture of me.
@Weenis …with a pipe stuck in your mouth, a gun and a dog at your side. Actually, you will never be lonely with those pups; and you do have your family.
@Gina
Pups are being sold.
What if my family isn’t real? What if it’s all a ruse? What if I’m really just a crusty dude in a basement or single bedroom apartment? What if I took someone’s online profile, and have just been posting as him and “Ryan” isn’t even my name? Who says that’s a picture of me?
When I was 15 I worked in a grocery store. I had this manager who would go hiking, was involved in karate, and had a fiance for 10 years. Pictures of her in his office and everything. After I left the grocery store, I found out he shot himself in the head. Killed himself.
I also found out he had no fiance. Didn’t know karate. Didn’t travel. Lived in a single bedroom apartment by himself. Alone. The best thing in his life was working at the grocery store. It was quite interesting.
@Weenis I am not interested enough in you to care if you are fake or not.
I will say one thing about you, or the fake you; you don’t seem like a liar. Misguided, on the wrong side of the issues, but not a liar.
@Gina
The best of all liars seems like the most truthful of individuals.
@Weenis OK, have it your way. You are a liar, with crusty pants, living in a basement.
@Weenis Liberalism is a political ideology, and you’re throwing cheap shots below the belt if the best you’ve got is to call them mentally ill. You can do better than that, c’mon.
And glad to hear you’re already “othering” people. That’s worked so well in every instance of it happening in modern civilization.
THAT’S SOME GOOD RAGE PORN @Weenis POSTED HERE:
To save you from the pain of suffering through the mindless dribble of an entire Schlichter column (it’s as long as you’d expect), we at Mediaite have compiled a list of the seven best quotes from his aroused bloodlust.
With political polarization in the US reaching a fever pitch under Donald Trump’s presidency, some Americans have joked that a second civil war could breakout. Townhall’s Kurt Schlichter has taken the idea a step further, however, by actually fantasizing about a second American civil war.
While Schlichter is known for writing bloody war-fantasy literature in the style of erotic Tumblr fan fiction, you can tell the former Army colonel really got the juices flowing in his latest column, titled, “Why Democrats Would Lose the Second Civil War, Too” — which reads like the The Turner Diaries if William Luther Pierce‘s target audience was barely literate, involuntarily celibate survivalists.
Join us in the battle of “Normal Americans” vs. “Team Kale n’ Vinyl” with these seven PatriotHole-esque quotes.
1. Schlichter claiming very important people ask him for advice on the possibility of a second civil war:
“Probably because I’ve spent time where they actually had a civil war, many people ask me – people whose names you know – whether I think this turmoil will all end in a Second Civil War. They are seriously concerned, and not without cause – the left’s hatred for Normal Americans and its dedication to totally stripping the people who are the backbone of this country of their ability to participate in their own governance is threatening to rip the country apart.”
2. Schlichter saying “stupidity and hatred” of Democrats could start a civil war — a conflict he is definitely not passionately rooting for:
“Civil war is unlikely, but never underestimate Democrat stupidity and hatred. The Schlichter family learned that lesson a century and half ago, the last time the Democrats decided to try to impose their hatred of basic human rights on the rest of the country, when an army of Democrats burned our family hometown.”
3. Schlichter fantasizing about Wisconsin hunters sniping US soldiers in tanks:
“For example, how do a bunch of hunters in Wisconsin defeat a company of M1A2 Abrams tanks? They ambush the fuel and ammo trucks. Oh, and they wait until the gunner pops the hatch to take a leak and put a .30-06 round in his back from 300 meters. Then they disappear. What do the tanks do then? Go level the nearest town? Great. Now they just moved the needle in favor of the insurgents among the population. Pretty soon, they can’t be outside of their armored vehicles in public. Their forces are spending 90% of their efforts not on actual counter-insurgency operations but on force protection. Sure, they own their forward operating bases, and they own a few hundred meters around them wherever they happen to be standing at the moment, but the rest of the territory is bright red.”
4. Schlichter using his own fiction book as evidence that suburban old men with AR-15s from Dick’s Sporting Goods could defeat the US military:
“As my recent novel illustrates, American guerillas with small arms are a deadly threat to the forces of a dictatorship.”
5. Schlichter giving would-be terrorists advice on how to shut down the trucking industry:
“A few guys shooting up big rigs along the interstate would shut down the entire trucking industry.”
6. Schlichter explaining how right-wing militias could invade and conquer San Francisco and Los Angeles:
“For example, San Francisco is a hotbed of treason, but the populace is largely unarmed and is trapped in a confined area. You put a brigade on securing the Golden Gate and Bay Bridges, then put a brigade on the San Francisco Peninsula to cut off the I-280 and US-101 corridors. Next you go to the Crystal Springs Dam and cut off the water. Then you watch and wait as the tech hipsters run out of artisanal sushi rice and kombucha. After about a week, they surrender. After all, you can’t eat and drink smugness. LA is just bigger in scope – more corridors to cut off, but in the end the population concentrations in large liberal urban areas that are their strength also make them extremely vulnerable to logistical pressure.”
7. Schlichter’s many attempts to turn the phrase “Normal Americans” into a proper noun:
“It’s obvious that the central tenet of the Democrat Party platform is now hatred and contempt for Normal Americans.”
“And nationally, these aspiring fascists are especially eager to disarm Normal Americans.”
“They are seriously concerned, and not without cause – the left’s hatred for Normal Americans…”
“The first scenario is that the Democrats take power and violate the Constitution in order to use the apparatus of the federal government to suppress and oppress Normal Americans.”
“The Democrat threat to peace is based on its policies designed to deprive Normal Americans of their right to speak freely, to worship freely, and to defend themselves and their rights with firearms. Make no mistake – millions of Normal Americans are willing to risk death to defend those rights.”
“America might split apart, but it’s highly unlikely Team Kale n’ Vinyl would fight should their big talk finally push Normal America too far.”
Schlichter did not respond to immediate requests for comment as to how he brought himself to write something so staggeringly stupid, but he has been celebrating his own column on Twitter for “annoying liberals.”
Source:
https://www.mediaite.com/online/7-most-insane-quotes-about-killing-liberals-in-kurt-schlichters-second-civil-war-fantasy-article/
@Gina
Yeah, I already read that article.
You should read the comments, lol.
@Weenis Aaaaah, that’s sweet. You have Rage Porn buddies. Now go back to your circle jerk with your new “friends”.
@Gina
Don’t be mad. It’s your party that’s pushing for civil war, again.
@Weenis I am not mad. I am full of hope and optimism. You are a little pornfused.
This vividly explains the opposition to gun-purchase-screening of mental health.
This civil-war is another one of CON-Serve-ative’s fantasy-favorites. They’ve been going on about this one forever.
I’m sure it has nothing to do with Southern states being the most CON-Serve-ative, and loosing the actual Civil War. I’m sure that’s not why there’s all the concern over flags & statues.
This is just a lawyer pushing the same crap as ted nugent:
Americans Should Kill Americans
Sorry, but fuck that, & fuck your simplistic fantasies of murdering everybody that’s not enough like you.
Fuck You
@luftballooneyegouge Ted Nugent, who crapped his pants for 2 weeks to get out of the draft, and then adopted a 17 year old when he was 30 years old so he could have sex with her. Nugent who is on the board of the NRA and was invited to trump’s White House. …and we are the mentally ill ones.
No… we all will lose. I’ve said it multiple times before – in the case of a civil war, the US will have zero qualms about nuking its own citizens.
I know it’s only a cartoon, but wasn’t this the plot of a simpsons movie? (it was averted, mind you, but still…)