Will the US have mass riots? (Congress, Iran, gasoline, taser)

[ohio_peasant]

Originally Posted by katharsis

I agree with your first paragraph, and I would like the U.S. be split into four regions:
- West Coast (CA, OR, WA, HI, and AK) and Southwest (CO, UT, NV, AZ, NM, TX, OK)
- Southeast (the former Confederate and border states and DC)
- Northeast (NY, PA, OH, IN, MI, and New England states)
- North Central (everything else)

I don't think it will happen, though -- or at least not for at least 50 years.

The complication is that the intra-state divides can be larger than the inter-state. Upstate New York has more in common with the Midwest than with New York City. Downstate Illinois has more in common with the South, than with Chicago or the Upper Midwest. Rural/desert California has more in common with Idaho, than with San Diego - LA - SF.

Here in Ohio, we have strong regional divides. The Appalachian SE is quite different from the traditional-Midwestern NW, and both are starkly different from the Cleveland area.

A politically viable split would be a fractal one, with the cities nationwide splitting into one confederation, and the countryside nationwide into another. Or maybe even more complex: the Coastal and Northern cities are one nation, the inland (Souhern and Midwestern) cities are another, and Rural America a third. Would that ever happen?

[Ralph_N_1962]

Originally Posted by katharsis

I agree with your first paragraph, and I would like the U.S. be split into four regions:
- West Coast (CA, OR, WA, HI, and AK) and Southwest (CO, UT, NV, AZ, NM, TX, OK)
- Southeast (the former Confederate and border states and DC)
- Northeast (NY, PA, OH, IN, MI, and New England states)
- North Central (everything else)

I don't think it will happen, though -- or at least not for at least 50 years.

I agree with you. I think it will happen but I think its a ways off. Elimination of the Electoral college would really speed things up though. If we ever get to the point where the coasts are electing every president this country is toast.

[katharsis]

Originally Posted by ohio_peasant

The complication is that the intra-state divides can be larger than the inter-state. Upstate New York has more in common with the Midwest than with New York City. Downstate Illinois has more in common with the South, than with Chicago or the Upper Midwest. Rural/desert California has more in common with Idaho, than with San Diego - LA - SF.

Here in Ohio, we have strong regional divides. The Appalachian SE is quite different from the traditional-Midwestern NW, and both are starkly different from the Cleveland area.

A politically viable split would be a fractal one, with the cities nationwide splitting into one confederation, and the countryside nationwide into another. Or maybe even more complex: the Coastal and Northern cities are one nation, the inland (Souhern and Midwestern) cities are another, and Rural America a third. Would that ever happen?

Thanks for your reply, and I agree that that would be a problem -- but then almost every state has problems like that. Most states are NOT homogeneous.

I don't know how many times I have mistakenly talked about California, without saying that I was talking about URBAN California, only to be (rightfully) corrected and told that not all Californians live in cities within 30 miles of the Pacific Ocean!

Another example is that we are moving to Wisconsin, and rural and northern Wisconsin is much different from Milwaukee, just like many parts of the Rust Belt are still very rural, but when one thinks of the Rust Belt, I think one usually thinks of cities like Cleveland, Chicago, Detroit and Indianapolis.

Anyway, in short, I do agree with you, and why I think that any attempt to divide the U.S. into large regions would probably not gain much support from voters.

[sas318]

People had a chance to protest after President Trump won the election in 2016. There were some Resist protests, but nothing big and nothing stuck.

[sas318]

Originally Posted by ADogNamedSam

In a country where people riot and loot over a basketball championship or some fool drug-dealer breaking his own neck in the back of a paddy-wagon, I'll venture a "yes" response to the OP.

That's right, I completely forgot about this. I think the rioters were rioting because they WON that basketball game. LOL. I couldn't believe it.

[sas318]

Originally Posted by stepka

The president has already given in to most of the demands but they are still trying to destroy the entire metro system, which was fantastic btw. They don’t even care if what they’re doing is in the best interest of the people and there is a bigger cloud of smog hanging over the city than usual.

Why are they still rioting when they got what they want?????

[stepka]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

Everyone should already have a few weeks supply of food and water.

This is so true but most folks don’t. Way back in 1999 I got caught up in the y2k thing and though I didn’t really think it would happen, i figured it could and it seemed a good plan to have food and water and other items like lamp oil. Of course nothing happened and in 2006 my family and i went off on a year long round the world trip and left our stockpile with my grandmother who was living in a big house. Good thing we did because she, at age 94 and living by herself, got the mother of all winter ice storms and it knocked out her electricity for a month, and that included water because she had a pump. She was fine because she also had a wood burning furnace with lots of firewood. Most people were not so well prepared.

Originally Posted by ADogNamedSam

A likely scenario: an EMF Pulse, Database failure, Computer Worm/Trojan/DOS attack, or other effect knocks out the replenishment feature of EBT/SNAP/Food cards.


Within seven days (more likely five), we would see widespread riots and looting, mostly constrained to urban areas.


So yes, I think it is possible. Distributing the databases across different areas of the country is only one of the sound practices that could mitigate this.

You might be right but I’d like to remind you that the riots here were started by college students, not the poor. The poor had too much to lose by all this.

[Bygeorge]

I've not seen or heard one thing that would drive me into the streets to battle the police or national guard. I'm old. I well remember the civil rights riots of Detroit to name one. People were killed by the guard and the police. It was open warfare. Then there were demonstrations that turned into riots because of left wing infiltration. Professional pot stirrers. They are the ones who never get injured. During the American Revolution, most colonials were in favor of remaining with England and the King. The vast majority of Confederate troops did not own slaves. Many were pressed into service while the rich and influential folks remained home waving flags.

Nah. Won't find this old boy out in the streets.

[KaraG]

No, normal people, the masses, won't riot in this country. We'll continue to have the anarchists, ANTIFA, isolated student groups causing trouble. Remember the last election when people couldn't get in to some Trump rallies because Democrats were being violent? Almost every riot has been people on the left, not the right.

Last election, a good friend of mine publicly posted that he was sure a Trump supporter would shoot people at the rallies. Of course it didn't happen. I don't know why Democrats say or believe such things.

And Trump not leaving the White House, same stories were out there at the end of the Clinton years, nothing new, just a different President.

But, in this day of lying and even dirtier political tactics, I wouldn't be surprised if people dressed as conservatives tried to incite trouble to make Trump supporters look bad.

We are really blessed that we don't have the severe problems of these other countries. And prepping is always a good idea, whether it's for riots, weather or power outages.

[Avondalist]

There won't be riots. Americans are more like to self-medicate with opiates and die from it than riot.