On The Quartering's Response to Secession and/or Civil War [Arnox]

Original video creator(s):
Arnox - script writer, video maker

Creator's description:
Jeremy from The Quartering has talked recently about how a secession or civil war would go down, or should I say, wouldn't, but I think he gets a few things wrong. I lay the issues out with my shitty mic.

The Quartering Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qG_q_CGf78g&t=0s

Game source:
Unreal Tournament 2004 w/ Ballistic Weapons

Transcript:
This is in response to Jeremy’s video which can be watched at The Quartering channel. A link to that will be in the description.

When the first United States civil war occurred in 1861, it wasn't exactly fun times, and it sure as hell isn't going to be any better in modern times. Before I begin what I'm gonna say, I think I need to make a few disclaimers. While I admit that I am morbidly curious as to how a modern civil war would play out, I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that even in the best case scenario, there will be a fair amount of bloodshed and economic disruption. At worst, a new US civil war could end up like all those other civil wars you see in Africa that, even after decades, seem to have absolutely no end in sight. So no, I don't want a civil war, but nevertheless, reality doesn't care about what we want. It is what it is. Now, let us continue on with the video.

Sarah Silverman isn’t exactly super bright, yes, but in her inane ramblings, she did stumble upon the right conclusion here. Just for entirely the wrong reasons.

I don’t know what Tim Pool does or doesn’t want as I’ve never watched him so I’ll just put him aside for now.

Starving in a week isn’t necessarily a foregone conclusion. As others have pointed out, food can be shipped from overseas. Admittedly though, the food situation still wouldn’t look good. Nevertheless, war is not forever and (hopefully) things will stabilize and commerce can open back up again between the states. Civil war is always such a risky and nasty proposition. But this is all assuming that there WOULD be a war. It’s entirely dependent on how petulant the government gets. The only thing that would cause bloodshed during this secession would be human pride and an inability to compromise.

While he’s generally right that division is usually not the answer, this isn’t actually about right vs. left. This is actually about the government vs. the freedom of the people. And the mainstream news is gonna try SO HARD to spin this as right vs. left on both sides of the aisle. And sadly probably succeed. But regardless, there are absolutely legitimate reasons to secede beyond red vs. blue. The government barely represents us anymore, and the Bill of Rights is getting thrown under the bus more and more these days. On top of all that, there are SO MANY problems that are directly caused by other problems, and the only way to truly fix them all at this point is a complete overhaul of the current system. Of course, such an overhaul deserves an entire discussion to itself, so that’s for another day.

Again, Jeremy’s right here that mainstream news wants division as much as possible, and it would be very good to break away completely from that sort of thinking. But that’s not the only thing that needs to be done here. For too long, talking about politics has been taboo because it almost always leads to arguments. But the issue isn’t the topic itself. The issue is almost always that both parties aren’t looking for new information to change their views, but instead, see it as this debate competition where they NEED to win and they CAN’T switch their views on the matter. And of course, when both sides are just talking AT each other, nothing productive happens, and at worst, only leads to fights and divisions.

Although Sarah has put out some dumb takes here, I don’t know if she should really be disparaged this much. I’ve seen MUCH worse takes. At very least, she isn’t trying to argue for conflict and fighting as so many do nor is she trying to berate the other side. And this kind of leads into an important point here that I discussed just before and as Jeremy already has pointed out. We shouldn’t be so divisive. Instead of pointing and laughing at Sarah here, maybe we should try discussing things with her in a civil manner. And hey, if she pushes back then, fine. But at least we made an honest attempt. I don’t think people should be lambasted just because they give a take that seems and maybe even is very much not thought out. I guess what I’m saying in the end is, more discussion. More openness. Less hostility.

Scalia saying “there is no right to secede” is complete absurdity. Any government derives all its power from the consent of the governed, and if the governed do not wish to be governed anymore by that government, then that’s fully within their power, and there is nothing that can take that away. The government can roll out the tanks, sure. It can apply violent force. But as we’ve already seen in various conflicts from Vietnam to the Middle East, it can easily turn into a no-win situation if the people refuse to consent to it through their own various violent avenues. As Andreas Antonopoulos has said, “The greatest lie that this generation has believed is the idea that we don't have power.”

Again, not talking about politics is not the answer. This should never have been normalized. It should never lead to fights. I don’t recall anyone ever getting into fights about what car insurance they choose. So why do we get into fights about this? It’s only because of our lack of empathy, our stubbornness, and our overly competitive attitudes that we make it so. Just not having discussions about politics is slapping a band-aid on top of a much bigger wound that needs to be addressed before it festers.

Absolutely agree about Twitter. It’s awful.

Absolutely agree that we need to stand together. In opposition to this government. We need to recognize that the real enemy is not us.
That’s all I have to say. Wish ya’ the best, Jeremy.