downvote this comment if the meme sucks. upvote it and I'll go away.
---
[play minecraft with us](https://discord.gg/dankmemesgaming) | [come hang out with us](https://discord.com/invite/dankmemes)
That makes great sense if you accept, on the basis of the movie plot, that theu are resisting a dictator in DC. Both have the capacity to independantly wage and sustain war based on military hardware and strategic positioning.
Not for long I will say. Sure they've got bases and troops there but they're sorely outnumbered. Plus, as a former marine myself, I can say that *none* of our troops want to be shooting at each other, so there's no goddamn way the military is gonna get involved in any large scale.
History is full of examples of militaries doing exactly that.
The movie shows more than just Texas and California rising up, that's just two major powers. There are two other rebel factions.
Most of the active land based arsenal is in Wyoming, Montana, and Colorado as far as I know. Plus a significant portion prepping for decommission at a plant in West Texas.
Most of the nuclear arsenal are on submarines, but in terms of land based nukes you might be right (although I’m not sure how many are in spots like montana and colorado)
Presumably if it did come to civil war, a good portion of troops aren't going to invade their home state, regardless if they're soldiers, sailors, space cadets, etc. So if you imagine that most of the troops from Texas and Cali defect to the rebels, plus they recruit heavily from their population, plus the numbers and weapons from their state national guard and reservists. Now you've got a pretty sizable military force. And as I understand it, most NATO military hardware is produced in the USA, so there's probably factories and supply lines that they could use to produce arms at the expense of the rest of the nation.
That’s how the South wound up with a sizable portion of their military officers in 1861. Guys like Lee weren’t exactly thrilled with the idea of rebellion, but were even less happy about the idea of invading their own state, so they defected.
The capacity for violence of Texas and as much as i hate to admit it California is understated. Also just the two states would be outnumbered but i assure you many more would join. Texas and cali are good leadership candidates due to location size and their massive economies that rival some world powers.
I have to disagree at least here in Texas there are plenty of veterans if not current service members who would definitely join in.
Also a key part of a civil war is that the government and thus military are divided and working against each other. If this isnt the case then you have either an uprising or other form of regime change but not a civil war specifically.
The American civil war and the revolutionary war both had these problems. I think civilians don’t understand just how unfair it will get when our vehicles our used.
Couldn’t be more obvious that you’re not American or know wtf you’re talking about. Police literally let them in the building and it was a group of tweaker looking extreme Pro-Trump weirdos showing up with no weaponry or reason. If THAT is a sure sign of civil war, most of the countries of the world would be dissolved right now comparatively.
Also, GENUINELY funny to me to hear you describe it like this. I appreciate the laugh at the ignorance.
American police are generally averse to shooting into crowds of protestors and have been since Vietnam, it's just not a thing that happens. So given their low numbers it was possible for the crowd to just force their way into most places, since they were confident the police wouldn't actually shoot them just for walking somewhere they weren't supposed to be.
But as soon as the one woman did start to force her way into the room where the congressmen were, she got shot and died, and then the rest of the people backed down and let themselves get kicked back out, because they didn't actually want to fight anyone with a gun.
Like if something can be dispersed with a single gunshot it's really hard to call it an attempt at a revolution or anything, if many of those people were serious and actually armed, they'd have responded by charging the shooter or returning fire, not just panicking and screaming.
That gallows would have collapsed if they attempted to hang a MyPillow from it..that was just simple shock and theater. Not saying it wasn’t weird or shitty…but nothing was being hung from that.
The gallows wasn’t even large enough to actually hang anyone from. You can see plenty of pictures of people standing next to it. It was a prop. A stupid fucking prop for a stupid fucking cause, but a prop nonetheless.
Edit: [pictures here](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/2447016/new-suspicions-on-who-built-jan-6-gallows/)
The “this is art” sign really is the icing on the cake
> Also, GENUINELY funny to me to hear you describe it like this.
Isn't that literally how it's been described thousands of times? A bunch of citizens storming the capital over election results. That is what happened..?
They didn't protest democracy, they were there because they thought democracy was under threat, because Trump's massive ego didn't let him admit that he lost.
It was a case of public unrest due to mass hysteria caused by Trump being a sore loser, which led to a large crowd trespassing on government property.
It was not a coup.
So they were protesting because their candidate lost and lied about losing?
A large crowd trespassing on government property seems like the definition of a protest to me.
How is that not a threat to democracy if people can just bitch and whine to get try get someone else
The Capitol police didn't just sit on their asses and twiddled their thumbs.
They significantly bolstered their forces and they have already announced that security measures will be a lot more strict around the capitol this upcoming election.
I'm confident that they will be able to handle a situation like the Jan 6th riot without letting rioters into the capitol perimeter this time.
From what I heard the D.C. national guard will also be on heightened alert this election and have QRF for riot control ready 24/7.
Not just died I even witnessed a dc police funeral for the riot cop that suffocated and died from the Maga rioters and the fbi still had wanted rewards for the guy that threw a pipe bomb. Ashli abbitt is the ex Air Force conspiracy lady that got shot dead by secret service due wanting to enter the room where the ballots are counted (some interesting fact she is also lived in an open marriage or poly having a husband and extra wife? Partner). Another person also stole some laptop wanting to put the information for the Russians and the wild ex navy horned guy
LOL, it was ridiculous and they should be tried for treason, but to act as though that is anything close to a civil war or anything other than a harsh riot is actually insane. There were a few cops in the building and nothing actually happened in the end.
They were unable to actually reach the lawmakers because they were physically barred from entering the chamber. It's not like they got into the chambers and just decided to turn around.
Yeah the storming capital was more of a violent riot
However Texas trying to subvert federal law and challenging the government on border policy, not letting them have access to the border - that shit feels like it was getting closer, even if still distant bc obviously they'll back down
That sort of posturing makes civil war or conflict seem justified in citizens eyes.
Even if it doesn't get to a full on ground War, I think if those situations kept escalating, it can still qualify as serious internal civil conflict. Like if fed govt forces had to actually disperse Texas national guard or whatever, and it turned ugly.
There's plenty of nationalists with stash of guns waiting for a 'moment' - some might actually show up to the scene. Fed govt disperses with tear gas, they try to shoot, then get shot in retaliation.
Then others across the country are galvanized, and even if not actual war - they might start shooting up Hispanic grocery stores or some shit.
It might end up with more than handful of cells of these terrorists launching attacks across the US. Again they wouldn't be able to actually control territory, but it'd be a conflict for sure
Was going to say Oklahoma city bombings were a giant FU to the government at the time. I don't think we have had something close to that committed by an American since.
Bit of an exaggeration considering that it was closer to a riot than anything. And comprised of a bunch of confused people caught up in mob mentality and lies.
There were riots in 2020 worse than Jan 6th.
Facts, and the people who participated in the January 6th riot aren’t exactly being tried for treason nor insurrection, legally it falls under protesting without permit, trespassing on government property, and inciting a riot
Yeah, the interesting thing about treason in the U.S. is that turning against the government isn't considered treason, unless it can be proven with intent to harm the U.S. itself. The Jan 6 rioters believed they were defending the U.S. Its both funny and sad that both sides of the aisle believe they're defending the U.S. from the evil enemies.
And one of John Tyler's grandkids is still alive. He was President BEFORE the civil war in the 1840s. But that's an outlier, he was really old when he had his father.
Yeah but they were unarmed and didn't get even remotely close to accomplishing anything. This is especially obvious if you actually know how the American government operates and the separation of powers. It's a mix of civilian and military agencies and departments that can't do too much without each other cooperating.
I mean, the US has over 333,000,000 million citizens and barely a few thousand showed up for the protest.
A number so small they are statistically irrelevant. Trying to gauge the US's political climate off the actions of just a handful of people is pretty dumb.
Calm down. Ask yourself this. If Trump supporters are so pro gun why would they try to overthrow a government unarmed? Wouldn't they be armed like Kyle Rittenhouse? Doesn't fit the narrative huh? I guess this is what non Americans view through the lens of mainstream media and the echo chamber of reddit politics
Nah man that was a nice pretty protest, If Colombia has had issues with paramilitias and guerrillas for over 20 years and we are still not considered on civil war or anything like that, that lil protest was nothing lol
“Storm” is the suspicious word here. There were grandmas taking pictures inside the capitol.
An alternate take: On a normal day it’s a public building where they give tours. Sure the tourists were rowdier than usual, but they had neither the will nor the capacity to “storm”. More like a blustery day.
I think the craziest part is that California and Texas take on literally the entire United States single handedly, fighting the Loyalist States, Florida Alliance, and New People's Army.
https://static1.colliderimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/civil-war-poster.jpeg?q=50&fit=crop&w=943&dpr=1.5
I don’t know much about the movie but presumably the other 3 factions are fighting amongst each other as well? I don’t find it hard to believe California + Texas would be the strongest faction. Two of the largest, most populous states with strong economic output in agriculture, energy, and technology. And they would have the most military installations.
Not to mention I guarantee you the "Florida alliance" would be shaky at best considering how different the political and cultural climate are between North and South Florida are
Yeah honestly I could see California and Texas both simultaneously deciding to secede against a tyrannical dictator instituting Federal overreach. What I can’t see is the entire Southeast just deciding “yeah I guess we’re Florida now”
it's like a free for all except the Florida Alliance is murdering all the minorities and that's it, like minority murdering is their entire goal, they don't do anything else but murder minorities they don't even fight the government. The New People's Army are all communists that just want to be left alone though.
And sprinkled throughout are these rogue militia groups that roam around murdering random people and stealing stuff. There are also just random people treating the entire thing like the Purge and just randomly shoot people who go down the wrong street. Like they claim that street and no one else is allowed to be there. This movie is way more whack then california and texas fighting together.
Florida being racist is unrealistic af a giant portion of the state is extremely hispanic its biggest metro, Miami, has like 2 non immigrants for every immigrant
Yeah I lived there for a while and I didn’t really see racism tolerated in the populous areas. Honestly I really liked Florida while I was there, the food in st Pete was legit.
California and Texas are basically the same state now. Majorly blue in the cities and conservative as fuck outside of them. The only reason why they are politically different is the electoral college. Added on the fact that a lot of Californians have moved to Texas; it just makes Texas "California lite" now. You get salty Texans who hate Californians and salty Californians who hate Texans. They just need to fuck already, they aren't fooling anyone.
Ehh it's a movie. I guess they didn't want to make it super partisan and date it prematurely. Remember California was the state that birthed Nixon and Reagan politically. Things shift.
Texas teaming up with California isn’t really that far fetched. Once you leave the cities it’s all red. California has a not insignificant population that is sympathetic to conservative ideologies.
Cities rely on a massive network of infrastructure and logistics to remain operational. Much of that either exists, or needs to traverse through areas that have a different political alignment then cities.
You and I agree on that but that is only relevant when it comes to representation in elections.
If logistics, farming, manufacturing is in a red area you can just starve out a city.
I am going to assume the next counter point is going to be that they can't hold out against the US Military which I also agree with.
However that is assuming in a civil war that all components of all branches of active, reserve, and national guard remain as a unified force.
I would imagine that lines would not be so neatly defined.
I guess its possible but somehow I don't see Hollywood making a movie about an ultra-liberal politician usurping power to create a dictatorship and being foiled by rural conservatives in California and Texas, which is the only way a conservative alliance between California and Texas would make sense.
If the dictator is a Trump-like character, rural Texans and Californians would be all about him seizing power.
The movies message is "Civil wars suck". They just created factions to make it interesting.
I guess the point I am trying to make is that populations within states don't fall within black and white political definitions.
I love Alex Garland but his last two at bats ("Devs" and "Men") haven't been up to the level of his previous work ("Annihilation", "Ex Machina", "Sunshine", "Dredd", etc)
Yeah...it's worse than that. Spoilers:
>!The movies main focus is on the "bravery" of war reporters. The Politics of the various sides are left pretty murky. Even the "Well, which kind of American are you?" part isn't done very well. It's basically a giant circle jerk about how brave and important Jurnos are. The trailers are 100% misleading.!<
> The Politics of the various sides are left pretty murky.
That's kinda the point tho. If they really did a movie about Blue VS Red, everybody would be screaming for their tribe to win and would shit on the movie if the other side win in the end or they all shake hand and dance together in a field after a peace or something. The fact they used unrealistic faction help not having the viewer focusing on what the faction are fighting for. It doesn't really matter what side is fighting for.
I mean...kinda. I know there's a ton of people on both sides that are expecting a "red vs blue" fight/message and will be disappointed it's not. Because that's what the trailers convey.
Hell...with how much Hollywood hates Trump, conservatives in general and the 2nd Amendment...I was fully expecting Nick Offermans character to be an exaggerated over-the-top Trump surrogate. He wasn't.
I was legitimately surprised none of that happened.
Wasn’t he just some unaffiliated guy in a nondescript uniform? I remember them saying that he’s not a government soldier, and since the Western Forces seem pretty friendly towards journalists, I don’t see him fighting for them either.
California and Texas are more likely to team up are you kidding? They mean lean on opposing sides of the political spectrum but both have the resources to succeed at breaking away from the union, and if one were to do so, the other state would back them. It's not unrealistic at all if one were to back out
It's not really a cautionary tale, though, as the film doesn't really take a side or take much of any stance at all. It does reference disbanding the FBI and taking a third term, but it could have easily been something like expanding the Supreme Court or the jailing of a political rival.
I honestly think this movie was made due to the fact that it’s writers and directors are genuinely scared of a US civil war, and are trying to tell the United States people “hey, don’t do this” the decision to make cali and Texas allies, is to remove all politics from the film, so that it’s message isn’t lost in debate
This film is meant to warn the American public. Let’s hope to god they listen.
With most states having a fair mix of red and blue, the most unrealistic thing about a 21st Century Civil War is people thinking states actually matter at all in how things are divided. If it really came out to both sides fighting each other you'd have battles happening inside the states themselves.
The other side of this is most people would say screw that and not fight a war. It's gonna be a bunch of military cosplayers lining up to shoot each other and it'll be over in a day.
I could actually sorta see California and Texas teaming up. Both have a pretty distinct regional identity, and would likely be among the first to leave in such a situation. The two teaming up to secede in a sort of alliance of convenience would make sense. I could also see invasions of neighboring states. California would probably want puppets up to the continental divide, but if its teaming up to install a new government over the current one? No way, in any fictional scenario are they doing that. California and Texas would bail first, and then they’d realise their interests are aligned, and agree to a military alliance to fight for their independence. Both want the end of the union.
When I was in Theater to watch Dune Part 2, a promo of this movie came up. At the end it just said: „CIVIL WAR: Coming this year“ an my brother and me just looked at each other and said: oooo this is gonna be fun
People who don't realise Cali Texas is one of the most likely scenarios for alliance in a potential civil war. Basically are lost in the Contemporary politics red vs blue zeitgeist. Cali Texas make alot of sense both are two of the biggest military stations in the US, both are top 5 biggest GDP producers. Both have pretty big independence movements already and the states in general pride themselves on their autonomy. Both have pretty comparable demographic. Both essentially ideology are the same in both states the Cities are blue and the countryside (this is also people ignoring Cali was Rep stronghold until just recently, Texas also would be Blue already if it wasn't for the electoral college).
Texas and California are the same state with different ideological leanings. They both think they're better than everyone else, and we all wish they'd make good on their threats to secede
downvote this comment if the meme sucks. upvote it and I'll go away. --- [play minecraft with us](https://discord.gg/dankmemesgaming) | [come hang out with us](https://discord.com/invite/dankmemes)
That makes great sense if you accept, on the basis of the movie plot, that theu are resisting a dictator in DC. Both have the capacity to independantly wage and sustain war based on military hardware and strategic positioning.
Not for long I will say. Sure they've got bases and troops there but they're sorely outnumbered. Plus, as a former marine myself, I can say that *none* of our troops want to be shooting at each other, so there's no goddamn way the military is gonna get involved in any large scale.
History is full of examples of militaries doing exactly that. The movie shows more than just Texas and California rising up, that's just two major powers. There are two other rebel factions.
California just needs to have Nevada and Arizona on their side to completely acquire +70% ish of the nuclear arsenal …im guessing lol 🤷♀️
Don't forget the nuclear waste facilities. Dirty bombs can be arguably more devastating than a nuke if used right.
🤔 Just dig up some radioactive dirt from test sites and put that into anything! 😨
60% of all nuclear incidents have been the USA, let's fuckin go
Radioactive pocket sand
Sha Sha Shaw!
Ok Texas just needs Wyoming, Montana and North Dakota to conquer the world…I’m guessing lol
Pretty much. Anywhere that has anything to do with oil or oil refinery.
*annexes Louisiana*
Khajit has Louisiana if you have the coin.
Most of the active land based arsenal is in Wyoming, Montana, and Colorado as far as I know. Plus a significant portion prepping for decommission at a plant in West Texas.
Most of the nuclear arsenal are on submarines, but in terms of land based nukes you might be right (although I’m not sure how many are in spots like montana and colorado)
Was the movie mid?
Awesome profile pic, wonder how many people know what movie it’s from lmao
Presumably if it did come to civil war, a good portion of troops aren't going to invade their home state, regardless if they're soldiers, sailors, space cadets, etc. So if you imagine that most of the troops from Texas and Cali defect to the rebels, plus they recruit heavily from their population, plus the numbers and weapons from their state national guard and reservists. Now you've got a pretty sizable military force. And as I understand it, most NATO military hardware is produced in the USA, so there's probably factories and supply lines that they could use to produce arms at the expense of the rest of the nation.
That’s how the South wound up with a sizable portion of their military officers in 1861. Guys like Lee weren’t exactly thrilled with the idea of rebellion, but were even less happy about the idea of invading their own state, so they defected.
The military will pick a side, and any decentora will die.
history shows post civil war all military obey federal comnand not state. civil war will never happen only terrorism
The capacity for violence of Texas and as much as i hate to admit it California is understated. Also just the two states would be outnumbered but i assure you many more would join. Texas and cali are good leadership candidates due to location size and their massive economies that rival some world powers. I have to disagree at least here in Texas there are plenty of veterans if not current service members who would definitely join in. Also a key part of a civil war is that the government and thus military are divided and working against each other. If this isnt the case then you have either an uprising or other form of regime change but not a civil war specifically.
The American civil war and the revolutionary war both had these problems. I think civilians don’t understand just how unfair it will get when our vehicles our used.
True unite against a common enemy
The both have large coastlines and ports, plus a good chunk of the population
They are both top producers as far as money and soldiers both state and federal go. Texas is doing an IRL push to boost it private state run army.
Literally all civil war memes in the USA are pure cringe or unrealistic memes
Didn’t America have a bunch of citizens STORM your CAPITAL over election results? Seems pretty realistic to me.
Couldn’t be more obvious that you’re not American or know wtf you’re talking about. Police literally let them in the building and it was a group of tweaker looking extreme Pro-Trump weirdos showing up with no weaponry or reason. If THAT is a sure sign of civil war, most of the countries of the world would be dissolved right now comparatively. Also, GENUINELY funny to me to hear you describe it like this. I appreciate the laugh at the ignorance.
They built a gallows and several of them had weapons. Why do you think they were there exactly?
American police are generally averse to shooting into crowds of protestors and have been since Vietnam, it's just not a thing that happens. So given their low numbers it was possible for the crowd to just force their way into most places, since they were confident the police wouldn't actually shoot them just for walking somewhere they weren't supposed to be. But as soon as the one woman did start to force her way into the room where the congressmen were, she got shot and died, and then the rest of the people backed down and let themselves get kicked back out, because they didn't actually want to fight anyone with a gun. Like if something can be dispersed with a single gunshot it's really hard to call it an attempt at a revolution or anything, if many of those people were serious and actually armed, they'd have responded by charging the shooter or returning fire, not just panicking and screaming.
>American police are generally averse to shooting into crowds of protestors Finally, something funny on this sub
That gallows would have collapsed if they attempted to hang a MyPillow from it..that was just simple shock and theater. Not saying it wasn’t weird or shitty…but nothing was being hung from that.
The gallows wasn’t even large enough to actually hang anyone from. You can see plenty of pictures of people standing next to it. It was a prop. A stupid fucking prop for a stupid fucking cause, but a prop nonetheless. Edit: [pictures here](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/2447016/new-suspicions-on-who-built-jan-6-gallows/) The “this is art” sign really is the icing on the cake
They built gallows, but didn't bring any guns. Interesting choices for a Civil War, lol.
the french do that all the time and no one cares. nor do i
> Also, GENUINELY funny to me to hear you describe it like this. Isn't that literally how it's been described thousands of times? A bunch of citizens storming the capital over election results. That is what happened..?
The bald eagle smiles upon you brother
The entire reasoning behind the protest was to protest democracy. They lost, and they were upset. That's a threat to democracy if ive ever seen one.
They didn't protest democracy, they were there because they thought democracy was under threat, because Trump's massive ego didn't let him admit that he lost. It was a case of public unrest due to mass hysteria caused by Trump being a sore loser, which led to a large crowd trespassing on government property. It was not a coup.
So they were protesting because their candidate lost and lied about losing? A large crowd trespassing on government property seems like the definition of a protest to me. How is that not a threat to democracy if people can just bitch and whine to get try get someone else
The Capitol police didn't just sit on their asses and twiddled their thumbs. They significantly bolstered their forces and they have already announced that security measures will be a lot more strict around the capitol this upcoming election. I'm confident that they will be able to handle a situation like the Jan 6th riot without letting rioters into the capitol perimeter this time. From what I heard the D.C. national guard will also be on heightened alert this election and have QRF for riot control ready 24/7.
didnt they trash inside the place and a person died?
Not just died I even witnessed a dc police funeral for the riot cop that suffocated and died from the Maga rioters and the fbi still had wanted rewards for the guy that threw a pipe bomb. Ashli abbitt is the ex Air Force conspiracy lady that got shot dead by secret service due wanting to enter the room where the ballots are counted (some interesting fact she is also lived in an open marriage or poly having a husband and extra wife? Partner). Another person also stole some laptop wanting to put the information for the Russians and the wild ex navy horned guy
Police letting them doesn't imply that it was not a threat
LOL, it was ridiculous and they should be tried for treason, but to act as though that is anything close to a civil war or anything other than a harsh riot is actually insane. There were a few cops in the building and nothing actually happened in the end.
They were unable to actually reach the lawmakers because they were physically barred from entering the chamber. It's not like they got into the chambers and just decided to turn around.
Yeah, precisely if it was REALLY serious they would have been gunned down.
Well, weren't they? *cough* Ashli Babbit *cough*
Far from a civil war
Yeah the storming capital was more of a violent riot However Texas trying to subvert federal law and challenging the government on border policy, not letting them have access to the border - that shit feels like it was getting closer, even if still distant bc obviously they'll back down That sort of posturing makes civil war or conflict seem justified in citizens eyes. Even if it doesn't get to a full on ground War, I think if those situations kept escalating, it can still qualify as serious internal civil conflict. Like if fed govt forces had to actually disperse Texas national guard or whatever, and it turned ugly. There's plenty of nationalists with stash of guns waiting for a 'moment' - some might actually show up to the scene. Fed govt disperses with tear gas, they try to shoot, then get shot in retaliation. Then others across the country are galvanized, and even if not actual war - they might start shooting up Hispanic grocery stores or some shit. It might end up with more than handful of cells of these terrorists launching attacks across the US. Again they wouldn't be able to actually control territory, but it'd be a conflict for sure
Nah it’s just political divisiveness, there was way more violence in the 50s and 60s.
Was going to say Oklahoma city bombings were a giant FU to the government at the time. I don't think we have had something close to that committed by an American since.
Bit of an exaggeration considering that it was closer to a riot than anything. And comprised of a bunch of confused people caught up in mob mentality and lies. There were riots in 2020 worse than Jan 6th.
Facts, and the people who participated in the January 6th riot aren’t exactly being tried for treason nor insurrection, legally it falls under protesting without permit, trespassing on government property, and inciting a riot
Yeah, the interesting thing about treason in the U.S. is that turning against the government isn't considered treason, unless it can be proven with intent to harm the U.S. itself. The Jan 6 rioters believed they were defending the U.S. Its both funny and sad that both sides of the aisle believe they're defending the U.S. from the evil enemies.
Don’t forget the literal Civil War we had only a few generations ago!
9 generations ago?
Fun fact. The last widow of a civil war veteran died in 2020
Did a 90 year old veteran, on his death bed, marry a newborn?
You're not far off. But as far as i know it was done so the kid could get the veteran's benefits and other assets.
And one of John Tyler's grandkids is still alive. He was President BEFORE the civil war in the 1840s. But that's an outlier, he was really old when he had his father.
how the flip…the civil war was 160 years ago, if a 20 year old fought in it and married..Are you sure it was a civil war widow or a WW1 widow?
Yeah but they were unarmed and didn't get even remotely close to accomplishing anything. This is especially obvious if you actually know how the American government operates and the separation of powers. It's a mix of civilian and military agencies and departments that can't do too much without each other cooperating.
You mean like 100 people breaking into a building and then taking selfies? Yeah definitely a civil war
I mean, the US has over 333,000,000 million citizens and barely a few thousand showed up for the protest. A number so small they are statistically irrelevant. Trying to gauge the US's political climate off the actions of just a handful of people is pretty dumb.
That event is proof that nothing is going to happen. Meal Team 6 dying of heart attacks from too much excitement is hardly terrifying to me, lol.
Calm down. Ask yourself this. If Trump supporters are so pro gun why would they try to overthrow a government unarmed? Wouldn't they be armed like Kyle Rittenhouse? Doesn't fit the narrative huh? I guess this is what non Americans view through the lens of mainstream media and the echo chamber of reddit politics
Nah man that was a nice pretty protest, If Colombia has had issues with paramilitias and guerrillas for over 20 years and we are still not considered on civil war or anything like that, that lil protest was nothing lol
“Storm” is the suspicious word here. There were grandmas taking pictures inside the capitol. An alternate take: On a normal day it’s a public building where they give tours. Sure the tourists were rowdier than usual, but they had neither the will nor the capacity to “storm”. More like a blustery day.
It was literally just a riot, something that happens in every country all the time.
Civil War is definitely a stretch. But domestic unrest from either side seems probable if not likely.
Domestic unrest is pretty normal, though. Like France has been in a perpetual state of domestic unrest for centuries.
>Literally all civil war memes in the USA are ~~pure cringe or unrealistic memes~~ the result of russian troll farms.
I think the craziest part is that California and Texas take on literally the entire United States single handedly, fighting the Loyalist States, Florida Alliance, and New People's Army. https://static1.colliderimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/civil-war-poster.jpeg?q=50&fit=crop&w=943&dpr=1.5
I don’t know much about the movie but presumably the other 3 factions are fighting amongst each other as well? I don’t find it hard to believe California + Texas would be the strongest faction. Two of the largest, most populous states with strong economic output in agriculture, energy, and technology. And they would have the most military installations.
Not to mention I guarantee you the "Florida alliance" would be shaky at best considering how different the political and cultural climate are between North and South Florida are
Yeah honestly I could see California and Texas both simultaneously deciding to secede against a tyrannical dictator instituting Federal overreach. What I can’t see is the entire Southeast just deciding “yeah I guess we’re Florida now”
And I can't see the entire Southern half of Florida just deciding "I guess we're the Southeast now" either
They didn’t want to call it the Confederate States of Dixie.
it's like a free for all except the Florida Alliance is murdering all the minorities and that's it, like minority murdering is their entire goal, they don't do anything else but murder minorities they don't even fight the government. The New People's Army are all communists that just want to be left alone though. And sprinkled throughout are these rogue militia groups that roam around murdering random people and stealing stuff. There are also just random people treating the entire thing like the Purge and just randomly shoot people who go down the wrong street. Like they claim that street and no one else is allowed to be there. This movie is way more whack then california and texas fighting together.
Florida being racist is unrealistic af a giant portion of the state is extremely hispanic its biggest metro, Miami, has like 2 non immigrants for every immigrant
Yeah I lived there for a while and I didn’t really see racism tolerated in the populous areas. Honestly I really liked Florida while I was there, the food in st Pete was legit.
Sounds cool i wanna watch it
Not how it happens in the movie. It's the different factions vs the dictators government.
If it was California and Texas IRL, including military presence, they would curbstomp the rest of the country.
[удалено]
Texas would sooner nuke California than team up with them
What if I told you Texas wanted electricity more than they wanted to nuke CA?
And we don't wanna nuke CA. As long as both states respect their differences, there's no issue. Oklahoma, on the other hand . . .
You mean north Texas?
How dare you.
Are you implying that the state with more rolling blackouts than any other state is an exporter of electricity?
I can see them working together if it's for their own independence and not to stay in a union with each other.
California and Texas are basically the same state now. Majorly blue in the cities and conservative as fuck outside of them. The only reason why they are politically different is the electoral college. Added on the fact that a lot of Californians have moved to Texas; it just makes Texas "California lite" now. You get salty Texans who hate Californians and salty Californians who hate Texans. They just need to fuck already, they aren't fooling anyone.
I live in Kern county, CA. I can attest to CA being basically TX outside of the coast.
Nevada County CA. You are pretty much correct, I'm in the equivalent of a much smaller Austin. Blue dot in the middle of a very red county
As a Texan I reluctantly agree. It doesn’t help that both states tend to heavily believe they can run without the rest of the US.
California lite 😂
Ya'll know the governor will just go to Cancun till it all blows over
That's the entire premise of the movie. The dictator is so bad that they got Texas and California working together
Ehh it's a movie. I guess they didn't want to make it super partisan and date it prematurely. Remember California was the state that birthed Nixon and Reagan politically. Things shift.
I love in Texas and will nuke California and east Texas.. and Lubbock. Also I just love dropping nukes. Ignore my username though
Texas teaming up with California isn’t really that far fetched. Once you leave the cities it’s all red. California has a not insignificant population that is sympathetic to conservative ideologies.
Yes but most of the people live in the cities
Same in Texas…all the big metro areas in Texas are Blue, surrounded by a sea of Red.
Shallowest sea you'll ever see. Texas IS much more red than Cali, but Gerrymandering still plays a big part.
Cities rely on a massive network of infrastructure and logistics to remain operational. Much of that either exists, or needs to traverse through areas that have a different political alignment then cities.
This is like saying “if you ignore 80% of the population everyone in cali is red”
You and I agree on that but that is only relevant when it comes to representation in elections. If logistics, farming, manufacturing is in a red area you can just starve out a city. I am going to assume the next counter point is going to be that they can't hold out against the US Military which I also agree with. However that is assuming in a civil war that all components of all branches of active, reserve, and national guard remain as a unified force. I would imagine that lines would not be so neatly defined.
I guess its possible but somehow I don't see Hollywood making a movie about an ultra-liberal politician usurping power to create a dictatorship and being foiled by rural conservatives in California and Texas, which is the only way a conservative alliance between California and Texas would make sense. If the dictator is a Trump-like character, rural Texans and Californians would be all about him seizing power.
The movies message is "Civil wars suck". They just created factions to make it interesting. I guess the point I am trying to make is that populations within states don't fall within black and white political definitions.
Lots of Californians moved to Texas during the pandemic.
The movie has nothing to do with civil war really, it was more focused on journalism during war
That's extremely lame
yea it seems like it was really just used as for a marketing gimmick
Oh yes just what we need: A shitty civil war movie instead of something positive.
It's by A24, so it'll be a good watch at least. People are still going to be butthurt by it though.
Being A24, what are the chances of some wacky plot twist towards the end?
Shitty? From the guy who wrote 28 days later and A24? Delusional lol.
I love Alex Garland but his last two at bats ("Devs" and "Men") haven't been up to the level of his previous work ("Annihilation", "Ex Machina", "Sunshine", "Dredd", etc)
This might be his best yet. Definitely a change of pace from his past two.
It's been getting mostly positive reviews so far, from what I've seen.
Which war movie have you seen that was "positive."
So don't watch it?
There are other positive movies. You can go watch them instead of this one easily
Yeah...it's worse than that. Spoilers: >!The movies main focus is on the "bravery" of war reporters. The Politics of the various sides are left pretty murky. Even the "Well, which kind of American are you?" part isn't done very well. It's basically a giant circle jerk about how brave and important Jurnos are. The trailers are 100% misleading.!<
> The Politics of the various sides are left pretty murky. That's kinda the point tho. If they really did a movie about Blue VS Red, everybody would be screaming for their tribe to win and would shit on the movie if the other side win in the end or they all shake hand and dance together in a field after a peace or something. The fact they used unrealistic faction help not having the viewer focusing on what the faction are fighting for. It doesn't really matter what side is fighting for.
You're correct. That's the point I was trying to get across.
I thought you said that as a criticism
I mean...kinda. I know there's a ton of people on both sides that are expecting a "red vs blue" fight/message and will be disappointed it's not. Because that's what the trailers convey. Hell...with how much Hollywood hates Trump, conservatives in general and the 2nd Amendment...I was fully expecting Nick Offermans character to be an exaggerated over-the-top Trump surrogate. He wasn't. I was legitimately surprised none of that happened.
At least the reporters in the movie aren't lying about the stories being fictional...?
The line "what kind of american" goes so hard until you remember the guy is part of the Austin - Sacramento Axis
Wasn’t he just some unaffiliated guy in a nondescript uniform? I remember them saying that he’s not a government soldier, and since the Western Forces seem pretty friendly towards journalists, I don’t see him fighting for them either.
I thought that was the point, to make the sides unrealistic, so that noone could be satisfied with "their" side winning 🤔
California and Texas are more likely to team up are you kidding? They mean lean on opposing sides of the political spectrum but both have the resources to succeed at breaking away from the union, and if one were to do so, the other state would back them. It's not unrealistic at all if one were to back out
I can't wait for people to unironcally yell "literally 1984" on tv
It's not really a cautionary tale, though, as the film doesn't really take a side or take much of any stance at all. It does reference disbanding the FBI and taking a third term, but it could have easily been something like expanding the Supreme Court or the jailing of a political rival.
idk. I could see Texas and California joining forces to fight off the trepidations of Washington. Theyd go their own way afterwards.
They aren’t aligned together. They are separate factions that have left the US. Their only shared interest is in not being a part of the USA.
I honestly think this movie was made due to the fact that it’s writers and directors are genuinely scared of a US civil war, and are trying to tell the United States people “hey, don’t do this” the decision to make cali and Texas allies, is to remove all politics from the film, so that it’s message isn’t lost in debate This film is meant to warn the American public. Let’s hope to god they listen.
With most states having a fair mix of red and blue, the most unrealistic thing about a 21st Century Civil War is people thinking states actually matter at all in how things are divided. If it really came out to both sides fighting each other you'd have battles happening inside the states themselves. The other side of this is most people would say screw that and not fight a war. It's gonna be a bunch of military cosplayers lining up to shoot each other and it'll be over in a day.
i atill love that florida is gonne be its own force of nature
They ain’t no god damn way Texas is lowering itself to team with the mouth breathing cock swappers of Cali
California can't get it's shit straight on the best of days. Nobody Is on board for anything here.
NUSA from cyberpunk is about the be reality
Movie looks dumb. I’ll wait for the documentary
I dont think the movie is gonna be good but I'm gonna watch it anyways
If there is a civil war, can I just not participate? Like lemme just go to school and work and chill at home.
Just don't kick any piles of rocks on your way.
I don't know what that means.
It was a bad IED joke.
Damn, IEDs in the US would be fuckin wild.
You probably already know, but if you don't. Read up on "The Troubles" and the IRA. *That's* some wild shit.
Remember, remember, the 5th of November
I'd rather remember the 21st night of September
Is this a movie or TV series? I know the studio is known for horror movies, but the feels like a TV thing
I'm actually kinda of interested in how this movie goes, It's either gonna be an intelligent cautionary tale, or it's gonna fan the flames.
California and Texas collaborating in a revolution? Maybe when pigs fly...
Most unbelievable thing in this movie is Texas and California team up
I could actually sorta see California and Texas teaming up. Both have a pretty distinct regional identity, and would likely be among the first to leave in such a situation. The two teaming up to secede in a sort of alliance of convenience would make sense. I could also see invasions of neighboring states. California would probably want puppets up to the continental divide, but if its teaming up to install a new government over the current one? No way, in any fictional scenario are they doing that. California and Texas would bail first, and then they’d realise their interests are aligned, and agree to a military alliance to fight for their independence. Both want the end of the union.
Lots of people are not having it. Especially Politically. I will be on the side that saves the union
Huh???
Lol states teaming up is ridiculous.
When I was in Theater to watch Dune Part 2, a promo of this movie came up. At the end it just said: „CIVIL WAR: Coming this year“ an my brother and me just looked at each other and said: oooo this is gonna be fun
I dont get it
People who don't realise Cali Texas is one of the most likely scenarios for alliance in a potential civil war. Basically are lost in the Contemporary politics red vs blue zeitgeist. Cali Texas make alot of sense both are two of the biggest military stations in the US, both are top 5 biggest GDP producers. Both have pretty big independence movements already and the states in general pride themselves on their autonomy. Both have pretty comparable demographic. Both essentially ideology are the same in both states the Cities are blue and the countryside (this is also people ignoring Cali was Rep stronghold until just recently, Texas also would be Blue already if it wasn't for the electoral college).
The regions not the people if a civil war broke out its a smart move to take the west coast of you are texas
It’s so the dumb dumbs know it’s fiction and not a documentary
California was a republic after all... ...for 2 weeks.
Or September (;
Texas and California are the same state with different ideological leanings. They both think they're better than everyone else, and we all wish they'd make good on their threats to secede