Tom Kratman plays Cassandra for Liberals

...and will be ignored. That was her fate after all, to see the future and not to be believed.

So Tom explores the question of Martial Law, as proposed in jaw-dropping stupidity by Rosie O.

It starts:

Dear Rosie…

…you unbefuckinglievably stupid and ignorant twat.1 Oh, and all you morons who agree with the silly bint, too.

In case you think he's being a bit rough on the poor whale lady...

But let’s just override that. Let’s go ahead with your fantasy a tad further. Let’s suppose that Trump is somehow preemptively locked away so that he can neither take the presidential oath nor transmit to anyone that he has. Let’s further suppose that (okay, this is a stretch) the military (which is to say that a majority of the politically corrupt moral and intellectual whores we call “flag officers”) decides that President Obama’s declaration is constitutional and that, as commander in chief, he is the proper ultimate martial authority to oversee martial law. At noon on the 20th Trump does not take his oath of office and martial law is announced.

As 12:01, Eastern Time, the civil war begins. I know it begins at that time because if no one else does I’ll start it myself. Now you, in your vast knowledge of history, can only think, “Well, so what? We won the last one.”

Yeah, and what were the odds in manpower then? What are they now? And where was the industry then? Where is it now? And how evenly was the martial spirit divided then? Where is the martial spirit now? And did the military hate the federal government back then as it tends to hate it now and will definitely hate it in that lefty martial law future? Just go to the red state-blue state map from the last election. No, instead go to the red county-blue county map. All that red stuff? They hate you.

So either way, whether Trump takes the oath and the military follows him, or he doesn’t and the military rebels against their senior officers and follows him, the result is ultimately the same: Martial Law but in hands that hate you.

What does that look like, by the way, as it ultimately plays out? Well, I want you to imagine a long ditch, Rosie.

Yes, the country is divided. One part may have disliked the other, but harrumphed, and been happy to go on its own way. The other? The other thought they were soooo special, so much better, that they had to tell everyone how to live, whether they wanted it, or not.

I'm not sure hate even qualifies. After watching BLM, the meltdowns, the condemnation of nearly half the country, the fake rape claims, the fake hate crimes, and everything the last few years...

It's a cold, hard, anger.

There's a reason we are slow to anger, we turn the other cheek, etc. Because once we decide the problem has to be dealt with, we tend to be thorough. Walter Russel Mead - liberal that he was - nevertheless saw a glimpse of this aspect of western civilization when he tried to describe what he called the Jacksonian Tradition in American politics.

Stephan Molyneux observed in an interview with Vox Day, that Europeans are very, very nice, until suddenly, they are very, very not. Others have observed "black people burn cities, white people burn continents."

We may be better able to rebuild them as well, but that's small consolation to the well meaning when everything goes up in flames.

The rabbits keep pushing, thinking our anger, our hatred, is as theirs - transient. A show to make people back off.

May god help them if, as Rosie proposes, they do something truly stupid.