Counter-Currents has some excellent authors. One of my favorites is Spencer Quinn. He can take the complexities of current events and type out an excellent summation of them and what they mean. In one article , Quinn states:
And now that we are in Year 1 AFE (After-Floyd Era), we must all realize that the United States has been irrevocably damaged, like the Titanic moments after it had been sliced open by the iceberg. Yes, it will stay afloat for a while, but it’s only a matter of time before it sinks and takes a tragically large number of people down with it.
The obvious manifestation of the sinking ship Quinn metaphorically describes above is civil war. As the reader is no doubt well aware, the United States has already had such a conflict. Since I’ve had a lifelong interest in that great calamity, I thought I’d attempt to distill the complexities of current events and compare and contrast them to the events of 1861-1865.
Four Score and Seven Years Ago. . .
The first thing to note is that an American Civil War was predicted from the get-go and these predictions continued with ups and downs in frequency until the Civil War started. One could say it was a long time coming and not really a surprise when it arrived.
The one Founding Father of the United States that did not sign the Declaration of Independence, John Dickinson (1732-1808), didn’t do so in part because he feared civil war. So from July 4, 1776, until the first shots of The Civil War were fired on April 12, 1861, there are 84 years, 9 months, and 8 days. I’ll also add that Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address on November 19, 1863, starts off with the Biblical sounding phrase, four score and seven years ago. . . Other predictions follow:
- Thomas Jefferson “fire bell in the night” regarding Missouri. 39 years until war.
- Daniel Webster “Fraternal Blood” speech. 31 years until war.
- “Bleeding” Kansas Territory established. 6 years until war.
- Abraham Lincoln “House Divided” speech. 2 years, 9 months until war.
- John Brown hanging. “Crimes of this guilty land. . .” 1 year, 4 months until war.
The participants all had time to avert the crisis, and one notices that the prophecies of civil war pop up and then die away. Nobody was predicting civil war in 1805 or later, such as 1846, when the Mexican War started, but the predictions are steady and made by mainstream politicians.
In the case of the George Floyd riots, there is a somewhat different dynamic at play, but things could still come to the same end in a roughly 80-plus year timeline. The pattern of major sociopolitical adjustments occurring after 80 years is consistent and forms the basis for the theory of the “Fourth Turning.” For example, Protestantism was officially tolerated in France when the Edict of Nantes was signed in 1598. It was revoked 87 (!!!) years later. After the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, a major sociopolitical adjustment in France happened — to put it mildly.
Americans are currently suffering from the “civil rights” sociopolitical arrangement. One can easily suppose that the arrangement is as unstable as the free state/slave state divide in the early United States or Catholic/Protestant divide in France through the 1600s. As this article goes to print, we are roughly 66 years from the Brown v. Board case that desegregated schools. We are roughly 57 years from the “I Have a Dream” Speech of that saintly Sub-Saharan, the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr., and roughly 56 years since the start of the 1964 Civil Rights Act — which is America’s illicit second constitution.
So with, ahem, four score and seven years as a predictive marker for a possible future adjustment, we are in the last two or three decades of the “civil rights” era as it is currently constituted.
Of course, all of the above can be hooey. It is entirely likely we could have the 1964 Civil Rights Act strung around our necks until Doomsday, and there will be an unending but steady drip of long hot summers with burning cities alongside weeping Negro reverends, virtue-signaling liberal White schoolmarms, and payout-seeking Sub-Saharan baby mamas after a saintly African that “didn’t do nothing” gets killed by the PoPo. Indeed, the George Floyd riots might only be the manifestation of the Democratic Party’s non-white and nuthouse wings being unable to rally around an obviously senile candidate, so their energy is instead being directed in an unproductive way. Thus, after the election, the rioting might disappear as quickly as it appeared.
Furthermore, there are no mainstream politicians predicting an end to “civil rights,” an end to racial integration, or Racial Holy War. It’s all evasions, dog whistles, and double talk. One cannot put a corresponding series of predictions as with the Civil War above. Africans and whites in America aren’t really “fraternal” either, but they do officially share a common citizenship.
How the North Won
Let’s say there is a sociopolitical adjustment at the end of four score and seven, though someone will look back and say the founding of American Renaissance was a predictor of change. Such an adjustment could take place in a number of ways. On the one hand, there could be something like the end of the Soviet Union and Communism in Eastern Europe. Statues of the saintly Reverend Doctor Martin L, etc. go down, the White Ethnostate is declared in Congress, non-whites head off for better places, and not a single shot is fired.
Or it could get pretty ugly. One crazy black lady DA indicts the wrong white lawyer couple and things spiral hopelessly out of control. If it does get ugly, the important thing is to come out on the winning side of the conflict. There is a great deal of literature on why the South lost and the North won, and one is free to read that literature and come to one’s own conclusion, but the basics of the situation are thus:
The South did know that they were the weaker party at the outset, but that doesn’t always spell victory or defeat in a clash of arms. For example, Holland beat Spain in the 1500s and America beat Great Britain in the 1700s. In more recent times, North Vietnam beat the United States. Thus a small, dysfunctional minority such as African-Americans might win, and there is no doubt that they could be persuaded to make a play for total control and subjugation of whites in North America.
Along with factories, the North had banks and supported complex financial activity. Abraham Lincoln didn’t interfere with this activity, though he did issue “Greenbacks,” raise taxes, and borrow massive amounts of cash. In other words, protect banks, Wall Street, and investor deposits, and you get many quiet and wealthy diehard supporters. The Confederacy let their cotton rot on the dockyards and suffered a terrible economic calamity as a result.
The North fully utilized its human capital. Competent, but not brilliant, military men such as General Henry Halleck turned out to be geniuses when arranging transport and logistics, moving divisions from one theater to the other, etc. General McClelland wasn’t much of a fighter, but he trained the Army of the Potomac. General Pope wasn’t a genius either, but he successfully waged a complex Indian War in Minnesota and the Dakota Territory.
The Northerners followed orders. The South’s army was individualistic to a fault, and the officers often failed to get along. General Grant was critical of the various senior leaders in the South being insubordinate in a number of his post-war writings. Meanwhile, the South was divided along a number of lines.
The North’s most critical senior leaders — Lincoln, Grant, and Sherman — had bounced back from considerable personal and professional hardships. There probably is something to getting off track and then back on track that brings toughness and wisdom to a person.
The Union was able to get geniuses to rise to the top alongside near-geniuses and disciples of geniuses. Grant’s memoirs, for example, are highly readable and clear. He also was able to devise and express a simplicity to his complicated campaigns. In his memoirs, he starts the story of his various actions by describing how he organized his senior lieutenants and their units and how he organized the logistics. He says things like “I put Schmedlap in charge here, the railhead was there, the supply wagons went this way, and then the Confederates fell back here.” Abraham Lincoln’s political genius is also well known. Suffice to say he could tell naughty jokes and write a second inaugural address worthy of being carved in stone.
The North also employed several strategies at once and each individual strategy could bring about victory on its own. The North had the naval blockade, Sherman’s March, the Red River Campaign, Schofield’s defense of Franklin, Tennessee, and the Siege of Petersburg, among other things. If one is in a situation where historians will debate that this strategy vs. that strategy is what turned the tide, one is in a good position.
Most importantly, the North had a moral narrative which the South did not have. It was from that which all other things flowed. Due to this moral legitimacy, the North got foreign diplomatic support, religious support, etc. While it was in the respective interests of Britain and France to get the United States divided, no politician from that nation could really side with a slave power after so much abolitionist metapolitical activity. It is our job to provide a moral narrative for our people.
Obama’s Coalition vs. Jackson’s Coalition
Although the George Floyd Rioters might not realize it, the contours of the conflict are not North vs. South. Monuments to abolitionists and Union men are falling as quickly as Southern ones. This conflict is that of President Obama’s coalition — sexual deviants, Africans, non-white immigrants, etc. against President Andrew Jackson’s coalition of dynamic Anglo-European Yeomen and their families.
Additionally, nobody seems to think about what will happen after every trace of the Confederacy is swept away and the next saintly Sub-Saharan that “didn’t do nothing” gets killed by the police or neighborhood watchman. With the memory of the South suppressed in the short term, whites can unite further.
Known Unknowns and Unknown Unknowns
There are some other things one needs to address. There are things out there we know that we don’t know (Known Unknowns) and then there are things we don’t know exist at all but are a big problem (Unknown Unknowns). This will come into play should things get worse.
During the Civil War, the United States had empire builders creating a white ethnostate in places like Colorado and Nebraska, but those empire builders hadn’t yet created an empire in the usual sense of one people ruling another. Today, the United States has an informal and formal empire whose boundaries extend to the DMZ in South Korea (to the West of the US) to the Baltics, Poland, Croatia, and so forth to America’s East. Those in the Orient, such as Koreans, have a sullen and hostile relationship to Americans. Korean immigrants like the “Poet” Kathy Park Hong and the VT Shooter, Seung-Hui Cho, assimilated into the hostile Obama coalition. On the other hand, Counter-Currents has writers of Eastern European origins who might wish American or Western European policy to change in a small way, but don’t have any hostility to Americans or the better parts of their culture in general. How exactly this situation would play out is anybody’s guess.
Western Europe also has an “Obama Coalition” of its own to manage and they all ape African-American culture even down to the simian gestures inspired by gangsta rap. Should events spiral out of control in the US, it is without a doubt that they will spiral out of control in England and France too.
Then there are also the little things, and it is here where that which is truly unknown will come into play. Technology goes all sorts of strange ways; 20 years ago it was unthinkable that one could watch people have sex on your telephone, but that’s the case today and it could be possible that billions of dollars in complex financial activities are tied up in the pornography vice. Also, who would have thought that a global pandemic would create a shortage of toilet paper?
Since the conflict is not North vs. South, but a clash between two geographically intertwined political coalitions, violent unpleasantness might take place more along the lines of the Bosnian War in the 1990s or the Lebanese Civil War in the 1970s and 80s. One personal account is published below:
I was born and raised on farm in Western Bosnia and we always had enough food and supplies on the farm to survive at least one year without any contact with the outside world. We grew our own wheat and corn and always had enough flour for at least three years. We also had cows, chickens, and sheep for dairy products, meat, and eggs. The sugar and salt would be purchased in the 50-pound equivalent bags. Besides the motor vehicles we also had horses that could be used for farm work and transportation. We even made our own brandy and had at least three years supply of it. . .When the things started to go bad, we were under impression that we would be okay; since we are on the farm and that we can just live there until everything was over. Boy, where we wrong. When the fighting broke out, the villages, small towns and farms were systematically cleared of people, looted and destroyed. You had a better chance of surviving if you lived in an apartment in the big city of if you lived in the farm that was further away from the front lines. It does not matter how good your house is built, it will not sustain few direct hits from the T-72 tank. Also, it does not matter how well you are armed, unless you have numbers on your side (number of armed people), and you dig in and try to protect your property, you will be over-run and destroyed.  
What non-white immigrants will do is also anybody’s guess. How long or well can a Korean work with a Pakistani in a violent and unpleasant circumstance? Could they unite to dispossess whites in such a case or will they fall apart? Since so many Israelis, Koreans, etc. come to the US to dodge the draft in their homelands, are they really a threat to whites in a conflict between Obama’s and Jackson’s respective coalitions?
Whatever the case, Americans are in for interesting times. We are still only Year One After Floyd.
If you want to support our work, please send us a donation by going to our Entropy page  and selecting “send paid chat.” Entropy allows you to donate any amount from $3 and up. All comments will be read and discussed in the next episode of Counter-Currents Radio, which airs every Friday.
Don’t forget to sign up  for the twice-monthly email Counter-Currents Newsletter for exclusive content, offers, and news.
  https://survivalblog.com/letter-re-the-bosnian-experien/  There is more to read here, also: https://survivalblog.com/lessons-from-wartime-bosnia-he/