USA: new civil war coordinates

Let's say that's exactly what it looks like.

The unrest shaking the United States today is seen by many analysts as the beginning of a very
serious process - a full-fledged civil war. Not everyone agrees, but as unrest increases, looting
and violence spread to more and more American cities, starting in Washington and New York,
and the U.S. Army becomes involved in the conflict, this scenario looks increasingly plausible. In
this article, we do not aim to weigh the chances of a full-fledged civil war in the United States
and what factors are at odds with that. Let us assume that what is happening in the U.S. right
now is a civil war, and try to understand the nature and consequences of these dramatic events
for both America and the rest of the world.
American bipartisanship as a frozen moment of civil war...
If the prerequisites for a full civil war in the United States? Yes, absolutely.
First, starting with the 1861-1865 war, when the Confederation of 11 slave-holding States vs.
the 20 abolitionist states of the North (including the 4 fringe states, where slavery existed, that
joined them), American society remains politically divided. While the North triumphed and
slavery was abolished, many other principles have preserved exactly the positions that the
South has championed. The abolitionism of the North was combined with a republican desire to
unify the United States into a single nation state, hence the Republic. The South insisted that
the United States retain a significant degree of independence, up to legal sovereignty. On the
issue of slavery, the North won, and on the question of the interpretation of federalism and the
very nature of the American State, the South won, despite the military defeat of the army of
the South.
It was during the Civil War of 1861-1865 that two major U.S. parties were established - the
Republican (Great Old Party) and the Democratic Party. The bipartisan policy of the United
States, which has survived to this day, is a direct consequence of the civil war, which, along with
the military victory of the North, resulted in a political compromise with the South. To
understand the nature of American bipartisanship, one can imagine what would have
happened if, after the Reds' victory in the Russian Civil War, the defeated Whites had created a
second party alongside the Bolsheviks and continued to defend their views. Or after Mao's
victory in China, a coalition government with Gomindang would have been established.
And that's what happened in the United States. Thus, the U.S. bipartisanship is a frozen civil
war that has been transferred to the political sphere. The fact that this system has not been
changed for almost two centuries and that no party has disappeared, even though no third
party has appeared, shows how deeply the civil war and the bipolar system are deeply rooted in
American politics.
The bipartisan system had its own history, and in some periods relations between the parties
intensified and evened out. Obviously, from the era of the 1990s, from Bill Clinton to Barack
Obama, including the period of George W. Bush's presidency, there was a consensus among the
parties on foreign policy, and all disagreements were limited to a few domestic political topics -
primarily health care reforms. At one point, the civil war seemed to have been completely
overcome as globalization progressed, but President Trump's arrival changed everything. The
fierce confrontation with Hillary Clinton four years ago and the re-emergence of the struggle
between Republicans and Democrats in the presidential race of 2020 brought everything back
to its place: the mutual hatred between supporters of the Republican Party and Trump and
Democrats reached its climax today. At the same time, it is important that these contradictions
are focused on the main political forces, which originally emerged during the Civil War, and
thus are dormant hotbeds of new possible conflicts.

Conclusion: Today's wave of protests dramatically aggravates the contradictions within the
American political system itself and may well result in a new round of full-fledged civil war
between the conservative wing represented by Trump and the progressionists represented by
the electoral base of the Democrats. At the same time, the figure of Trump and the sharpness
of his policy further exacerbate the situation. Trump is the most suitable figure for the civil war
in the U.S. to become a reality.
Black America vs. White America: Uprising of negatives
The riots, pogroms, protests and clashes with police in many U.S. cities have clear racial
overtones. This shows that the racial problem in the U.S. is far from being solved, and like the
Civil War, it has simply been temporarily frozen. If the Civil War and its relevance are followed
by two dominant parties in the U.S., then the legacy of undead slavery is the presence of two
halves of the U.S. population that differ in color. No matter how much the U.S. claims that
racism in the U.S. is completely outdated, today's protests and their grand scale show that it is
not. The U.S. race problem exists and is the most important force in a possible and clearly
approaching civil war.
The murder of black African-American George Floyd by a white policeman was a trigger for
today's protests, which immediately became distinctly racial in nature. It was essentially a black
American uprising against white America. Despite all the assurances that American society
would achieve full equality of races, if that were the case, African Americans would not rebel
with such rage in response to a fairly common U.S. crime, and a movement such as Black lives
matter would not be so widespread.
The fact is that racism is the basis of the American liberal system. Ethnic differences in the U.S.
were erased among all segments of the population - both white and slaves imported by force
from Africa. The Indians living in North America were almost completely exterminated, and only
a few diasporas - Latin American, Chinese or Jewish - retained a certain ethnic identity. The
Anglo-Saxons, on the other hand, built American society on the principle of individualism. And
at all levels - both at the level of lords, the colonizers themselves, who came from Europe, and
at the level of slaves, which was expressed in the division of enslaved Africans: they were
distributed among different masters precisely in order to prevent the slightest ethnic
consolidation. Thus, Europeans arriving in the United States lost their identity and language in
favor of English and Anglo-Protestant culture, and African slaves lost their ethnic roots and
learned the language and morals of their masters (and what they had to do!). This distinguishes
slave-holding practices in the Americas from those in other countries. Anglo-Saxon countries
forced and obligatory division of slaves, and in Latin America most often black slaves were
settled by families or groups.

Thus, in South America, the black population has managed to preserve its cultural traditions, its
identity, at least in residual forms, and in the United States it has lost it completely. This is the
colossal problem of African Americans: they became the negatives, "black copies" of the white
population, deprived of any identity other than that which they were allowed or even forced to
borrow by their white masters. It was American liberalism that gave birth to racism, where
instead of ethnic differences, color differences were reinforced, while all other signs were
reduced to individuality in both cases - the white and black populations. Normally, white was
considered a full and free individual, while black was considered an inferior and dependent
individual.
The abolition of slavery included African-Americans among the nominal citizens (outside of
which, however, there were still Indians who categorically refused to accept individual identity
and to turn into obedient slaves). But this inclusion was based on an external - white,
individualistic, liberal-Anglo-Saxon - identity. In other words, "black" was accepted as citizens as
"evil", "would be white", that is, as those who had yet to become white, fully assimilating their
cultural identity. First, African slaves had their own identities scorched with calico iron, and
then they were graciously allowed to base copies of white people's identities on this "empty
space".
These processes took about a century, and today African Americans have formally all the same
rights as whites. Everything... except the right to their own identity. The question of this
identity became acute among the African population as early as the 19th century, when
theorists such as Paul Cuffee, Martin Delany, etc. put forward the thesis that the complete
liberation of the African American population is possible only through return to Africa (Back-to-
Africa). The emergence of African States such as Liberia and Sierra Leone is linked to these
projects.
This idea was later developed by another African-American leader, Marсus Garvey, who
developed a theory of pan-Africanism and declared himself "President of Africa". However,
these movements were not widespread, and the vast majority of Africans remained in the
United States with no identity other than that which dominated white society, becoming a kind
of "photonegative" of the white population. Thus the racial problem in the United States
became non-ethnic: white and black meant only social markers corresponding to social classes -
white was "at the top", black was "at the bottom".

Therefore, today's African American uprising is not about defending one's own identity (African
Americans simply do not have one), nor is it an act of struggle for one's rights. This uprising
shows only the tragedy of the emptiness of people who have no identity at all, except for the
color of their skin, which has private meaning by inertia.
And that is why the whites who apologize in mass today to African Americans who are racking
up shops and engaged in destructive looting only swear by the same "black emptiness" that in a
sense opens their own "white emptiness". True repentance should have been done in
liberalism, individualism, and utilitarian selfishness, but these principles are still the foundation
of the entire New Age Western civilization, and above all its cultural and economic avant-garde
- the United States. Racism and segregation are only consequences of the materialist imperialist
universalism of New Age. And this same universalism in its new - ultra-liberal or left-liberal form
- pushes American progressives to align themselves with African-American protests: under
conditions of an exclusively individual identity, the United States simply has nothing to offer
blacks, and blacks have nothing to defend in the face of whites.
The racial problem in American society in such circumstances simply has no solution, but
formally at the level of law and official liberal ideology, everything is already solved.
Consequently, the current wave of African-American protests raises deeper questions where
there is no answer. The only proportionate answer would be the destruction of the United
States. But that is, in a sense, the logical outcome of the civil war that is now emerging.
The White Pole: Second Amendment and Black Helicopters...
At the opposite pole from African Americans in the structure of the modern social and political
explosion in the U.S. stand alternative forces to African Americans and progressionists, most
often represented by white with conservative views. They are largely oriented towards Trump,
American isolationism and even nationalism. At the same time, they are aware of themselves as
opponents of progressivism, globalization, and the strengthening of centralist tendencies,
which were not historically associated with Democrats as they are today, but with Republicans.
As a rule, it is this part of the population that holds on to the second amendment to the
Constitution, which allows possession of firearms. Sociologically, they represent the main
population of provincial America or small towns - fly over zone.
On the extreme flank of these deliberately "white" Americans are extreme American
nationalists. Some of them are united in small communities - those that consider it their
mission to protect private property - with weapons in their hands if necessary. Only a very small
minority, even from that part of American society, is truly racist. That part of the American
white population as a whole is not a single political force.
Under the pretext of confronting "nationalists", left-wing liberals in the United States are
forming "anti-fascist movements", sometimes using terrorist methods. Thus Trump recently
called for recognizing "antifa" as an extremist ideology. Under the pretext of fighting against
real or fictional American nationalists, antifa sometimes use violence against all their political
opponents, whoever they may be, adding even more oil to the fire of civil war.
So far, these "conscious white" or "right" are not actively involved in the civil conflict, but when
the object of the looters are objects whose owners belong to this category, they meet a tough
fight, which marks the next phase of a possible scenario of escalation. If this part of the
conservative Americans sees a real threat to what they consider their inalienable rights (first of
all, the threat of the Second Amendment to the Constitution), they may play an important role
in civil war.

It is indicative that today not only Republican nationalists, but also those who still share the
Southerners' positions in the 1861-1865 war - at least in the issue of decentralization - belong
to this pole. Thus, a more European-like pair of positions is formed from the special and quite
original American bipartisanism, where Republicans initially defended abolitionism and
centralism and Democrats - slavery and decentralization:
- On the one hand, there are progressists who support further phases of "nihilistic
emancipation", all types of minorities, legalization of perversions, etc., and at the same time,
strengthening of central power and raising taxes, introduction of a number of social strategies,
- and conservatives, on the other hand, combining nationalism with maximum regionalism,
subsidiarity and the right to bear arms.
These two poles - unlike the two main US parties - have no clear institutionalization, but it is
these two positions that are as irreconcilable, conflictual and radical as they are beginning to
appear today.
This is how the new coordinates of the civil war are gradually becoming clearer, reflecting
exactly the political, social and ideological conditions where the U.S. finds itself today.
Coronavirus and eschatology: American Armageddon.
Now it is important to take into account another factor: protests and unrest in the United
States are unfolding in the context of the epidemic. The Coronavirus has hit the U.S. economy
and especially the middle class, which was knocked out of the economic rhythm due to
quarantine. But in a credit economy, this disruption of rhythm can easily become fatal. If the
balance of earnings and payments is interrupted for at least a short period of time, which is
exactly what happened, the modern capitalist economy will collapse. And this collapse is most
painfully felt by representatives of small and medium-sized businesses. In contrast to the
economic crisis in 2008 or the dot.com crisis in 2000, the problem cannot be solved by
allocating additional funds from the FRS to large banks and other financial institutions. Today,
American households have been directly affected by quarantine, and giving them direct
assistance is so contrary to the logic of financial capitalism and the FRS principles that it is not
even theoretically considered. Besides, it will only lead to a round of inflation and structurally
will not improve the situation. This factor of the deep crisis of the American economy,
associated with the coronavirus, further aggravates the probability of a truly radical conflict,
which has all chances to turn into a full-fledged civil war. The last degree of despair can easily
push people into such an outcome.

Attention should also be paid to the polarity of opinion that has developed today in the U.S.
when assessing the very nature of the coronavirus pandemic.
Progressives, Democrats and social reformers insist on the seriousness and reality of the
Coronavirus and indirectly support universal vaccination. Moreover, reformist and Democrat-
owned media and social platforms (such as FB) strictly censor articles and posts of those who
deny the seriousness of the epidemic and - under whatever (sometimes extremely extravagant)
pretexts - propagate against vaccination, Bill Gates, George Soros, WHO, etc.
Conversely, the conservatives and supporters of Trump, from the very beginning, challenged
the scope of the epidemic, refused to observe quarantine and perceived the pandemic as a
false strategy of globalists aimed at reducing the population, destroying the economy,
introducing a regime of total supervision and control - for the subsequent chipping and turning
humanity into slaves of the global elite. These sentiments are extremely common today in the
United States, and Trump himself, who formally introduced a quarantine regime, seeks to
please this part of the electorate, which is very substantial.
It is telling that African-American protesters most often - even nominally - wear masks, and in
images of armed whites gently repelling the rebels, we see their faces without masks.
Thus, the coronavirus not only creates economic prerequisites for the exacerbation of civil war,
but also lays the foundation for demonizing the enemy. In the eyes of conservatives,
progressives are the accomplices of the forthcoming crime of planetary expansion, which is
supported by the widely developed in this environment Protestant ideas about the near end of
the world. For them, Bill Gates, George Soros, Hillary Clinton and other globalists appear to be
the Antichrist retinue, which is ready to bring the U.S. and all mankind (especially the free
world) on the altar of Satan, establishing a planetary electronic dictatorship and high-tech
concentration camp.

For the progressionists themselves, such views seem to be the ultimate "cave obscurantism"
and "fascist delirium", the more dangerous it is, the wider it spreads among the population.
And in the U.S., more than half of the population sincerely believes in conspiracy theory, one
form or another.
Under such conditions, both those who believe in the danger of coronavirus and those who
deny it in the eyes of each other acquire the status of "ontological enemy", because for
religious consciousness in "recent times" (in the era of disasters, ulcers, upheavals) there is no
more serious opposition than the division between the camp of believers and supporters of the
Antichrist. But this time the role of "Antichrist" is not played by the USSR, not some external
force or threat, but by half of the American population itself.
This is how the civil war in the U.S. acquires a religious and eschatological character.
Black Revolution: Trump and Globalists
When we closely observe the details of the protests in the U.S., we can see that the actions of
protesters with their spontaneous waves of outrage and a strange for a Russian man desire to
break a supermarket window and take everything out of there is worth some more or less
organized force. Then in one place, then in another, there are figures of people who know very
well what they are doing. For example, they break several shop windows, but do not participate
in the robbery themselves, and move on - to other shop windows, leaving no trace, carefully
hiding face, hair, eyes under a gas mask, protective suit and ... umbrella (only few simple
demonstrators know the fact that the open umbrellas can protect against rubber and
helicopter shots). In addition, it is clear that certain American and world media - primarily
progressive media (such as CNN or the BBC) - seek to steer things in a certain direction by
mitigating the abominable scenes of black beating and robbing innocent shopkeepers, women,
the disabled and the elderly, and, conversely, by glorifying members of minorities who provoke
the crowd to open violence by some (most often ugly) gesture or action.
In other words, it seems that the US has launched a process of "color revolution", through
which the Americans themselves had previously overthrown regimes they didn't like around
the world (from anti-Soviet uprisings in Eastern Europe in the 80s to Maidan in Ukraine or an
attempt to pull Hong Kong out of continental China). But if in other cases of "color revolutions"
Americans overthrew their external opponents in this way, bringing to power in other countries
obedient to them political puppets, then who today strikes at the United States itself?

Here we should remember the fundamental split within the American elites that was
discovered during Trump's election campaign. Trump then accused the U.S. political elite of
ceasing to serve American interests, siding with globalization, and seeking to establish a World
Government willing to sacrifice itself to the United States. Trump called the network of liberal-
globalists "Swamp". The revelation of Swamp was the most important line of his campaign and
probably that was what brought him success and victory in the elections. Trump thus put an
inner enemy, not an outer enemy, at the centre, making the elites split into globalist and
national ones the main political problem in the USA.
During his presidency Trump continued to fight against the "Swamp", which was clearly not
ready to be "drained" and opposed Trump in every way. But it was the structures of these
globalist centers that were most actively involved in the implementation of "color revolutions"
in various countries. The palm of the championship here belongs, of course, to the
organizations of George Soros, a supporter of the global "open society", who together with his
structures (banned in many countries because of direct links with terrorist tactics and coups
d'état) resurfaces almost everywhere where protests, unrest and riots begin, actively siphoning
oil into the fire. It is clear that the "swamp" is not only Soros and its networks, but also a
significant part of the world's political and financial elite, united by the project of the World
Government. Liberals openly and consciously seek to abolish nation-states and create a
supranational governing body. Their project was the creation of the European Union, as well as
a number of supranational bodies such as the Hague Tribunal, the European Court of Human
Rights, the World Health Organization (WHO), etc. But when the tools of classical political
lobbying do not work (so Soros was unable to prevent Brexit and implement a number of other
liberal projects), the methods of "color revolutions" are used.

If this observation is true also in the case of the U.S., we can conclude that behind the civil war
in the U.S. is the "Swamp", that is, globalists and their structures that seek to discredit Trump
and ensure the victory of his candidate - Joe Biden.
At the same time, using the marginal layers of American society, mobilizing the most unstable
and aggressive minorities and especially the racial factor, networks of globalists risk bending
the stick and blowing up American society from within. And if that happens, even if Trump
manages to bypass, the raised wave will threaten the American state itself. After all, the
aggravation of all the existing contradictions that we see can hardly be removed by the coming
to power of the indecisive, inaudible, and unwilling Biden, devoid of any charisma or charm.
In other words, if we are dealing with a "color revolution", behind which the Swamp stands, it
can not only lead to excessively destructive consequences at the first stage, when a state of
emergency has to be declared throughout the country, but it can also further undermine any
sustainable strategy - even if Trump succeeds in pulling down.
Deep State and its ambiguity
It remains to consider how the American Deep State, the "deep state", can behave. The term
never made its meaning clear during Trump's presidency. It is not clear whether Deep State
stood behind Trump himself, supporting him in the face of globalists who have gone too far
away from U.S. national interests, or whether, on the contrary, Deep State is so conflicted with
globalism that it cannot tear its deepest layers and Trump's entire presidency counteracts it by
preventing it from implementing its national (nationalist) program. Since this most important
circumstance remains unknown, it is difficult to envisage the behavior of DeepState. Without
knowing what we are really talking about, we can equally likely assume that some forces in the
American establishment (primarily law enforcement agencies) may take advantage of the
emergency situation to introduce direct centralized control and even establish a military
dictatorship, or vice versa, to oust Trump if the protests are partially played up. In any case, the
Deep State, whatever it may be, may have its own agenda in an emerging civil war, different
from the policies and ideologies of the main operating forces.
This, of course, does not clarify the picture, but makes it even more confusing.
If America collapses...

What is the risk of a full-fledged civil war in the U.S. for the rest of the world? It will mean no
more or less the collapse of the global capitalist system. Since the middle of the twentieth
century, the U.S. has been the vanguard of world capitalism, and after the fall of the Soviet
Union and the collapse of socialism in Eastern Europe, acts as the only pole of the unipolar
world. When the USSR collapsed, there was only one of the two poles left. He was the main
authority of world politics. Now the USA can quite comprehend destiny of the USSR. This means
that there will be no pole in the world, and most importantly - there will no pole of last decades
and even of the era of great geographical discoveries, when Western European capitalism,
imperialism and colonialism were formed. Rebellious African Americans today seek to derail the
history of slavery and white racism. To do so, we must put an end to the history of New Times,
capitalism and Western European civilization in its modern phase. This is logical: to finish the
European Modern, it is necessary to "shut America down". Thus, this time the civil war in the
United States is meant to be the end of the United States and at the same time the end of the
global Western-centric capitalist world order.
For all peoples and societies on Earth, this can be both joyous and worrying news. Joyful -
because the U.S. implosion will open up the possibility for all countries and peoples to develop
on their own trajectory, to look for their unique place in the world, which will become
multipolar with necessity. This will be the end of Eurocentrism and colonization, and nothing
can claim to be universal - neither in economics, nor in politics, nor in technology. In this way,
each civilization will be able to live according to its own values and perceptions, according to its
own time, seeing the West as just one of many possibilities, as an exhibit that can be admired
or simply overlooked, but that does not have to follow at all.
What is important is that pro-Western liberal elites in all societies, which now have key
positions and determining influence in them, will collapse after the US. This means that
capitalism, parliamentary democracy, individualism and liberalism will no longer be mandatory
fundamental paradigms, and each society will be able to build its own social, economic and
political systems without paying attention to the prescriptions of the world metropolis - the
West and the USA.
It will deeply affect everyone, including China and Russia. And if the U.S. collapses first, all the
other political regimes associated with capitalism - either ideological, economic, political,
cultural, technological, or all at once - will collapse or be completely reborn.
But now the disturbing news come. The U.S. implosion can cause a global catastrophe, as the
country has the largest concentration of weapons, including nuclear weapons. Consequently,
the fate of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction may find itself in the hands of those
whose actions will be unpredictable. Civil war nullifies all rules and all principles. And this is
extremely worrying.
Finally, it cannot be excluded that in case situation becomes worse, some of the forces,
desperate to resolve the situation in another way, may resort to a large-scale military conflict,
which would make it possible to end the U.S. civil war in the face of an external threat. Anyone
can be chosen as an enemy - including Russia, China, Iran, etc. But there may be other
candidates to "save America" by taking on the role of its mortally dangerous enemy. At some
level of civil war development, this may well be the only way to end it, since it is even
theoretically impossible for any of today's opposing forces to win it.
The end of America.
Let me remind you that from the very beginning we considered the version that a civil war in
the United States is very likely and that events are likely to follow this scenario. This was
necessary for the integrity of the analysis. But of course, we cannot rule out that we are present
at a false start of the "civil war", its simulation or its rehearsal, at a kind of laboratory
experiment that allows us to assess in practice the real situation and the degree of escalation of
internal conflicts in American society. Watching the footage of protests and riots in American
cities and the American capital, it is difficult to escape the feeling that we have seen these
footage many times in Hollywood soap operas and movies about epidemics, disasters, zombie
apocalypse or political collapse (such as in "House of cards").
The upcoming civil war in the U.S. has long occupied the fantasies of American filmmakers and
embodied in a variety of scripts and films. In a world ruled by virtual technology, reality and
virtuality, reality and fantasms are so intertwined that it becomes increasingly difficult to
separate one from another. That's why we sometimes get the impression of being present
when we make a movie about the end of the United States. And if that is the case, even if this
time a full-fledged civil war is somehow avoided, it would mean that it is postponed until the
next case. And seeing how events in the U.S. are unfolding, something suggests that this "next
case", albeit somewhat postponed, will not take long. In a sense, the "end of the United States"
has already taken place - even if it is still in the first approximation, in the form of a rehearsal or
a scenario, which with inevitable fatality becomes more and more realistic and inevitable.