submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by thelastaxolotl@hexbear.net to c/movies@hexbear.net


Cali-Texas and big florida fighting the feds over who gets to be the true Heir of Hitler while the northwest has a Maoist Insurgency lol red-sun

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] WeedReference420@hexbear.net 67 points 1 week ago

What making a film about a second American civil war while avoiding politics does to a worldbuilding

[-] Rom@hexbear.net 62 points 1 week ago

Love how in every fantasy about the US splitting apart states continue to use their existing borders.

Also shouldn't this be Civil War 2? Since there was already the first one a while back

[-] asg101@hexbear.net 37 points 1 week ago

Since there was already the first one a while back

The first one only ended on paper, it has been a "cold" civil war since then. I am pretty certain it will be heating up again some time soon.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net 58 points 1 week ago

Expectation: Pacific NW Maoist insurgency.

Reality: Pacific NW fascists trying to tiptoe around the word "Volk".

[-] tactical_trans_karen@hexbear.net 52 points 1 week ago

I fucking detest these people that want civil war. Like, how do you dare fantasize about this shit? Their little murder fantasy is so important to them that it should uproot and destroy the lives of everyone else.

[-] Maoo@hexbear.net 53 points 1 week ago

The only upside to another American civil war is that its capacity for imperialism would be decimated. The entire capitalist world order would fall apart.

[-] WayeeCool@hexbear.net 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The real downside for the rest of the world is without a doubt a second US civil war will result in minimum a few hundred nuclear weapons being detonated. Civil wars are one of the most brutal and nasty forms of warfare where some of the worst crimes against humanity regularly are played out.

Due to the nature of the US nuclear triad all sides of a second US civil war will end up with hundreds of nuclear warheads. Washington state has the US Navy nuclear weapons for the Pacific and Virginia state has the nuclear weapons for the Atlantic. States in the middle of the nation like Montana and the Dakotas have the ICBM nuclear weapons. California and Nebraska have large numbers of US Air Force nuclear weapons with the rest of the Air Force nuclear weapons being kept at dozens of US Air Force bases around the globe. All of the officially inactive but still functional nuclear warheads, numbering in the thousands, are stored in underground vaults at the PanTex facility in Texas.

[-] KoboldKomrade@hexbear.net 21 points 1 week ago

I was going to say that there could be some theoretical match up that would be unlikely to use nukes... But the only reasonable ones are:

  1. A right wing uprising, in which the CHUDs would nuke the big (where the liberals are to own them) cities as soon as they had the chance.
  2. A left wing uprising, in which the feds would nuke any communist either as soon as they looked like they were losing, or immediately to snub it.
[-] WayeeCool@hexbear.net 18 points 1 week ago

And being a civil war where the other side has access nuclear weapons, it will result in nuclear retaliation. When a crime on the scale of nuclear weapon deployment is committed, it has to be responded to with nuclear retaliation against the parties responsible. It's the problem with weapons like nuclear warheads that can wipe entire cities off the map in an instance, in that instance a million plus innocent people die and create ten million plus grief filled loved ones demanding swift revenge.

So if the CHUDs nuke the liberal cities, it will result in a nuclear carpet bombing of key rural areas and most of the southern United States. If it is the feds using nukes to put down some kind of successful left-wing uprising, it will result in at minimum Washington DC, Maryland, Virginia, and the Carolinas being wiped off the map in retaliation with a hundred or so nuclear weapons.

load more comments (19 replies)
[-] roux@hexbear.net 20 points 1 week ago

This is a great point. Regardless of the outcome, a great deal if the global south would more than likely become a power vacuum and the "new" United States wouldn't have nearly the leverage it did before.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] AnarchoAnarchist@hexbear.net 13 points 1 week ago

As horrific is the first American Civil War was, the US was flexing its imperial muscle 20 years after hostilities ended.

A Civil war would only militarize American society, it might weaken the Empire in the short term but very soon the rest of the world would feel the consequences of an American society that had been re-oriented for war instead of treats.

[-] Maoo@hexbear.net 18 points 1 week ago

The US recovered due to the war being short and there being a full Northern victory for reunification, with the north increasing its industrial capacity in the process. Industrial capacity was leveraged to create systems of unequal exchange in America's new colonies, particularly the Philippines and much of Latin America.

We live under neoliberal capitalism where industrial capacity is already developed in other countries and they wouldn't just wait for the US to reunite, if it ever did. They would construct their own systems at the expense of the US order. The empire would be headless and the entire rest of the planet would act accordingly. Sure, the former US would still make weapons, weapons to kill each other with while they blow through stockpiles and can no longer afford imported materials. But the US isn't going to reindustrialize in five years, it has already lost industrial advantage, it only has financial and military power that would be thrown into internal chaos.

The rest of the world would reel from the collapse of the US, trying to find footing with the loss of the current order. Financial systems, food systems, energy would all change overnight. They'd build their own alternatives out of necessity and that means building alternate power structures. Everything would get worse (for years) but the balance would change.

[-] HamManBad@hexbear.net 25 points 1 week ago

A revolution is also a civil war, for what it's worth

[-] robotElder2@hexbear.net 46 points 1 week ago

Putting aside the stupid premise and the toddler level political understanding on display, what fucking genius decided to draw this map in all slightly different shades of green?

[-] Poison_Ivy@hexbear.net 41 points 1 week ago

I hate maps of rebellion in the USA that conforms to state lines

Real rebellions dont respect borders ffs

[-] zed_proclaimer@hexbear.net 27 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

For reference from an actual civil war, here's a map of Syria's administrative provinces:

Here's the map of controlled territory by factions in 2016, during the height of the civil war:

You can see that state lines make little difference. It's more relevant where the oil fields are, the geographical features (rivers, deserts, mountains, etc) & where the population centers are.

[-] Dolores@hexbear.net 14 points 1 week ago

every US state nominally has an army answerable to its state government. it's a bit silly to believe these would be 1:1 in an actual civil war, but there's reason to believe in a higher retention of regional blocs over a free-for-all.

[-] zed_proclaimer@hexbear.net 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This is true, and to be fair, the Syrian "civil war" wasn't really a civil war. Insurgents flooded in from Iraq, Jordan and Turkey en masse which is why the ISIS/Rebel (same thing really) strongholds and territories are along these borders. Foreign governments like US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Turkey all poured billions into various terrorist factions, and shipped in heavy weaponry. Russia, Iran, Hezbollah all got involved on the side of Assad.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] edge@hexbear.net 40 points 1 week ago

Just the dumbest baby-brain idea of a modern civil war. The South is one block, except Texas, SC, and NC for some reason? Why is is called big Florida? California and Texas working together is so bad that I hope it was intentional just to get people talking about the shitty movie. The Maoist insurgency is the PNW and Minnesota, plus a bunch of solidly conservative states? Good old Maoist Mormons.

[-] ZWQbpkzl@hexbear.net 37 points 1 week ago
  • South Carolina: loyalist
  • Utah: communist
  • Texas allied with California.

Big Florida is the only thing that makes sense here.

[-] LeylaLove@hexbear.net 31 points 1 week ago

Utah would 100 percent become its own nation. It's kind of a huge part of Mormon folklore/prophecy, that's literally what Mormons mean by Zionism.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Des@hexbear.net 37 points 1 week ago

let me guess. the new people's army will be some puppet state of evil china or something not a homegrown communist insurgency

[-] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net 39 points 1 week ago

Well yeah, I would totally expect any organic insurgency formed by Western leftists to immediately bog down into some pointless infighting about outdoor cats or bed times until whipped into shape by Chinese/Cuban/DPRK instructors and advisors.

[-] EatPotatoes@hexbear.net 37 points 1 week ago

This only makes me appreciate to implicit world building of the first Mad Max movie even more.

[-] Rx_Hawk@hexbear.net 36 points 1 week ago

Get them off my team

[-] BlueMagaChud@hexbear.net 35 points 1 week ago

This makes no sense, pac nor west is full of nazis and cali and texas would never work together

[-] Frank@hexbear.net 33 points 1 week ago

CA and TX don't even share the same watershed, and hydraulic despotism is the only kind of despotism I can see them agreeing with.

[-] Greenleaf@hexbear.net 28 points 1 week ago

On a very abstract level, I like the idea of a US breakup map that doesn’t just basically come down to a Dem/Rep split or rely heavily on broad stereotypes of people from different states (i.e. treating the South as if only white people exist because that’s how the voting shakes out because voter suppression, gerrymandering, etc). People don’t believe me because “Mormons” and “Sin City”, but in a collapse situation Nevada and Utah would absolutely be together because those states are tied tight economically and with the numbers of transplants in each state from the other. So I like the idea of aligning regions of the US on more material issues.

BUT that isn’t even what this dogshit map is doing, the writers just think they’re being edgy and clever by putting CA and TX together because reasons.

[-] AlicePraxis@hexbear.net 35 points 1 week ago

I liked Ex Machina and Annihilation but damn this man is dumb lmao.

[-] Optimus_Subprime@hexbear.net 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yeah, thankfully Alex Garland said he is retiring from directing movies to focus on screenwriting. https://screenrant.com/civil-war-last-movie-alex-garland-director-retire-confirm/

I watched Dredd and, damn, did he not get that it's supposed to be a satire of the American justice system and Dirty Harry-style cops in particular. He made Dredd look good when he's supposed to be the most nightmarish thing you can think of. He basically remade Robocop.

[-] AlicePraxis@hexbear.net 20 points 1 week ago

I tried to rewatch Dredd a couple years ago and I turned it off because it was so explicitly fascist. It just felt like a conservative nightmare fantasy where crime is so bad that of course we should let cops kill whoever they want. You're supposed to 100% buy this logic and root for Judge Dredd and the other white woman cop who spends most of the movie holding a black man captive. Like you said there was no satire, they pulled a reverse-Starship Troopers.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Optimus_Subprime@hexbear.net 34 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This map is ... interesting. The backstory behind it could screw with my suspension of disbelief.

The US NW is full of nazis and chuds - Idaho and Montana, especially (Montana militia men still exist. Idaho used to house the hq of the aryan nations). And while some might think Utah would join them, Utah would use a civil war to formally declare Deseret and annex Northern AZ and Nevada. So no way would there be a "New People's Army" in the Northwest, unless that name refers to the chuds themselves.

People forget about parts of CA, mostly eastern CA. Bakersfield and Sacramento is filled with chuds who pitch a fit when people talk about CA - that is, Bakersfield and Sacramento =/= SF and LA. The libs of the Napa Valley would want their own country so it could be wine mom mecca. And then we get to So Cal. People don't know this but the worst governor CA ever had (besides Reagan), that I've had the displeasure of growing up under, and trying to do his shittiest impression of Reagan, came from San Diego. Worked well enough for SD to elect him as Mayor 3 times. He was Gov. of CA twice.

Pete Wilson. Fucker.

TX might have a lot in common with eastern CA, but a "better" civil war map would also have SF and LA form their own state along the coast, giving it most of the economic power. Forgive for me for saying for this cursed name: "San Angeles". cringe

Also, Houston might break away from TX and form its own state. And TX would pull a Deseret and re-establish the Republic of Texas, saying "fuck CA".

Anyway, just a lot "wrong" with that fictional map.

[-] Des@hexbear.net 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

i did a dive and watched whatever trailers exist and read some articles.

supposedly the "loyalist" states are loyal to the federal government, which has suspended elections and basically become a presidential dictatorship which catalyzed the civil war. it kicked off when the federal government slaughtered some "antifa" movement so im guessing a mass execution of protestors. the Florida alliance are basically states that opted out and seceded but are fighting defensively only.

the texas-cali alliance is one of convenience as they are actively engaging the federal government to topple it and restore the "republic" (makes sense as those two states would likely be military powerhouses) and when the movie starts they are making rapid gains

know nothing about the NW insurgency. maybe robert evans is leading an army of anarcho-bidenist polycules

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Llituro@hexbear.net 34 points 1 week ago

my-hero graphic design is my passion

[-] bbnh69420@hexbear.net 26 points 1 week ago

Wow should have consulted people with 10k hours in paradox games to make it good

[-] Alaskaball@hexbear.net 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I honestly think those losers have a better idea of how the cookie would crumble more than this dork.

Like even the nerds that made the hoi4 fallout mod seem to have a better grasp of how shit the u.s would be.

[-] aaaaaaadjsf@hexbear.net 25 points 1 week ago

All it would take is an alliance between California and the loyalist states, and the war would be over incredibly quickly.

What a useless graphic.

[-] kristina@hexbear.net 25 points 1 week ago

protracted peoples war from the farming countryside tho costanza-maoist

[-] TeddyKila@hexbear.net 16 points 1 week ago

hey hoi4 reddit, rate my encirclement

[-] Fishroot@hexbear.net 24 points 1 week ago
[-] FlakesBongler@hexbear.net 23 points 1 week ago

The early reviews I read say that the movie is far less about the United States having a civil war and more about what it means to be a journalist during wartime

So it's likely to make the chuds mad it's not about the libs and its likely to make the libs mad that it's not about the chuds

[-] Frank@hexbear.net 29 points 1 week ago

Hmm. I could see that being I guess better than using another country as the setting for misery porn about how sad white professionals are.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JustSo@hexbear.net 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

northwest has a Maoist Insurgency

Don't let your dreams be memes

Edit: Meanwhile, in reality.

The Northwest Territorial Imperative (often shortened to the Northwest Imperative) was a white separatist idea put forward in the 1970s–80s by white nationalist, white supremacist, white separatist and neo-Nazi groups within the United States.

[-] JamesConeZone@hexbear.net 16 points 1 week ago

Finally, Tennessee and North Carolina can return to warring with each other in the heights of the Smokey Mountains

[-] Chapo_is_Red@hexbear.net 14 points 1 week ago

The Northwest on this map aren't the insurgents. We hold state power there and can organize conventional military formations.

The commie insurgents are everywhere else meow-knife-trans

[-] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 14 points 1 week ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JealousCactus@hexbear.net 14 points 1 week ago
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2024
112 points (100.0% liked)


22548 readers
312 users here now

Rules for Movies & TV Discussion

  1. Any discussion of Disney properties should contain a (cw: imperialism) tag. If your post isn't tagged appropriately it will be removed.

  2. Anti-Bong Joon-ho trolling will result in an immediate ban from c/movies and submitted to the site administrators for review.

  3. On Star Trek Sunday only posts discussing how we might achieve space communism are permitted. Non-Star Trek related content will be removed and you will be temporarily banned until the following Sunday.

Here's a list of tons of leftist movies.


Perverts Guide to Ideology

founded 3 years ago