People keep talking about “Federalizing the National Guard” and now you’ve got other States pledging their NG to Texas in defiance of the Supreme Court (see image).

So is this what CW2 looks like?

P.S. I’m a Brit

  • linearchaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    9 months ago

    At current, this is all posturing. If Biden does engage the military to stop them. Perhaps lock up the governors for treason, maybe it could escalate somewhat. If something did happen that was in the line of being more serious, it wouldn’t be a long incursion as long as the military obeyed the commander in chief. The national guard is absolutely no match for even a small slice of the might of the US military.

    If something does happen, hopefully they’ll shut it down quickly and bloodlessly, maybe finally gather enough strength to enable some Germany type of anti-fascism laws.

    We need to fix gerrymandering, we need to fix people screwing with elections. We need to put some strong protections against the propaganda and opinion pieces flowing out of all the news outlets. We need to force free non-political basic education to the entire f****** country so people can make some informed decisions about s***.

    I’m tired of everybody looking at politics like it’s a f****** football game.

    • jabjoe@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      And if Trump gets in again? All the people not crazy going to along with him, or will he be to deploying the army? At what point does the apparatus of state start to split as people within it don’t all go with crazy orders?

      If I was Putin, or CCP, helping the crazies is the best money spent.

    • arin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      What are the chances of China attacking us during the civil war? Or taking Taiwan (we NEED Taiwan for our silicon production)

      • thereisalamp@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Us, never. Just like with China you can’t win a land war over here, and a home attack has a greater risk of uniting is against a common enemy.

        Taiwan possibly. Though I don’t think so. Taiwan is much more useful as a political chess piece that China can beat their chests about. They can invoke the island and be offended about support for it whenever they need leverage right now.

        Not to mention it isn’t just the US alone that needs Taiwan and movement there risks a global response.

        • arin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          IDK if any other foreign entity actually supports Taiwan other than US

          • thereisalamp@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Define support.

            They’re not devoid of allies beyond the US and in general have vocal support of most of the western world.

            But only 13 countries recognize them as a country, but not even the US is on that list of 13. Interestingly however, the Vatican does recognize them.

            Which is why, they’re remain a nice political chess price for China.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      We need to put some strong protections against the propaganda and opinion pieces flowing out of all the news outlets.

      Something tells me this one is a non-starter, as any new laws will slam up against the Constitution, over and over again.

      Having said that, I would love to at least seen a real-time label, in a large font size, on any monitor/tv that specifies that what’s being shown is an opinion piece, and not a factual article/show.

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        If we go into a civil war, the Constitution’s going to slam up against a lot of changes.

        GOP is ignoring the shit out of the Constitution already why should it protect them? They already tried to dismantle the executive branch and turn the presidency into a dictatorship. Now they’re going after the judicial branch. Nah, they’re going to game the Constitution until the US is forced to change it. It’s either going to happen slowly over time, or quickly after a pretty substantial bloodbath.

        We can’t just sit here and go oh look It’s Hitler incarnate, but you know first amendment, oh damn, they ignored some laws and found some loopholes I guess we had just better conform to oppression by the minority. We better all get some swastikas.

        This country isn’t going to go quietly into dictatorship for fear of failing to make everyone happy. The Democrats are weak because they try to follow the rules, They try to give breaks to the people that f*** them over because they don’t want to hurt the other people, but like everything else there’s a line. When Americans are shooting each other over propaganda, The propaganda’s going to have to f****** go.

      • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Something tells me this one is a non-starter, as any new laws will slam up against the Constitution, over and over again.

        The first amendment states that congress shall not abridge freedom of the press. In reality it needs to be strengthened because speech and press isn’t free anymore, it’s overwhelmingly controlled by interest with huge amounts of economic power. The reason for freedom fo speech and press is that dissenting ideas and thoughts are heard in order to have accountability. Which the current interpretation is doing the opposite of.

        For example you could pass laws that any journalist has the right to voice his own opinion and not be fired or discriminated against by his employer (as long as he doesn’t discriminate himself or uses hate speech). That would not abridge the freedom of the press. Basically give the journalists more freedom from their owners.

        Or you could make a law that forces owners to sell their media empires into trusts that are democratically controlled by the journalists / workers, and finance it through a bank. This would not abridge the freedom of the press (which is not the same as the owner).

        Of course this is unthinkable and the current supreme court would never allow it. But we shouldn’t accept the degenerate view that freedom of the press is the same as turning speech and news into a commodity that is owned by the elite. And especially in a plutocracy that basically is state owned media.

        You could appoint a 100 young people as new supreme court judges and then pass these modern laws and election reform also limiting the future excesses of the supreme court. There isn’t really anything stopping the Democrats from doing that.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I said this in another thread-

    Most Americans aren’t interested or even capable of fighting in a civil war. When you live paycheck-to-paycheck, you’re not going to abandon your family to fight on the front lines.

    And a huge percentage of Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck.

    Texas would have to have a draft.

    Good luck with that.

    • nexguy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      Not to mention states themselves are never more than 60%/40% leaning either way. It’s not like the more homogeneous populations of the 1800s.

      • 52fighters@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        Bingo. If Texas tried to leave, a HUGE chunk of the population would revolt against the State of Texas. Many more would just leave. Very little good would remain.

    • nifty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      The tech bros in Austin are not going to the front lines. Front line at airport, maybe.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      You’re wrong though. The general public is more likely to engage in civil unrest when they’re struggling. The reality though is that while many Americans might be living paycheck to paycheck, they’re not poor and not struggling. They are just bad at managing their finances and they have a lot to lose.

      If you have more to lose than to gain, you won’t participate in a civil war. But when you’re a slave working in a cotton field, you have nothing to lose, only something to gain.

      The idea that your average American is so poor is just laughable.

      • tastysnacks@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        I’m just imagining the sales of golf carts or those scooters going through the roof because Americans cant run a couple of miles during a civil war.

      • Sweetpeaches69@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Bad at managing their finances

        Either you’re being purposefully deceitful, or you have a horrible understanding of macroeconomics. But please, let’s just continue to ignore the elephants named record-inflation, rent records and housing crisis in the room.

      • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        There is a term for this called the “Valley of revolt” basically a people need enough empowerment to revolt but not enough to feel heard.

        Also it’s not necessarily just “bad with finances” it’s that our expected standard of living doesn’t match our actual standard of living. Rising cost and stagnant wages and all that.

      • iquanyin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        over half a million live on the streets. flat out homeless. and then, the working poor, which you are if you live paycheck to paycheck. also, if you can’t live unless you work, you’re the working class.

  • vamp07@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    9 months ago

    My take on it is that the Republicans will do their best to drag this out until the election. No compromising or middle ground. Just make it out to be the crazy Democrats fault. This stuff gets to be very predictable after all these years.

    • halva@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      9 months ago

      the weird part is the predominantly conservative federal court sided with the presidential administration

      • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        9 months ago

        I’d say that’s primarily because the conservative arguments have gotten so crazy/illegal that it’d be hard for almost any judge to agree with it. They ruled against Moore v. Harper and almost everything Trump tried to do with the election for example.

  • rusticus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    No this is all Republican division. It’s their only playbook to rally their base. The take home message for everyone is VOTE, VOTE, VOTE. Before the election started up we had a nice quiet 2-1/2 years. This kind of shit only appeals to those that love the chaos that Trump will bring back.

    • CashewNut 🏴󠁢󠁥󠁧󠁿@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s very tiresome. This also feels a lot more agro than interrogating a president about getting a BJ.

      Why are your lunatics so energetic, crazy and numerous? They seem to be getting worse. Some BJ obsessions in the 90s. Then tea parties in the 00s. Now it’s full-blown inssurection with Texas wanting to secede.

      Now that all the crazies have joined their “god army” and trundled down to the border would it be a good time to nuke them? Just wipe out all the lunatics in one go. Problem solved.

      • rusticus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        9 months ago

        Why are your lunatics so energetic, crazy and numerous?

        Simple, Russian and Chinese bots on social media designed to foment division, anger, and the destruction of western democracy. It’s the exact same thing that led to Brexit and the election of Trump. And it will get worse until we get a handle on blocking bad actors on social media.

    • Marcbmann@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s not Republican division. A lot of Americans are disgusted with the open border and the gross inaction of our government.

    • jhulten@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      At the same time, if we can get the 14th figured out the “pledging troops in opposition to the federal government” seems like the things insurrectionists do.

    • hglman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Its a meaningful and new escalation. This dismissive attitude is exactly why there will be a war. These governors should be removed and charged with sedition.

  • AlphaNature@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    It all seems quite a bit overblown to me. There’s legal precedent for the President to take over a state’s national guard and use federal troops to enforce a court order (see Brown v Board of Education):

    “In September 1957, Arkansas governor Orval Faubus called out the Arkansas Army National Guard to block the entry of nine black students, later known as the “Little Rock Nine”, after the desegregation of Little Rock Central High School. President Dwight D. Eisenhower responded by asserting federal control over the Arkansas National Guard and deploying troops from the U.S. Army’s 101st Airborne Division stationed at Fort Campbell to ensure the black students could safely register for and attend classes. […]” (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education)

    The current wording of the Insurrection Act provision (which has been amended a few times since initial adoption), according to Wikipedia:

    "Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion."
    

    Just my $.02 but I’d guess either the feds back down or Texas does. Hopefully nobody gets trigger happy.

    • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      The reference to Little Rock Nine suddenly made me realize that Forest Gump was 38 at the time of Forest Gump.

      I’m 38 now. As tired as I am of Hollywood reimagining films from the nineties, I would appreciate a Forest Gump born in the 80s. The whole concept could really be repeated every 30 years or so.

      • yumpsuit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        9 months ago

        Brother, your idea is commendable, but the weave of history will be incinerated if you give all of that malign power to the Bubba Gump Shrimp Company.

    • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      The aftermath of racial desegregation court victories are some of the most interesting things in recent US history. A law would be struck down and sort of left like that… and people would take it upon themselves to organize and challenge the new law, often in the face of violent opposition. Freedom Riders taking busses down to the south to challenge desegregation of public transit being met with mobs and put in jail.

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          enslaved person being emancipated in 1942 Beeville, Texas

          From the Wiki article…

          In September 1942, Alfred Irving, who is believed to be one of the final chattel slaves in the United States, was freed at a farm near Beeville. Alex L. Skrobarcek and his daughter, Susie, were indicted by a federal grand jury in Laredo, Texas on November 9, 1942.[11][12][13][14] The pair were found guilty in Federal court in Corpus Christi, Texas on Thursday, March 18th, 1943. Alex L. Skrobarcek was sentenced to only four years in prison, while his daughter, Susie Skrobarcek, received two years. [15]

          • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Bruh, 4 years for doing Chattel Slavery in 1942??? I didn’t even know that part. That’s so crazy yet somehow not super surprising 💀

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    I don’t see how the national guard isn’t already federal, it’s the national guard, not the state guard. They get called up just like regular military for wars.

    Cut off their money, court martial them, dishonorable discharge, take away their guns and vehicles. These belong to the military, not Texas.

    • dukk@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      9 months ago

      National Guard listens to the state by default, as each state has its own National Guard. However, the federal government can intervene at any time and give them new orders.

      I guess they’re just choosing not to do anything? IDK.

    • _skj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      The national guard is part of the military, so funded and supported by the feds. Unlike normal army units though, each state or territory has its own national guard unit under the command of the governor. The intention is to give each state the power to quickly respond to emergency situations without needing federal approval. They’re the successors to the old state militias, but have much stronger federal ties now.

      • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Unlike normal army units though, each state or territory has its own national guard unit under the command of the governor.

        What’s the chain of command?

        Does it stop at the Governor, or does it go from the Governor to the President?

        Do they swear an allegiance to the state Constitution, or to the Federal Constitution?

        • splicerslicer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          They swear allegiance to the federal constitution, the governor, and the president. With the president being CIC and having power over the governor and the constitution having power overall. So in theory, the governor cannot give you orders that defy the president, and not even the president can give force you to comply with an unlawful order. It would take some serious stones to defy orders though

    • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      That same separation is what prevented Trump from sending in the national guard to Detroit and Oregon just because he disagreed with the protests there.

      The intent to give the peoples of the state further say in the use of force in the state.

  • LordCirais@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I get that this isn’t the point, but this is one of the least-cropped screenshots I’ve ever seen.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Can we just have a normal, boring year for once, please? I’m so tired…

      I’m right there with you.

      But at least you can think of this to console you: You’re not actually fighting in a world/civil war, down in some troops trench somewhere, reading this (at least that’s my hope for you).

      Other generations have had to go through major wars, but so far we’ve been dodging that bullet, for the most part.

      Things could be a lot worse.

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Better yet, can we have a government that doesn’t pretend things are fine and actually doe something about the fucking fascists?

  • Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    “Fuck yeah, secession!” Says the Texan from the comfort of their lounge chair, beer in hand.

    These people are too comfortable to ever be willing to die for their stupid ideals. All it took was one MAGA idiot to get blasted on Jan 6th and then they all scattered like roaches. As soon as their lives were on the line, it was no longer a matter of grave importance. They all firmly believed that democracy was at stake, but were unwilling to fight for it to the death because they somehow must have known that it was bullshit, somewhere in the back of their pea-sized brains, they knew.

    By the time Texas starts asking people to show up to mustering fields, rifle in hand, the facade will fall apart. Biden doesn’t need to do anything. This sideshow of bluster and saber-rattling will fall apart on it’s own.

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Also, millions of people living in Texas are not originally from Texas and have no particular allegiance to Texas.

      • halfeatenpotato@lonestarlemmy.mooo.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Also, as a native Texan that still lives here because it’s not feasible to leave, I feel no particular allegiance to Texas. This government doesn’t represent anything I stand for – it’s infuriating. Fuck Texas, and fuck proud Texans.

      • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        And the economic powerhouses of the state (Dallas, Houston, Austin) all lean democratic. This will just make skilled, educated people leave the state and accelerate the brain drain that’s been happening since the 40s.

    • Alpha71@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      You’re thinking first civil war. This civil war is going to be about bombing and terror. And it will be MAGA idiots bombing govt facilities. But they’ll start first with places like gay bars and libraries.

      THEN the federal govt will get involved and it will devolve into a shit show from there.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        The federal government is already involved. The FBI has been a thing for decades. Are we really going to compare the pathetic levels we have now to the 1950s with the KKK?

        Here is the truth to any wannabe terrorist: none of you have gotten smarter but the federal government has. You are one guy, the government is a whole mess of guys spending decades studying ways to stop you. No company has any incentive to help you and has a big incentive to report you. Everyone is tracked now, every transaction recorded, every internet post, heck our very movements.

        Random acts are going to happen and it is awful but any kinda coordinated resistance will fail.

        Plus you know we are all fat now. Successful resistance movements are led by poor people who can live off the land. That Bundy Ranch ordering takeout thing really illustrated it well. Who do you know in your life that is capable of living in the woods as a revolutionary? Do you really see someone like Hannity or Ted Cruz sitting in a cave somewhere to lead his forces?

  • LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Highly unlikely this is what the civil war would be like. It’s not a state v state thing necessarily although that might be a small part of it. In the first civil war, the south unified and its people largely supported the war, except their slaves. It’s unlikely something like that will happen again. It’s not impossible but unlikely.

    What is much more likely is rural v city. Even in red states, cities are blue and will often vote for blue policies. Rural areas are where things get dicey. They’ve been largely left behind by the surge in industry and general expansion of the capitalist economy we currently have (they’ve had a lot of businesses (including grocery stores) close because more people are leaving, and their rural towns are frequently having their hospitals close leaving large swaths of areas where the nearest hospital is an hour away). As such, they’ve got a grudge against the cities. What’s likely to happen is rural counties and their local governments trying to cut off their food supply, starving the cities to win the battle. There’s tons more possibilities, but this one I think is the one that’s got the highest likelihood.

    Another possibility that is scary, but is highly dependent on the party of the people in power, is the government using their power to actually strike the cities, like in Syria where Assad bombed and used chemical weapons on his own people. Syria is actually a pretty good example of what more modern civil wars are like, or can be like. Governments v rebels and militias, and cities v rural (although there’s much less rural land in Syria).

    If you’re interested, the podcast It Could Happen Here has a great first season where they go over possible disasters including a civil war and a pandemic (it was actually made in 2019 so before covid). It’s really helpful and can teach a lot, especially for an outsider from across the pond. It also does a lot better job giving an explanation and actual sources.

    Hope this helps since it didn’t seem like you were getting a real answer.

    • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      The geographical separation of slave states by an actual border allowed the first Civil War to take place on a stage perfectly suited for traditional warfare. North/South division and the formal joining of the Confederacy by state governments kept it all straightforward. Point South and tell the generals “Go.”

      It definitely won’t be that simple again.

    • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Another thing the world ought to know is that the folks who are identified by “red” and “right” in America are in the minority.

      Significantly so.

      However our voting system uses geography / land as a modifier so while there are less of them they occupy a larger land mass and have an outsized vote strength because of that.

      When total votes in a state can be split 45-55 but the delegates go 90-10 there is a problem

      • skulblaka@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Another fun thing about that is that most folks who identify “red” or “right” actually aren’t paying enough attention to know that. Go ask them, they think people like them make up 70% or more of the country. If they do try to activate their little civil war they are going to find themselves very quickly surrounded by folks who do not like them at all, as their expected 200-million strong army ends up actually only being 1.5 million people spread out over 30,000+ square miles. Watching the realization dawn on them might actually even be fun if it weren’t a herald of Troubles for America.

      • BaldProphet@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Another thing the world ought to know is that the folks who are identified by “red” and “right” in America are in the minority.

        Significantly so.

        This isn’t accurate. In 2020, 29% of voters identified as Republican, 33% as Democrat, and 34% as independent. There certainly were more Democrats, but only by a 5% margin.

        Playing up exaggerated differences between the number of Democrats and Republicans and emphasizing the “we outnumber you” rhetoric is extremist and should be avoided. It makes you a part of the problem.

    • drcobaltjedi@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I had to stop listening to ICHH it gave me way too much anxiety and was just too stressed back when i listened in 2020. I’ve since taken up to instead listen to BTB and cool people who did cool stuff off the same network. Monsters that are usually dead and people who kick ass make me feel better.

      • BaldProphet@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        This is oversimplifying the problem. Democrats from urban areas have failed for decades to adequately address the needs and concerns of rural voters. When one party ignores you (and often speaks of you with open contempt), it’s a no-brainer that you would be inclined to vote for the party that caters to your concerns. The Democrats handed rural voters to Trump on a golden platter.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Could they not at least bunch up a bit so it’s easier to build a wall around them?