Just because the Republicans, moderate Americans and US military forces were ready and willing to put a stop to such things, doesn’t mean that in a more chaotic part of the world such peeps wouldn’t have tried it.

What is different is not the people. What is different is how afraid the people are of rocking the boat or how desperate they truly are.

People out in the third world are pretty desperate and with nowhere to turn. That doesn’t make them any different, fundamentally, than the Democrats except for the fact that the Democrats are spoiled and knows how to work the system to corrupt the system.

Also historically, people and governments have a higher chance of creating rampages if they think the military boot won’t crash on them for it.

We in America go all-out with the wildest (and often vicious) of commentaries, and then, when the election is over, we go on about our daily lives, having done our best.

The idea that the Democrats simply accepted defeat and went about their daily lives, is false. They were working on how to upset the status quo and steal back their power. Just cause the situation forced them to use quasi legal means instead of military juntas and coups does not say much good about them. It only bolsters the good and health of American institutions.

They feared, with our “outrageously armed citizenry and massive number of guns” that they would be constantly fearful.

These people have been indoctrinated from child birth to think of guns as the weapons. Nobody needs a gun or a knife to kill. I can kill a person just by applying a moderate amount of force to wind pipe and eye. What protects people isn’t the absence of weapons, it is the absence of intent to do harm.

It is something people in Britain, with their bans against guns, have never really been forced to think about lest it challenge orthodoxy.

I’d like to read that article, Mike, since it sounds interesting.

Y, despite all the widespread hollering about Bush stealing the 2000 Election, how many Democrats began mob rampages, attacks, slaughters, etc? It’s true we had the Weather Underground and SDS that were violent in the late 60s and early 70s, and we had abortion clinic bombers more recently. But in general, our level of political violence is incredibly low.

There was a recent story about tourists from Great Britain touring our cities, especially at night. They feared, with our “outrageously armed citizenry and massive number of guns” that they would be constantly fearful. Instead they reported to their own newspapers how amazingly safe they felt, and how free and at ease Americans seemed, especially when compared to the constant, endemic threat of violence they felt looming over themselves within British cities!

I had another European relative observe news footage of a KKK demonstration (here in the U.S.) and proudly tell me that such would never have been allowed in her country. I pointed out that, in our system, we could know exactly who and where these people were and what they believe and it was also made plain for the world to see what idiots they were. She granted that that was something to consider in that comment.

Expat is right. We are much better at managing chaos.

This isn’t true for many Democrats and their Leftist allies. Then again, it wasn’t true for Democrats in 1861 after Lincoln was elected, either. So it is not as if American virtues got “worse”.

Expat, you are so exactly right! What especially amazes me is that our political discourse must appear to most others to be complete chaos. Most other countries elect leaders via smoke-filled rooms. Those that attempt what we do end up in pitched bloody battles in the streets. We in America go all-out with the wildest (and often vicious) of commentaries, and then, when the election is over, we go on about our daily lives, having done our best.

It’s easy to keep forgetting, in the midst of all the negativity, that often we really are amazing.

Years ago, when I first moved to this area, I was at a party and was asked by a new aquaintance about the differences between America and Germany. The setting was not conducive to a philosophical discussion, so I tossed out, “Americans are better at dealing with chaos.” That may be the most insightful comment of my life.

It just happens to be that America isn’t run on a majority rules platform, where the nuts can form a coalition that has 51% of the vote. 20% of any population are essentially insane in more than one fashion. in addition to acquiring some traitorous behavior. If you combine that 20% with the 30% of your regular socialist and communist ideologies, what you have is pretty close to 51%, which only needs some vote fraud to pump up.

The 13 Colonies wanted to ensure that everybody was represented. And the Civil War and WW1-2 ensured that everybody really was represented.

Europe’s political history wasn’t about ensuring that everyone got represented, Europe’s political history always revolved around certain family dynasties like the Hapsburgs or Prussian Junkers for good or ill.

Their culture does not have a preference for liberty just as the Islamic culture does not have a preference for initiative and personal responsibility.