Given this scenario:

1) TSHTF. Martial-law is declared and *really* pisses-off a lot of people, but most people stay quiet to avoid "the consequences". A lot of "redistribution of wealth" takes place.

2) Things sort-of recover.

3) What next. Are people expected to "forgive & forget" the Government actions? Of course, people will be divided. People who would otherwise die say the Government did really good. People who got "screwed" feel otherwise (quite strongly).

Would any historians care to predict #3?

-- Anonymous99 (Anonymous99@Anonymous.com), January 29, 1999

Answers

You may find the thread called "TBOTWASBI" (The Beginning of the world as we build it) interesting. It is in the Misc. archive. The url is:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000Phr

-- Rob Michaels (sonofdust@net.com), January 29, 1999.

In Rome, sometime around the 200s BC, Hannibal attacked. There were two major wars called the Punic Wars. Rome won them.

Thanks to the senate, Rome won them. This senatorial victory quashed any moves towards true democracy -because the oligarchy had saved Rome's ass- and would lead to the end of the oligarchy and the beginning of a dictatorship, just over a hundred years later.

y2k could be the Punic War that ends the Republic.

--Leo

-- Leo (lchampion@ozemail.com.au), January 29, 1999.

Politicians believe that we all have short memories so they are banking on us to forgive and forget. Aren't we doing this with Clinton? Stock market is up, people are employed, economy is humming along, what's there to gripe about? Maybe we don't really know what the "agenda" is, aren't we always the last one's to know what's going on, and if it's even the truth at that!

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), January 29, 1999.

Seems to me the country's already pretty well divided, ideologically. Congress isn't exactly a light in the darkness, but I do think it's fairly representative. And it is divided. These people were all elected from their home districts.

Not too much pushing and shoving now, of course, since almost everybody's fairly comfortable. Take away the comforts and things may heat up here.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), January 30, 1999.

Historically, it is not the imposition of dictatorial measures, but rather the easing of dictatorial measures, which tends to be the most destabilizing, both politically and socially. I'm sure that the current batch of political figures know this - good grief I got that more than a quarter of a century ago in my undergraduate poli sci work...

s-o-o-o there's a distinct possibility that #3 could be quite nonlinear...

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), January 30, 1999.

I'm not too worried about #3. #1 and #2 will probably be enough to keep us all busy for quite a while. In fact, they could take years to finish.

-- Noah Simoneaux (noaj@yournet.com), January 30, 1999.

For one thing, earnings multiples on the stock market would fall to ridiculously low levels and then they would be loathe to rise above a rational level. It's very debateable what a rational level would be, but the most cogent analysis I've read is by Benjamin Graham. His work is available in good libraries and bookstores.

-- Puddintame (dit@dot.com), January 30, 1999.