4 ms·

If you haven't been paying attention to American politics, there are currently widespread protests due to a woman being shot by ICE last week. It looks like the

by nsvd2 8mo ago

If you haven't been paying attention to American politics, there are currently widespread protests due to a woman being shot by ICE last week. It looks like the current administration may be seeking violent unrest in the hopes of delaying elections.

derektank 8mo ago
There were large protests in the wake of a law enforcement officer killing someone in 2020 too. Notably, there was not a civil war, even though the Trump administration used the protests as cover for bad behavior then too
- PurpleRamen 8mo ago
  2020 was a single accidental case as the result of a poor system. Many people even from within the system on all levels agreed something went wrong and apologized. Today's situation is different, as the whole system is weaponized on purpose from one specific layer/group against the other layers/groups of the system. It's an internal conflict within the system itself, and a prime-example for justifying a civil war. And at the time Trump was still on the leash of his own adminstration.
JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
> looks like the current administration may be seeking violent unrest in the hopes of delaying elections Civil war requires two militaries. Tiananmen Square wasn’t a civil war.
- lukan 8mo ago
  I believe there are plenty of weapons around in the US in general and the police and military is also not 100% behind Trump and MAGA.
- 0xEF 8mo ago
  Not wrong, but don't forget there are many militias with itchy trigger fingers all over the political spectrum here, though admittedly some parties have more affiliated with them than others. It's not a stretch to assume should fighting in the streets escalate beyond ICE shenanigans that larger armies would not quickly congeal from the pocket groups and individuals.
  - JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
    > there are many militias with itchy trigger fingers all over the political spectrum here That’s still not a civil war in the conventional sense. If it gets entrenched and coördinated it could be come something we’ll debate, e.g. the Troubles. But insurgency != civil war.
    - btbuildem 8mo ago
      The devil lives in the fine print, always.
      - JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
        > devil lives in the fine print Sometimes yes. Sometimes no. Civil wars are large-scale mobilizations. That’s what makes them uniquely destructive. Insurgencies are also destructive, but in a categorically-different way.
  - ActorNightly 8mo ago
    Generally, if you yourself aren't willing to pick up a gun and start fighting, chances are, the vast majority of the people aren't either.
    - 0xEF 8mo ago
      I am, under the right circumstance. I'm not a pacificist, at least not historically. Although, we can banter all day with tough words, but the reality is that none of us can really predict how we will react to a situation until we are in it.
      - ActorNightly 8mo ago
        >I am, under the right circumstance. Right, and so are a lot of people. My point is that we still have a long way to go before that sentiment sets in.
- deleted 8mo ago
  [deleted]
johncolanduoni 8mo ago
But if there is a civil war, what were you going to be able to do with the USD anyway?
- falcor84 8mo ago
  Interesting - I found this quantitative historical study [0] showing that while a civil war does significantly increase the likelihood of inflation, only 36% of countries analyzed which had a civil war between 1975-1999 ended up in an inflationary crisis. And with the USD having such a strong foundation, I would expect the risk to be significantly lower. [0] https://kjis.org/journal/view.html?uid=302&vmd=Full https://kjis.org/journal/view.html?uid=302&vmd=Full
  - spotplay 8mo ago
    I am speculating wildly but I would expect the exact opposite due to different actors trying to destabilize the US to the point of no recovery in such an event.
    - falcor84 8mo ago
      > to the point of no recovery Interesting, are you saying that the intentional use of USD somehow makes the US more vulnerable? What failure mode are you thinking of?
- immibis 8mo ago
  Exchange it for something else before the war started?
GoblinSlayer 8mo ago
1. ban guns 2. start civil war 3. ??? 4. civil war with stone axes
- lazide 8mo ago
  There are more currently owned guns in circulation in the US than people. One thing is for sure, any civil war in the us will not be short on guns.
grosswait 8mo ago
Or is it the financial backers of the protests that want a civil war?
- ActorNightly 8mo ago
  Your entire party is literally lizard people, so no argument you can make is valid.
throwaway2037 8mo ago
I love comments like this. You pop out of your (presumably New Zealand) prepper bomb shelter to get enough WiFi signal to make a post. I will bet against people like you all day long and make lots of money. How much are you willing to bet that there will be civil war in the US in 2026? Let's meet on PolyMarket!
- nsvd2 8mo ago
  You have a very unusual opinion of me!

by nsvd2 8mo ago

derektank 8mo ago

There were large protests in the wake of a law enforcement officer killing someone in 2020 too. Notably, there was not a civil war, even though the Trump administration used the protests as cover for bad behavior then too

PurpleRamen 8mo ago
2020 was a single accidental case as the result of a poor system. Many people even from within the system on all levels agreed something went wrong and apologized. Today's situation is different, as the whole system is weaponized on purpose from one specific layer/group against the other layers/groups of the system. It's an internal conflict within the system itself, and a prime-example for justifying a civil war. And at the time Trump was still on the leash of his own adminstration.

JumpCrisscross 8mo ago

> looks like the current administration may be seeking violent unrest in the hopes of delaying elections Civil war requires two militaries. Tiananmen Square wasn’t a civil war.

lukan 8mo ago
I believe there are plenty of weapons around in the US in general and the police and military is also not 100% behind Trump and MAGA.
0xEF 8mo ago
Not wrong, but don't forget there are many militias with itchy trigger fingers all over the political spectrum here, though admittedly some parties have more affiliated with them than others. It's not a stretch to assume should fighting in the streets escalate beyond ICE shenanigans that larger armies would not quickly congeal from the pocket groups and individuals.
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
  > there are many militias with itchy trigger fingers all over the political spectrum here That’s still not a civil war in the conventional sense. If it gets entrenched and coördinated it could be come something we’ll debate, e.g. the Troubles. But insurgency != civil war.
  - btbuildem 8mo ago
    The devil lives in the fine print, always.
    - JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
      > devil lives in the fine print Sometimes yes. Sometimes no. Civil wars are large-scale mobilizations. That’s what makes them uniquely destructive. Insurgencies are also destructive, but in a categorically-different way.
- ActorNightly 8mo ago
  Generally, if you yourself aren't willing to pick up a gun and start fighting, chances are, the vast majority of the people aren't either.
  - 0xEF 8mo ago
    I am, under the right circumstance. I'm not a pacificist, at least not historically. Although, we can banter all day with tough words, but the reality is that none of us can really predict how we will react to a situation until we are in it.
    - ActorNightly 8mo ago
      >I am, under the right circumstance. Right, and so are a lot of people. My point is that we still have a long way to go before that sentiment sets in.
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]

johncolanduoni 8mo ago

But if there is a civil war, what were you going to be able to do with the USD anyway?

falcor84 8mo ago
Interesting - I found this quantitative historical study [0] showing that while a civil war does significantly increase the likelihood of inflation, only 36% of countries analyzed which had a civil war between 1975-1999 ended up in an inflationary crisis. And with the USD having such a strong foundation, I would expect the risk to be significantly lower. [0] https://kjis.org/journal/view.html?uid=302&vmd=Full https://kjis.org/journal/view.html?uid=302&vmd=Full
- spotplay 8mo ago
  I am speculating wildly but I would expect the exact opposite due to different actors trying to destabilize the US to the point of no recovery in such an event.
  - falcor84 8mo ago
    > to the point of no recovery Interesting, are you saying that the intentional use of USD somehow makes the US more vulnerable? What failure mode are you thinking of?
immibis 8mo ago
Exchange it for something else before the war started?

GoblinSlayer 8mo ago

1. ban guns 2. start civil war 3. ??? 4. civil war with stone axes

lazide 8mo ago
There are more currently owned guns in circulation in the US than people. One thing is for sure, any civil war in the us will not be short on guns.

grosswait 8mo ago

Or is it the financial backers of the protests that want a civil war?

ActorNightly 8mo ago
Your entire party is literally lizard people, so no argument you can make is valid.

throwaway2037 8mo ago

I love comments like this. You pop out of your (presumably New Zealand) prepper bomb shelter to get enough WiFi signal to make a post. I will bet against people like you all day long and make lots of money. How much are you willing to bet that there will be civil war in the US in 2026? Let's meet on PolyMarket!

nsvd2 8mo ago
You have a very unusual opinion of me!