5 ms·

I’m curious when people make comments like this, do they actually live in the US and believe this or has the media environment gotten so bad in Europe+ that peo

I’m curious when people make comments like this, do they actually live in the US and believe this or has the media environment gotten so bad in Europe+ that people have no clue what’s real or not?

toomuchtodo 9mo ago
Maybe you'd trust Blackrock's CEO instead? I live in the US and I have rotated away from US equities and treasuries to derisk from volatility of poor governance (both this administration and long term fiscal policy). BlackRock CEO delivers blunt warning on US national debt - https://www.thestreet.com/investing/blackrock-ceo-delivers-blunt-warning-on-us-national-debt https://www.thestreet.com/investing/blackrock-ceo-delivers-b... - January 18th, 2026 The U.S. Deficit Will 'Overwhelm This Country': BlackRock CEO Larry Fink - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4d1GzgnhkI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4d1GzgnhkI
- whimsicalism 9mo ago
  I don’t disagree that our fiscal situation is unsustainable. I’m curious specifically about the people envisioning (with barely disguised glee) the US erupting into a civil war within 5 years, as they seem somewhat to have lost touch with reality.
  - toomuchtodo 9mo ago
    In longitudinal surveys, typically, about 5% of folks elect the "some men want to watch the world burn" option. I cannot speak to the glee component you mention, I know these people exist, but they are a minority. I can speak to the ongoing political polarization that treats national politics as a sport and is avoiding course correcting fiscal policy trajectory. And this fiscal policy is going to lead to widening wealth inequality, a continuation of a K shaped economic recovery, and pushing the electorate to more extreme options besides the voting booth. No one is "winning", there is no moderate middle ground any more, and I don't see how this trajectory will change. Thanks Gingrich (who set us on this path decades ago)! Nearly 40% of Young Americans Say Political Violence Is Acceptable in Certain Circumstances, Harvard Poll Finds - https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/12/4/hpop-poll-political-violence/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/12/4/hpop-poll-polit... - December 4th, 2025 Americans say politically motivated violence is increasing, and they see many reasons why - https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/10/23/americans-say-politically-motivated-violence-is-increasing-and-they-see-many-reasons-why/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/10/23/americans... - October 23rd, 2025
  - antonvs 9mo ago
    What could easily happen much sooner than 5 years is an incident that gives Trump an excuse to invoke the Insurrection Act, and send federal troops - not just National Guard - into blue US cities. Things could go a lot of different ways after that, but something resembling civil war - or a smaller-scale guerilla war - is very much in the realm of possibility. Be wary of normalcy bias, it's a big part of what lets the Trump admin get away with what its doing. People think "oh that can't happen"... until it does.
  - throw0101a 9mo ago
    > I’m curious specifically about the people envisioning (with barely disguised glee) the US erupting into a civil war within 5 years, as they seem somewhat to have lost touch with reality. The MN governor has called up their National Guard to help local law enforcement. The Pentagon is readying troops as well, presumably to help federal officials (ICE). If both sides think they are following lawful orders, and neither side will give, what do you think will happen? (I have no answers.) Further, there are folks that want a conflict because the West has become too decadent or something, and some conflict is needed to toughen up (?): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerationism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerationism * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment
    - toomuchtodo 9mo ago
      To note, I believe it's possible the ~1500 troops staging to Minnesota are not to assist with ICE operations, but to be air lifted via the 133rd Airlift Wing to Greenland. If interested in pursuing this, task some commercial satellite imaging. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/133rd_Airlift_Wing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/133rd_Airlift_Wing
      - throw0101a 9mo ago
        "Pentagon readies 1,500 troops for potential Minnesota deployment, officials say": * https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/18/pentagon-alaska-troops-minnesota-deployment https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/18/pentagon-ala...
        toomuchtodo 9mo ago
        What they say cannot be trusted, based on all available evidence, so you must infer the truth from actions.
      - throw0101c 9mo ago
        The troops that are being readied are actually the 11th Airborne Division: * https://time.com/7347191/minnesota-army-troops-standby/ https://time.com/7347191/minnesota-army-troops-standby/ whose deputy commander is a Canadian, as a part of an exchange program: * https://11thairbornedivision.army.mil/dcgo/ https://11thairbornedivision.army.mil/dcgo/ so I'm not sure how sending him to Greenland is going to work.
  - JumpinJack_Cash 9mo ago
    > > the US erupting into a civil war within 5 years, as they seem somewhat to have lost touch with reality. When your material needs are satisfied then only ideological battles remain to be won. And having lots of material stuff you have plenty to throw at the enemy. It's already happening. People are willing to forego their material needs and harm the country and themselves to 'own' and defeat the other side. The only hope is that the ideological wars become so scattered and around so many topics and centers of power that it's not 70m people vs. 70m people or that the ideological wars are slow that people realize that they come with a loss of quality of life and material wealth and rebalance towards the latter instead of pursuing the 'owning the other side' doctrine
    - whimsicalism 9mo ago
      I think effectively all empirics go against this notion, the only real counterexample I can think of is the Troubles. People living comfortable lives don't want to die and the ideology usually routes around that: look how morality has been evolving wrt the notion of 'sacrifice for the common good' - and we expect people will sacrifice their lives for their perception of the common good? doubt it
      - JumpinJack_Cash 9mo ago
        > > People living comfortable lives don't want to die Trump is the prime example , why did he decide to abandon the lifestyle afforded by his 500 million dollar net worth to pursue a job where 27% of his predecessors where shot at? Abandoning comfortable life to risk death. Why don't rich celebrities quit after the first death threat letter, when they already have a huge bag of money? The material wealth at the extremes is a recipe for unstable and unpredictable behavior , not for calm and collected behavior. People engage in ego battles and fall in love with their ideas and are willing to go to war for them as in a world of abundance they are the only thing that matters in order to 'win'. The most abstract things (interest rates ring a bell) become personal because ideas about them were conceived in self reflection during the infinite hours of thinking and wondering free time afforded by material abundance, killing off ideas becomes akin to killing part of self and becomes unacceptable to the ego. This Is true for individuals and countries alike. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_sink https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_sink
- drstewart 9mo ago
  >Fink is still a big believer in the U.S. economy and argues things are looking mostly constructive at this point. He feels the bull story is still intact, but its durability matters a lot more. So do you believe him? Let me guess: you'll pick and choose the parts
  - toomuchtodo 9mo ago
    I agree with his statement you quote. I believe that the US still has some growth ahead purely out of existing demographics and population, but that due to go forward geopolitics and global trade reconfigurations, more growth will be had internationally than in the US over the next 5-10 years (and this is the same guidance I share with the HNW individuals I advise from geopolitical safety and portfolio strategy perspectives). Where has most growth been in the US recently? The Mag 7, AI, data centers, etc. Will this growth last? No one knows. What happens when it stops? Sadness. Global markets outperform the U.S. in 2025 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DERutj8lfY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DERutj8lfY - December 30th, 2025 2026 Outlook: International Stocks and Economy - https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/international-stock-market-outlook https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/international-stock-marke... - December 9th, 2025 (not investing advice, I am simply very curious and a degenerate gambler)
- ptero 9mo ago
  Warnings about the deficit are spot on. It is a safe bet that the country with government that spends 50% more than it takes in as taxes will not give above inflation return on its government debt. As a side note, most of the "Western world" is in the same boat (spending way above the long-term ability to pay, so eventually will have to default-by-inflation on bondholders). But I am sure the poster you are responding to was criticizing the take about US splintering into parts due to armed unrest within the next 5 years. Which sounds completely nonsensical to me as well.
- staticman2 9mo ago
  I'm not gonna watch a video but did you even read that article before you linked to it? "Fink is still a big believer in the U.S. economy and argues things are looking mostly constructive at this point. He feels the bull story is still intact, but its durability matters a lot more." It's the human equivilent of AI slop.
hightrix 9mo ago
Do you have any criticisms to the parent comment? As an American, they seem pretty spot on to the current climate. I'd argue we've never been closer to civil war than we are today[0], primarily due to trumps regime invading cities around the country, kidnapping citizens utilizing a bounty program, and killing people in concentration camps. Ediot: [0] - Since the last civil war. I thought that was obvious, but it seems like it isn't.
- treis 9mo ago
  We've literally had a civil war so I'd say your argument is a bit off the mark.
  - hightrix 9mo ago
    Correct, I assumed others would understand I meant since the last civil war. Edited the comment to clear up my intent. Thank you.
    - treis 9mo ago
      It's still absurd. Today isn't close to what we saw during the depression or the 70s or desegregation or the Rodney King riot. Besides that, there's no plausible fault line in the military or any sort of ethnic or religious or regional fault line where two sides could form to fight each other.
      - whimsicalism 9mo ago
        I think we might have surpassed the Rodney King era but I wasn't alive then. Broadly agree with you otherwise.
- whimsicalism 9mo ago
  [flagged]
  - packetlost 9mo ago
u8080 9mo ago
This is truth since it was fact-checked by leading independent EU fact-checkers.
DustinEchoes 9mo ago
It’s wishcasting. Some people just want to see dead Americans.
- jacquesm 9mo ago
  On the contrary. The ones that want to see dead Americans are currently sitting in the Whitehouse. Mostly because it won't be them on the receiving end of it and they get to plunder the country. Smaller cake, but more for me seems to be their motto.
  - whimsicalism 9mo ago
    I think perhaps multiple people can want to see dead Americans. There is definitely a subtext of glee in this discussion of modern American civil war imo.
    - jacquesm 9mo ago
      Not with the Europeans that I know, they are all absolutely aghast at every single murder. It is one of the reasons EU countries are reluctant about participating in any war, they always hope to avoid it (and as a result sometimes get much larger ones...).
      - whimsicalism 9mo ago
        Hard for me to see anyone who says an American civil war is a best case scenario as not cheering for American deaths and I'm skeptical that this was written by an American as it sounds far too out of touch and 'wishcasty' as someone else said.
        jacquesm 9mo ago
        I don't know exactly who you are referring to, which article/comment/?? do you refer to? You are skeptical that it was written by an American, but you have no proof that it was not? Do you know who did write it? Those guys in the Whitehouse, are they not American? They are the ones steering you straight off a cliff and quite literally anything - including civil war - could happen as a result of that.
btbuildem 9mo ago
We don't live in the meth lab downstairs, we're in the apartment above it. It's been wild in the past couple of decades, but lately you guys have started taking pot shots at the ceiling, so yeah, we're watching.
- whimsicalism 9mo ago
  I don't think an American civil war in the next 5 years is at all likely. The rest of your comment I understand - not much we can say beyond we're sorry and his support is a small (but influential) minority.
  - wasabi991011 9mo ago
    > I don't think an American civil war in the next 5 years is at all likely. The government of Minnesota has readied the national guard, the Pentagon put 1500 soldiers on standby to be deployed to Minnesota, Trump is threatening to invoke the insurrection act, and there's no sign of this conflict cooling off. 5 years is a long time too, I don't see how you believe it's not at all likely. Edit: to be clear, I'm not sure it will lead to the fragmentation that the other commenters was claiming. But an conflict between federal and state law enforcement/ military seems likely.
  - mythical_39 9mo ago
    > I don't think an American civil war in the next 5 years is at all likely. Minnesota might like a word with you
- jasonwatkinspdx 9mo ago
  I think you're missing the criticism, which is not just that an armed civil war is extremely unlikely even given everything happening in the US, if it did happen, it would not splinter the US regionally. The divide here is urban vs rural. There's no way to turn that into a set of successor regions. If armed conflict does happen, it'll be much more amorphous, terrifying, and random, concentrated in the cities, and resemble things like the Tulsa massacre at a larger scale.
shagmin 9mo ago
I get what you're saying and mostly somewhat agree with your point, but it's kind of funny thinking back and feeling the complete opposite. People like to argue which states would be better off in a civil war, meanwhile I grew up in an area where people liked to claim the south is going to rise yet again. And we do have a problem with militias.

toomuchtodo 9mo ago

Maybe you'd trust Blackrock's CEO instead? I live in the US and I have rotated away from US equities and treasuries to derisk from volatility of poor governance (both this administration and long term fiscal policy). BlackRock CEO delivers blunt warning on US national debt - https://www.thestreet.com/investing/blackrock-ceo-delivers-blunt-warning-on-us-national-debt https://www.thestreet.com/investing/blackrock-ceo-delivers-b... - January 18th, 2026 The U.S. Deficit Will 'Overwhelm This Country': BlackRock CEO Larry Fink - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4d1GzgnhkI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4d1GzgnhkI

whimsicalism 9mo ago
I don’t disagree that our fiscal situation is unsustainable. I’m curious specifically about the people envisioning (with barely disguised glee) the US erupting into a civil war within 5 years, as they seem somewhat to have lost touch with reality.
- toomuchtodo 9mo ago
  In longitudinal surveys, typically, about 5% of folks elect the "some men want to watch the world burn" option. I cannot speak to the glee component you mention, I know these people exist, but they are a minority. I can speak to the ongoing political polarization that treats national politics as a sport and is avoiding course correcting fiscal policy trajectory. And this fiscal policy is going to lead to widening wealth inequality, a continuation of a K shaped economic recovery, and pushing the electorate to more extreme options besides the voting booth. No one is "winning", there is no moderate middle ground any more, and I don't see how this trajectory will change. Thanks Gingrich (who set us on this path decades ago)! Nearly 40% of Young Americans Say Political Violence Is Acceptable in Certain Circumstances, Harvard Poll Finds - https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/12/4/hpop-poll-political-violence/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/12/4/hpop-poll-polit... - December 4th, 2025 Americans say politically motivated violence is increasing, and they see many reasons why - https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/10/23/americans-say-politically-motivated-violence-is-increasing-and-they-see-many-reasons-why/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/10/23/americans... - October 23rd, 2025
- antonvs 9mo ago
  What could easily happen much sooner than 5 years is an incident that gives Trump an excuse to invoke the Insurrection Act, and send federal troops - not just National Guard - into blue US cities. Things could go a lot of different ways after that, but something resembling civil war - or a smaller-scale guerilla war - is very much in the realm of possibility. Be wary of normalcy bias, it's a big part of what lets the Trump admin get away with what its doing. People think "oh that can't happen"... until it does.
- throw0101a 9mo ago
  > I’m curious specifically about the people envisioning (with barely disguised glee) the US erupting into a civil war within 5 years, as they seem somewhat to have lost touch with reality. The MN governor has called up their National Guard to help local law enforcement. The Pentagon is readying troops as well, presumably to help federal officials (ICE). If both sides think they are following lawful orders, and neither side will give, what do you think will happen? (I have no answers.) Further, there are folks that want a conflict because the West has become too decadent or something, and some conflict is needed to toughen up (?): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerationism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerationism * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment
  - toomuchtodo 9mo ago
    To note, I believe it's possible the ~1500 troops staging to Minnesota are not to assist with ICE operations, but to be air lifted via the 133rd Airlift Wing to Greenland. If interested in pursuing this, task some commercial satellite imaging. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/133rd_Airlift_Wing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/133rd_Airlift_Wing
    - throw0101a 9mo ago
      "Pentagon readies 1,500 troops for potential Minnesota deployment, officials say": * https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/18/pentagon-alaska-troops-minnesota-deployment https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/18/pentagon-ala...
      - toomuchtodo 9mo ago
        What they say cannot be trusted, based on all available evidence, so you must infer the truth from actions.
    - throw0101c 9mo ago
      The troops that are being readied are actually the 11th Airborne Division: * https://time.com/7347191/minnesota-army-troops-standby/ https://time.com/7347191/minnesota-army-troops-standby/ whose deputy commander is a Canadian, as a part of an exchange program: * https://11thairbornedivision.army.mil/dcgo/ https://11thairbornedivision.army.mil/dcgo/ so I'm not sure how sending him to Greenland is going to work.
- JumpinJack_Cash 9mo ago
  > > the US erupting into a civil war within 5 years, as they seem somewhat to have lost touch with reality. When your material needs are satisfied then only ideological battles remain to be won. And having lots of material stuff you have plenty to throw at the enemy. It's already happening. People are willing to forego their material needs and harm the country and themselves to 'own' and defeat the other side. The only hope is that the ideological wars become so scattered and around so many topics and centers of power that it's not 70m people vs. 70m people or that the ideological wars are slow that people realize that they come with a loss of quality of life and material wealth and rebalance towards the latter instead of pursuing the 'owning the other side' doctrine
  - whimsicalism 9mo ago
    I think effectively all empirics go against this notion, the only real counterexample I can think of is the Troubles. People living comfortable lives don't want to die and the ideology usually routes around that: look how morality has been evolving wrt the notion of 'sacrifice for the common good' - and we expect people will sacrifice their lives for their perception of the common good? doubt it
    - JumpinJack_Cash 9mo ago
      > > People living comfortable lives don't want to die Trump is the prime example , why did he decide to abandon the lifestyle afforded by his 500 million dollar net worth to pursue a job where 27% of his predecessors where shot at? Abandoning comfortable life to risk death. Why don't rich celebrities quit after the first death threat letter, when they already have a huge bag of money? The material wealth at the extremes is a recipe for unstable and unpredictable behavior , not for calm and collected behavior. People engage in ego battles and fall in love with their ideas and are willing to go to war for them as in a world of abundance they are the only thing that matters in order to 'win'. The most abstract things (interest rates ring a bell) become personal because ideas about them were conceived in self reflection during the infinite hours of thinking and wondering free time afforded by material abundance, killing off ideas becomes akin to killing part of self and becomes unacceptable to the ego. This Is true for individuals and countries alike. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_sink https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_sink
drstewart 9mo ago
>Fink is still a big believer in the U.S. economy and argues things are looking mostly constructive at this point. He feels the bull story is still intact, but its durability matters a lot more. So do you believe him? Let me guess: you'll pick and choose the parts
- toomuchtodo 9mo ago
  I agree with his statement you quote. I believe that the US still has some growth ahead purely out of existing demographics and population, but that due to go forward geopolitics and global trade reconfigurations, more growth will be had internationally than in the US over the next 5-10 years (and this is the same guidance I share with the HNW individuals I advise from geopolitical safety and portfolio strategy perspectives). Where has most growth been in the US recently? The Mag 7, AI, data centers, etc. Will this growth last? No one knows. What happens when it stops? Sadness. Global markets outperform the U.S. in 2025 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DERutj8lfY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DERutj8lfY - December 30th, 2025 2026 Outlook: International Stocks and Economy - https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/international-stock-market-outlook https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/international-stock-marke... - December 9th, 2025 (not investing advice, I am simply very curious and a degenerate gambler)
ptero 9mo ago
Warnings about the deficit are spot on. It is a safe bet that the country with government that spends 50% more than it takes in as taxes will not give above inflation return on its government debt. As a side note, most of the "Western world" is in the same boat (spending way above the long-term ability to pay, so eventually will have to default-by-inflation on bondholders). But I am sure the poster you are responding to was criticizing the take about US splintering into parts due to armed unrest within the next 5 years. Which sounds completely nonsensical to me as well.
staticman2 9mo ago
I'm not gonna watch a video but did you even read that article before you linked to it? "Fink is still a big believer in the U.S. economy and argues things are looking mostly constructive at this point. He feels the bull story is still intact, but its durability matters a lot more." It's the human equivilent of AI slop.

hightrix 9mo ago

Do you have any criticisms to the parent comment? As an American, they seem pretty spot on to the current climate. I'd argue we've never been closer to civil war than we are today[0], primarily due to trumps regime invading cities around the country, kidnapping citizens utilizing a bounty program, and killing people in concentration camps. Ediot: [0] - Since the last civil war. I thought that was obvious, but it seems like it isn't.

treis 9mo ago
We've literally had a civil war so I'd say your argument is a bit off the mark.
- hightrix 9mo ago
  Correct, I assumed others would understand I meant since the last civil war. Edited the comment to clear up my intent. Thank you.
  - treis 9mo ago
    It's still absurd. Today isn't close to what we saw during the depression or the 70s or desegregation or the Rodney King riot. Besides that, there's no plausible fault line in the military or any sort of ethnic or religious or regional fault line where two sides could form to fight each other.
    - whimsicalism 9mo ago
      I think we might have surpassed the Rodney King era but I wasn't alive then. Broadly agree with you otherwise.
whimsicalism 9mo ago
[flagged]
- packetlost 9mo ago

u8080 9mo ago

This is truth since it was fact-checked by leading independent EU fact-checkers.

DustinEchoes 9mo ago

It’s wishcasting. Some people just want to see dead Americans.

jacquesm 9mo ago
On the contrary. The ones that want to see dead Americans are currently sitting in the Whitehouse. Mostly because it won't be them on the receiving end of it and they get to plunder the country. Smaller cake, but more for me seems to be their motto.
- whimsicalism 9mo ago
  I think perhaps multiple people can want to see dead Americans. There is definitely a subtext of glee in this discussion of modern American civil war imo.
  - jacquesm 9mo ago
    Not with the Europeans that I know, they are all absolutely aghast at every single murder. It is one of the reasons EU countries are reluctant about participating in any war, they always hope to avoid it (and as a result sometimes get much larger ones...).
    - whimsicalism 9mo ago
      Hard for me to see anyone who says an American civil war is a best case scenario as not cheering for American deaths and I'm skeptical that this was written by an American as it sounds far too out of touch and 'wishcasty' as someone else said.
      - jacquesm 9mo ago
        I don't know exactly who you are referring to, which article/comment/?? do you refer to? You are skeptical that it was written by an American, but you have no proof that it was not? Do you know who did write it? Those guys in the Whitehouse, are they not American? They are the ones steering you straight off a cliff and quite literally anything - including civil war - could happen as a result of that.

btbuildem 9mo ago

We don't live in the meth lab downstairs, we're in the apartment above it. It's been wild in the past couple of decades, but lately you guys have started taking pot shots at the ceiling, so yeah, we're watching.

whimsicalism 9mo ago
I don't think an American civil war in the next 5 years is at all likely. The rest of your comment I understand - not much we can say beyond we're sorry and his support is a small (but influential) minority.
- wasabi991011 9mo ago
  > I don't think an American civil war in the next 5 years is at all likely. The government of Minnesota has readied the national guard, the Pentagon put 1500 soldiers on standby to be deployed to Minnesota, Trump is threatening to invoke the insurrection act, and there's no sign of this conflict cooling off. 5 years is a long time too, I don't see how you believe it's not at all likely. Edit: to be clear, I'm not sure it will lead to the fragmentation that the other commenters was claiming. But an conflict between federal and state law enforcement/ military seems likely.
- mythical_39 9mo ago
  > I don't think an American civil war in the next 5 years is at all likely. Minnesota might like a word with you
jasonwatkinspdx 9mo ago
I think you're missing the criticism, which is not just that an armed civil war is extremely unlikely even given everything happening in the US, if it did happen, it would not splinter the US regionally. The divide here is urban vs rural. There's no way to turn that into a set of successor regions. If armed conflict does happen, it'll be much more amorphous, terrifying, and random, concentrated in the cities, and resemble things like the Tulsa massacre at a larger scale.

shagmin 9mo ago

I get what you're saying and mostly somewhat agree with your point, but it's kind of funny thinking back and feeling the complete opposite. People like to argue which states would be better off in a civil war, meanwhile I grew up in an area where people liked to claim the south is going to rise yet again. And we do have a problem with militias.