4 ms·
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
by 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 agoWe've literally had a civil war so I'd say your argument is a bit off the mark.
- hightrix 9mo agoCorrect, I assumed others would understand I meant since the last civil war. Edited the comment to clear up my intent. Thank you.
- treis 9mo agoIt'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 agoI 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 agoI think you misunderstand who participates in a civil war, at least initially. It's not always the citizens, in this case it's the state militia and the federal government. We are dangerously close to that. I agree that it's silly to say "we're as close as we ever have...", but the rest of GPs point stands. Things are bad, and just because you're not seeing it and are rich enough to not care doesn't mean it's not happening.
- justin66 9mo agoThis comment: A new civil war that drives the US to fragment into several independent regions over the course of the next ~five years would kind of be the best scenario from a global perspective. is nutty.
- Phelinofist 9mo agoIt is, but I get the sentiment of these comments. If the US infighting they will leave us alone.
- surgical_fire 9mo agoWhat is "nutty" about it? For countries outside the US, it would actually not be a bad scenario. Better than having your supreme leader threatening invasion, annexation, promoting coups and so on.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- justin66 9mo agoWe’ve apparently abandoned the meaning of the word “best,” for staters. > For countries outside the US, it would actually not be a bad scenario. I really don’t think I can help you, but the two obvious crazy ideas encompassed here are that civil wars never turn into wider regional conflicts and that losing a major trading partner never tanked an economy. Or that the ideological conflict here won’t possibly spread anywhere else (did you not even notice Vance and Musk’s support of afd ?) Good luck with all that.
- surgical_fire 9mo ago> losing a major trading partner never tanked an economy The major trading partner that has been placing heavy tariffs on everyone but Russia? I just want to confirm we are talking about the same one. > did you not even notice Vance and Musk’s support of afd ? This is exactly the sort of problem we are talking about.
- 9mo ago
- JKCalhoun 9mo agoThe last Civil War in the U.S. had States banding together and separating from the Union. The closest the U.S. is to a Civil War now is akin to a Cold Civil War with, for example, states gerrymandering their Representative districts. Or the Pacific states joining together for West Coast Health Alliance. Did I read rumblings about separate trade deals with foreign countries? Protesters battling ICE in the streets would not, in my opinion, count as Civil War. Civil unrest? Sure. EDIT: this always turns out to be one of my unpopular opinions. Oh well.