• UnkTheUnk@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    132
    ·
    8 months ago

    I don’t think we need to be worried about full-blown civil war, but preparing for an increase in stochastic terrorism probably isn’t the worst idea.

    • SendMePhotos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      8 months ago

      Climate change will create food and water scarcity. Their life or yours.

      Idk man. I’ve been having some huge existential crisis lately and climate change and destruction is just flooding my brain.

      Anyone else or just me?

      • Chriswild@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        8 months ago

        Not me. There’s nothing I can do to stop it and I refuse to bring kids into it. So my plan if things get really bad is to die and there’s no sense worrying about that.

        • Hjalmar@feddit.nu
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          8 months ago

          there is nothing I can do to stop it

          Wtf. Drive/fly less and bike/walk more. Take the train/collective transport. And if that’s too troublesome for you at least vote for politicians who care about climate change and are willing to actually do stuff.

          So my plan if things get really bad is to die and there’s no sense of worrying about that.

          And please that’s just so fucking selfish. Even if you don’t get any kids there are still people who will have to live with the climate change that you created. For example I and all of my friends, cousins, classmates, etc will have to live with the consequences of climate change.

          • Chriswild@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            8 months ago

            That’s a mountain of assumptions and frankly insufficient attempts to feel like you can make an impact. The literal best way for a person to reduce ecological impact is to not exist.

            Secondly, having someone exist for you even if their existence is pure misery is the most selfish thing. It’s my body and it’s my choice. Anyone who says different is someone who feels entitled to keeping me around regardless of what I want.

            • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafeOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              8 months ago

              I’m gonna take a wild guess here and say you’re depressed and suicidal. If so, I am sorry for what you’re going through and hope you find some way to improve your life and get better.

              • Chriswild@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                8 months ago

                Not really? Like there are moments but I’m talking about if or when things fall apart I don’t care to keep trying. It’s not because of depression that I’d be ok with death but because I’m not scared to die but I am scared to suffer every day.

                I don’t think depression has the monopoly on desiring death over suffering.

          • cinnamonTea@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            8 months ago

            While I’m all in favour of individual action, I think it’s very reductive to say that that will stop climate change. And even the politicians we explicitly vote for to actually do things don’t, or not enough. And it’s not like we chose to live in a world that is being destroyed by climate change, so how is it selfish if we leave behind other people who also do? They created it as much as me - barely, because none of us have any real recourse to deal with it.

    • SasquatchBanana@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      8 months ago

      If you’re not white, straight, and a guy, I’d also recommend updating your passports and maybe arming yourselves. It’s gonna be a bumpy year.

      • UnkTheUnk@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        8 months ago

        I can’t really imagine danger being particularly extreme for anyone other than trans people, for trans folk updating passports is likely a good idea. But keep in mind that blue states would still be relatively safe.

        If shit truly gets to the point where it’s death squads and fascist street gangs, realistically there would not be anywhere in the world that would be safe.

        • BmeBenji@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          8 months ago

          “Blue states” are states with notable swaths of intolerant people spread out over the majority of the state, with a lot of tolerant people and allies condensed into cities.

        • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          Really? Other groups besides trans people certainly have a lot to fear in my state: I can predict immigrants, Black people, Native Americans, gay people, non-Christians, and anyone who positions themselves as allies, off the top of my head.

          Not sure where you live, but the fascism is feeling pretty full-blown around my parts lately.

  • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    For there to be a civil war, both sides need an army. The US president will have the US army, and the other side might as well have nerf guns. The civil war would last an afternoon.

    If there’s going to be anything, it’s an increase in domestic terrorism.

      • Donkter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        8 months ago

        That’s what’s going to suck. The war might only last a couple months but I can’t imagine months of bombings and violent demonstrations in every city across the U.S.

        • Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          The us gov is not going to bomb cities and kill innocent citizens and I’m frankly sick of seeing idiots repeating this insane concept.

          • ggppjj@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            8 months ago

            I think you may have added the “us gov” part from inference, vigilante citizens and vigilante cops have bombed American cities and citizens in the past, and will again.

          • Donkter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            Sorry buddy, it’s not going to be the U.S. government bombing cities and killing innocent civilians.

              • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                8 months ago

                The US has bombed its own citizens twice. First in 1950 it bombed the Puerto Rican towns of Jayuya and Utuado, then in 1985, the Philadelphia police dropped a bomb on a residential neighborhood while targeting MOVE.

                If we were to go down the road of military and police violence against US citizens it would be a much longer list.

    • V ‎ ‎ @beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Furthermore, the American Civil War was precluded by several decades of escalating tension between the states, not between parties in the federal government. The legal and organizational attributes of a state also served to enable separatist states to even attempt to raise an army (this was by design). Bubba and his buddies will, as you said, be armed with nerf guns comparatively

    • BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      There’s also no real fiscal incentive. Morality and freedom are important and all, but we fight wars for financial gain.

      • MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        8 months ago

        That and the three letter agencies have so much incompressible amount of power that any real revolution/civil war is damn near impossible.

        Plus, who really wants to abandon modern living to die in some urban street combat?

    • _NoName_@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      It would be a guerilla collective against a conventional force that’s consistently failed against guerilla tactics.

      There’s no way to know how long it’d last or how it’d impact politics, but targeted acts of terrorism in cities would likely become a more common tragedy. It would pretty much gaurantee US states increasing their police forces and personal rights eroding, and I’m not looking forward to that.

  • A_Filthy_Weeaboo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    8 months ago

    Everyone keeps saying this, but I think good ole’ Amercian laziness will win out and nothing happens.

    Ever been around people when an emergency happens? People can’t be bothered half the time; or they gawk…

    • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      Most Americans are lazy until they aren’t. Doesn’t require much energy to show up somewhere with a gun in hand now does it?

    • Bizarroland@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      I still remember in the sequel to The first Mage: The Ascension ttrgp book that the Ascension war was fought and ultimately came to a stalemate because when the average person was given the opportunity to Ascend and be giving God like powers to rewrite the world to their own whims they chose to watch TV instead.

  • ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    8 months ago

    No, these guys are way less organized than last time and Donald Trump is getting fucked in court still. I think its less likely now than it was 4 years ago. The GOP is fracturing and losing steam. Senators and governors are still a threat but not in the civil war type of way I don’t think.

    • Patches@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      What exactly is required to be a threat in the civil war type? Besides Guns and a feeling of not being represented?

      • Bizarroland@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Unification.

        That’s the main lacking puzzle piece on both sides.

        If the left were unified there wouldn’t be a republican in politics.

        If the right were unified, you wouldn’t have jackasses running their mouth at every opportunity just to get a news blurb generated about themselves.

        The old adage about United we stand, divided we fall? Technically, our divisions are the only thing keeping us up right now.

        If we ever come together it will end in nuclear hellfire

      • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Organizing a war against the us army would take a lot of planning. Unless trump wins, controls the army, and enough generals agree.

  • Thevenin@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    8 months ago

    I always like to say everyone should have a zombie survival plan. Is there any possibility of zombies? No. But there’s a lot of overlap between prepping for the exciting, fictional disaster and boring, real-world natural disasters.

    • Having a fireaxe in your trunk might not let you chop off zombie heads, but it’ll sure be useful for clearing road debris after a hurricane.
    • Having a bug-out-bag with important documents and bottled water is also great for wildfire preparedness, even if that bag also has a spiky leather jacket in it.

    I encourage people to have a civil war plan. Do I expect we’ll have one? Not really, it wouldn’t be a two-sided conflict. But we can expect to see domestic terrorism (see also: insurrection) and potentially police riots (the police enacting organized violence as they did in 2020). If you’re ready for a civil war, you’re ready for the more mundane breakdowns we’re more likely to see.

    • Knowing first aid and how to treat a gunshot wound might not find use on a battlefield, but it could easily save someone’s life in a mass shooting or isolated hate crime.
    • Having ad-hoc or peer-to-peer communications is useful during riots and power outages.
    • If you can move ordinance discreetly across state lines, you’ll probably find the skillset applies to moving red state refugees as well.
    • Building a network of people you trust to band together when SHTF? Brother, you just invented a mutual aid network.

    So yeah, if you feel anxious about the possibility of a civil war (or zombies), channel that energy into prepping for it, and you’ll find that even if your predictions were wrong, your effort will not go to waste.

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    8 months ago

    So long as we have mass precarity this is going to continue to be a risk. And we’re going to have to deal with renegade MAGAs and Project 2025.

    After 2016, I don’t trust the people of the US not to vote in fashy autocrats.

    • colin@lemmy.uninsane.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      Democrats too. half the country lost a pretty significant right to their own bodily autonomy that they’d taken foregranted for basically their entire life. and they just… rolled over and took it? that’s about the most concrete domestic loss they’ve taken this century, and more concrete than anything else on the table right now, so i honestly don’t know what would have to happen in order for the left to do anything meaningfully violent.

      • Cyborganism@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’m sorry, but what were your expectations towards the Democrats here?

        These anti abortion laws were enacted at state level. By Republican state governments whose representatives were elected by the people. What did you want the Democrats to do here? Even if they complained, in the end if they don’t have the majority in the state government, they have no power to do anything.

        Even at the federal level, the Senate is 48 Democrat members, 49 Republican members and 3 independents. They don’t have the majority there either.

        And in the house of representatives, the Republicans are the majority with 220 members vs 213 as Democrats. They still don’t have the majority there.

        And if you look at the supreme court, Trump packed it with Republican judges.

        So what are your expectations towards the Democrats??? If people don’t elect them, they can’t do anything.

        The president can’t step in and cancel any of these anti abortion laws because it’s the will of the people. (In a way)

        That’s what happens when people are apathetic and don’t go out to vote.

        • colin@lemmy.uninsane.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          what you say is entirely consistent. it’s a strong belief in democracy as a process with no bounds/constraints, as an ultimate good in and of itself. and it’s sort of my point: in the “civil war” frame, Democrats are super unlikely to instigate violence. your neighbors will vote away all the things you value, out of religious beliefs you disagree with or merely out of spite, but that’s okay, so long as they do so democratically.

          i meet enough democrats (little d) who say they wouldn’t comply with a draft, even if enacted democratically. my thoughts are that there’s at least a few things similar to that: decisions where your own interests shouldn’t be subservient to the will of an abstract majority. the surprise with abortion for me is that for my whole life, that was de-facto such an example. it wasn’t treated as a thing that had been decided democratically, just as a thing which was. then some people far away said “abortion should be decided democratically”, and the number of people around me saying “actually no it shouldn’t” was way smaller (i.e. zero) than the number of people who say that about things like the draft. i still don’t know how to square that, but to answer your “what were your expectations towards the Democrats here” question, well, you asking that is the answer to why i think “civil war” talk is so beyond the pale.

  • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    8 months ago

    Probably, at some point. Wealth disparity is wrecking a huge swathe of the population’s way of life. They’re restless and want change.

    Politically, divisiveness is continually reaching new heights. Politicians, republicans for the most part, are more reactionary and less productive. They are now fueling the fear and anger of their constituents and it won’t end well.

    • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      🤔 Do you have any family or friends abroad or by the Canadian border? Can you get to the Canadian border in late October? There’s a bus that’ll take you over the Ambassador Bridge in Detroit, and all you need is a passport book or card and a good excuse. Just tell them you’re going to gamble at the casinos there.

      There’s a thousand mile expanse of woods and bullshit across the northern states where you could just walk through the forests into Canada.

      Or you could drive into Mexico if you know anybody there, such as that is.

      Cruise to the Bahamas, perhaps…?

      • MelodiousFunk@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        There’s a thousand mile expanse of woods and bullshit across the northern states where you could just walk through the forests into Canada.

        I’ve always wanted to get eaten by a moose.

        • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          I mean, if it’s a choice between getting eaten by Canada’s moose army and being thrown in a literal concentration camp, I think it’s an easy pick

  • Luvon@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    I left the country to study abroad in 2012, and after 2016 was firmly in the camp of never moving back