It's the end of the world as we know it

[Friday]

And I feel fine

Trigger warning: doomscrolling thread. Do not read if you're in a good mood because it'll ruin it and do not read if you're in a bad mood because you might jump off a cliff. Only read if you are in a medium mood.

I would like Thad to comment on this thread if you don't mind. The link goes to a long-ass twitter thread talking about the political future of America.

Is she wrong? Right? 90% right? 80% right? 50/50? Completely wrong doomsayer who doesn't know that divorce rates are down? I honestly don't know how full of shit this person is. I defer to those here who are more politically literate than I am, hence my asking for Thad to comment. (Others please feel welcome, but keep in mind I want this to be a practical no-bullshit no-doom thread.)

Is voting enough at this point? I personally have been turned around on voting thanks to this place. I no longer consider it a waste of time. My question has now changed:

Barring a miracle event, can voting and voting alone get us out of a minority christian fascist rule? If not, do you believe we are actually for real no meme heading toward one of the following three things in the next 20 (or less) years?

1. Dystopian authoritarian theocratic rule.
2. A massive Civil Rights movement.
3. Civil War.

Thank you for your time.

[Caithness]

1. We're essentially already there
2. One can only hope, but seems unlikely
3. It might be the best of all bad options

I didn't read the thread because I'm in a good mood

[Mongrel]

Okay, my tl:dr: It's very bad but not quite as utterly hopeless as that twitter thread presupposes. However, it would be wise to be personally prepared for violence and mass civil unrest.
_________________________________________________________________

I been watching the US's shit since the early 90's and I've never been particularly surprised when shit got worse, other than being impressed at the speed of negative changes at times. If nothing else, Mad Magazine has spent 60 straight years being vindicated for telling people to never vote Republican.

Anyway, at this point it's clear Something Big Is Gonna Happen. It's quite unclear what that Something will be though.

I'm a little more optimistic about it than I used to be because a lot of inaction has been couched in the delusional denialism that the GOP aren't straight-up massively evil. Also, the younger you go, the more hostile people are to the RW.

I think the biggest mistake the GOP (and the RW around the world, as you and I have talked about) is making is how they've sped up their timeline. We know that enough people can be trained to accept and internalize almost anything, but greed betrays the requirement for patience and it takes time to get enough people to accept a new normal without disruptions at a level which can't be controlled by the ruling classes.

The chances of violence are very high though, IMO. A semi-balkanized US where refugees flee from Red states seeking sanctuary in Blue states seems a real possibility and is arguably already underway. The big questions to me are:

- Will population flows to blue states fundamentally imbalance the union in their favour even with Red states gerrymandered to hell and back? What I mean is with enough population and money, the Blue states can eventually gain levers back over the political machinery by brute force (not necessarily violence, but stuff like money and orgs)
- What does Biden do post-2022? What does he do this fall if Roberts can't wrangle Kavanaugh into changing his vote in order to preserve the constitutional right to privacy? Because you gotta know that's exactly what he's doing; Roberts is fairly RW and sympathetic to RW positions, but he isn't fucking insane enough to delude himself about what happens if you burn down 100-150 years of constitutional protections in one term of government.
- Which way will corporate money go? This might be a rare occasion where a majority of corporate interests are horrified by a RW so deranged they know it will ruin the US, if only out of pure self-interest. Theocracies are TERRIBLE places to try and make bank.
- Will blue states honour a Dred Scott II? Or a "Fugitive Pedo Law"? I'm actually leaning no on this unless it's imposed by force. Northern governments were hostile, in many cases extremely hostile to both of those laws.
- Who the fuck do the dems field in the next couple presidential elections, including 2024?
- What happens in 2024? Do we see a coup attempt with Red states invalidating their electors? Chance of this are very high in a contested election. If this happens what next? What does the army do? I'm not sure the Army benefits from a RW coup or a delegitimized government since no one's promising them any power, though there's certainly large Red-state and fascist elements within the army. Could be a real fucking mess just within the armed forces themselves.

Overall the main problem with that analysis is that it assumes leftists and even centrists just sit around and do nothing, or flail around ineffectually. While I can't entirely fault that assumption, given the past SEVERAL DECADES, the idea that the pendulum can't swing the other way at all is kind of dumb.

What happens if the RW does try a coup but there's absolutely massive nationwide protests and weeks or months of violence in the streets? It's certainly not impossible. Star Wars prequel jokes aside, I don't see this going the way it has in, say, Orban's Hungary. There's so many countries in the world where democratic forms of government have never had a chance to take root, where having the same leader for 20 or 30 years in spite of people wanting him gone is a normal and tolerated thing, and the GOP just assuming Americans will go along for the same ride is a pretty huge gamble on their part. This is especially true given the US is a far more federalized state where you have strong regional leaders in state governors who can oppose the central government in various forms. GOP control over red states was built from the ground up, which makes that control very strong, but also makes that control extremely hard to replicate in states where that wasn't feasible.

So uh, I dunno. Stuffs gonna happen.

I would say the main thing is to be prepared for violence. Be prepared to try and help victims of it. Be prepared to for those who could potentially commit it against you and yours.

And, if you're so inclined, be prepared to commit it. The soap box and the ballot box are in bad shape indeed - though they are not yet destroyed and should be used for as long as they can - increasingly reducing Americans to the cartridge box as the only remaining means of exercising their franchise.

[Cait]

- Will blue states honour a Dred Scott II? I'm actually leaning no on this unless it's imposed by force.

The whole point of the Dred Scott type of rulings is that states have the ultimate power to decide laws and that federal laws are an overreach on their sovereignity. It's not about making blue states be red, it's about letting red states be red.

[Mongrel]

I also want to add one small, separate key observation made by people far smarter than me: Biden's presidency has, quite unexpectedly, more or less shown us what a Bernie presidency would have been like. No one could have guessed he'd try to tack so far left (by Dem standards), and honestly Bernie would have had even less-buy in from a lot of Dem senators, so I'm not sure he'd have even got as much done.

So apart from a few things like court-packing (which Biden may still try to do!) the critical takeaway here is that the structure is so rotten, that i think we can say pretty confidently Bernie - or any other strongly leftist candidate - wouldn't have made any real difference. No president alone could. GOP power must be broadly confronted and beaten at all levels of government.

[Mongrel]

- Will blue states honour a Dred Scott II? I'm actually leaning no on this unless it's imposed by force.

The whole point of the Dred Scott type of rulings is that states have the ultimate power to decide laws and that federal laws are an overreach on their sovereignity. It's not about making blue states be red, it's about letting red states be red.

You can't view it in isolation though. You have to look at it while also bearing in mind the other legislation of the era, mainly the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850.

It's less likely that a court or government today (at least in the very near future) would try to outright cause someone to not be legally recognized as a person at all as Dred Scott absurdly did, but red states may try to effectively deny citizenship based on felony prohibitions and non compos mentis-type classifications, mixed with the bureaucratic intransigence we already see being used.

The most important outcome will be if blue states can hold strongly or weakly as areas of relative freedom and safety should red states aggressively pursue extradition requests for refugees (and there's no reason to think they won't).

[Mongrel]

Also just fuck the GOP forever for dragging us to a place where we're making legislative comparisons to the 1850's at all. Just fucking fuck them.

[Brantly B.]

Is voting enough at this point?

No.

[Büge]

- Which way will corporate money go? This might be a rare occasion where a majority of corporate interests are horrified by a RW so deranged they know it will ruin the US, if only out of pure self-interest. Theocracies are TERRIBLE places to try and make bank.

But corporations loooove fascism. I think they'd hold their noses to work within a Christian Theocracy if it meant they could run rampant over regulations and workers' rights. And besides, the US has a strongly fatalistic Protestant streak in its political pedigree: if you're poor, it's because you just haven't worked hard enough, not because you're trapped in a cycle of exploitation or lack the economical clout to make your situation better. That kind of thinking is Spanish Fly for capitalists.

[Thad]

Barring a miracle event, can voting and voting alone get us out of a minority christian fascist rule?

Yes, but the path is narrowing.

2020 showed that a significant enough majority turning out to vote is still enough to defeat (some of) the antidemocratic barriers the GOP's been putting up (and the ones that were always there, like the Senate and EC). And that Democrats can win statewide races in states like Arizona and Georgia.

People keep talking about November like it's a foregone conclusion, but it's not. It's likely that Democrats lose the House, but it's not certain. And they may pick up seats in the Senate -- which won't help much legislatively if they lose the House, but might be enough to get filibuster reform passed if they keep it. And keeping the Senate (and growing that majority) is still valuable; appointments are important, and whatever his faults, Biden's been appointing a shitload of federal judges.

That's a lot of maybes, especially in the face of feckless Democratic leadership. I don't know what the hell Biden thinks he's gaining by praising McConnell, and Pelosi and Clyburn stumping for Cuellar right after the Dobbs opinion leaked is astonishingly tone-deaf even for them. Nonetheless, we're seeing that people like Cuellar are vulnerable, and that's a good sign even if he ultimately squeaks out a primary win. (I'm still talking about '22, but come '24 we've definitely got a shot at replacing Sinema with this guy.)

There's also the possibility that the madness of the current SCOTUS becomes impossible for people to ignore. Abortion's been a successful wedge issue because the people who opposed the status quo were more emotionally invested than the people who supported it. For all that the right's been talking about reversing Roe for 50 years, a lot of people are genuinely surprised that they actually did it (or are about to). That's going to result in some significant backlash against the GOP (even before we start talking about stuff like birth control bans and anti-sodomy laws); the question is how much and how soon.

All that said: I wouldn't say we need a miracle, not yet. But the challenges are significant and growing, and one of those challenges is that the Democratic leadership doesn't seem to be taking any of this seriously. (I will say that some Democrats are, and I think there are a lot more of them now than there were during the Obama Administration. I think the party's shifting, but I'm extremely concerned that it's not shifting fast enough.)

If not, do you believe we are actually for real no meme heading toward one of the following three things in the next 20 (or less) years?

1. Dystopian authoritarian theocratic rule.

That's the direction we're heading.

2. A massive Civil Rights movement.

The civil rights movement never ended; we're still in it. BLM is the civil rights movement. The fight for LGBT rights is the civil rights movement. The women's march, abortion rights, and the fight against nativism are the civil rights movement.

3. Civil War.

The odds are growing. I don't think we get #1 without it being closely followed by #3.

[Crick]

I have a hard time believing in something resulting in a full blown Civil War. I think something like an American version of "The Troubles" is more likely, with Qanon adjacents blowing up things and maybe storming places with guns, all while a gridlocked government is sorting itself out. We're sorta already there.

Maybe i'm naive, but my reasons against the civil war idea are sorta:
1. I don't think there's something as economically powerful/culturally vital as slavery nowadays that would make a confederation of states break off.
2. The military capabilities are way different. I don't think the national guard of even, like, four states could withstand a hot conflict with the rest of the US. I think people know that.
3. There's more of "us" than them. As Thad points out, a lot of people are quiet because they expect the status quo to hold. If it doesn't you'll see WAY more people out there. Even now, at protests where white supremacists show up, they're usually outnumbered. Lot of videos of people driving off Proud Boys. A lot of policies considered generally "left" in American politics poll really well, and more and more young people consider themselves more and more left. GOP and their white supremacist power structure only exists by exploiting systems or barricading democratic processes, but at the end of the day, if it came down to people in the street rioting, they're just outnumbered.

[Friday]

I take your reply that the Civil Rights movement never ended well, and you're correct to point that out. I guess what I meant was a massive increase in activity under a new charismatic and effective leader. I know movements don't NEED a leader, but it sure seems to help with the success rate. Or maybe I'm wrong and I'm just myopically focusing on King and Ghandi because that's what I learned in high school.

I have a hard time believing in something resulting in a full blown Civil War. I think something like an American version of "The Troubles" is more likely, with Qanon adjacents blowing up things and maybe storming places with guns, all while a gridlocked government is sorting itself out. We're sorta already there.

Actually this is a good point and I agree. I don't think a "north vs south" "formal" civil war will occur. As Brentai pointed out a while back (I don't remember where, it was a year or two ago) The American Civil War was actually a statistical outlier in how, uh, territorial it was. It was, in a very literal geographical sense, north vs south. Almost all civil wars in almost all other countries have been instead just a massive chaotic mess with no or very few "lines". Just explosions and murder and death and civilians caught in the crossfire as factions vie for constantly shifting and temporary goals.

So yeah I think your point about The Troubles is correct.

Thanks to all who took the time to reply. I want to be clear that this isn't meant as a doomsday thread (despite the title), I just want to discuss the issue as frankly and constructively as possible.

[Thad]

I have a hard time believing in something resulting in a full blown Civil War. I think something like an American version of "The Troubles" is more likely, with Qanon adjacents blowing up things and maybe storming places with guns, all while a gridlocked government is sorting itself out. We're sorta already there.

That's more what I'm picturing, yeah. When I say we're approaching civil war, I don't think it'll look anything like the last one.

I take your reply that the Civil Rights movement never ended well, and you're correct to point that out. I guess what I meant was a massive increase in activity under a new charismatic and effective leader. I know movements don't NEED a leader, but it sure seems to help with the success rate. Or maybe I'm wrong and I'm just myopically focusing on King and Ghandi because that's what I learned in high school.

I think that the rise of a charismatic leader is, by its nature, impossible to predict.

I do think that we're going to see a lot more large protests, and a lot more clashes with the police.

[Mongrel]

I have a hard time believing in something resulting in a full blown Civil War. I think something like an American version of "The Troubles" is more likely, with Qanon adjacents blowing up things and maybe storming places with guns, all while a gridlocked government is sorting itself out. We're sorta already there.

That's more what I'm picturing, yeah. When I say we're approaching civil war, I don't think it'll look anything like the last one.

Also agree here as well. The geographic discontinuity just isn't there and nor is clear regional military power. As Friday (& Brent) rightly point out, even if there's a bit of coasts-vs-mid thing vaguely going on it's not even close to being as clearly defined as the original Civil War was.

One thing I'd be worried about is assassinations. We've already had some weird, potentially-close calls in the past few years - no one knows what would have happened if Pence had gotten in that car on Jan 6th, and Biden was worried enough about his security team that he fired them all and replaced them with guys he knew personally as veep. Then there was that weird two-year op (possibly by Iran), to compromise individual members of Biden's security team. Assassinations can be really destabilizing events, precipitating large-scale violence (especially societies under so much tension already), but also leftist movements in the US have historically suffered worse than right-wing ones if their leaders are killed.

[Crick]

Thanks to all who took the time to reply. I want to be clear that this isn't meant as a doomsday thread (despite the title), I just want to discuss the issue as frankly and constructively as possible.

I know what you mean! For as bad as it is too, I don't really think it's a doomsday thing either. I think a lot of problems in the US are foundational. Buckley v. Valeo, et al essentially means people's opinions on issues don't matter, and that's not really the kind of thing that you can just vote away. People need a kind of pressure that matches what, like, Wal-Mart can do with money.

So this could be like a course correcting thing, you know. Like I said, there's more of us than them.

[Mongrel]

- Which way will corporate money go? This might be a rare occasion where a majority of corporate interests are horrified by a RW so deranged they know it will ruin the US, if only out of pure self-interest. Theocracies are TERRIBLE places to try and make bank.

But corporations loooove fascism. I think they'd hold their noses to work within a Christian Theocracy if it meant they could run rampant over regulations and workers' rights. And besides, the US has a strongly fatalistic Protestant streak in its political pedigree: if you're poor, it's because you just haven't worked hard enough, not because you're trapped in a cycle of exploitation or lack the economical clout to make your situation better. That kind of thinking is Spanish Fly for capitalists.

Corporations are generally pretty keen on fascism, and enjoy governments which are nice and corrupt, but the US's tech-based economy has generally been at-odds with outright theocracies. Any government run by zealots is going to start costing them money, and indeed, we're seeing that in places like Florida or Texas.

True believers, be they religious or ideological, have a way of making everyone's money burn - just look at Russia.

The US in particular has been a haven where corporations have grown used to their place in the sun as quasi-independent often-inherited feudal states, with significant temporal and political power. When I say feudal states, I really mean that. The US was once the land of the Company Town for a reason, and in many ways it still is.

So yes, in the long run they can and should be brought to heel, with their power utterly broken. But if in the short term any corporations are temporarily inclined to share a bed with progressive causes, then progressive causes should absolutely empty those pockets.

[zaratustra]

You shouldn't worry too much about Democrats losing elections, because they have no intention of doing anything but suffocating real left-wing movements, forever.

[Friday]

A bunch of people are on a bus. The bus is moving at a very fast speed, and ahead is a cliff.

One guy stands up. "We should hit the gas!" he says. "There's no cliff ahead."

Second guy stands up. "We should let off the gas," he says. "We don't need to be accelerating toward the cliff."

Third guy stands up. "Letting off the gas won't work," he says. "We need to hit the brakes and turn the wheel."

First guy says "There's no cliff!"

Second guy says "Are you insane? Hitting the brakes and turning the wheel might flip the bus! People could die!"

Third guy says "Yeah, that's true, but if we do what you want to and simply let off the gas, we'll still go over the cliff, just a bit later than if we hit the gas like the first guy wants. Our only logical choice is to hit the brakes and turn the wheel so we don't go over the cliff. Some people might die or be injured from this action, but that's better than everyone dying when we go over the cliff."

Second guy says "You're an insane radical. I know what I'm doing. What we need to do is to reach out to the first guy and get him to see reason and work with us."

The first guy doesn't reply as he is busy frothing at the mouth and screaming racial slurs.

[Mongrel]

Well this is an OOF.



"Any one of these..."

[nosimpleway]

"It's not that The Simpsons Wired predicted anything, it's just that we haven't fixed any of society's problems in 40 years"