Pretty sure climate change is the answer.

  • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    11 days ago

    Historically, in the US at least, violent movements are a precursor to peaceful social change. People protest and protest peaceful for decades, and little to nothing actually changes.

    I mean think about it, do you think for example that an insurance company that is run by people freely willing to kill tens of thousands of people have any problem just ignoring any number of protesters? No one ever got any rights by asking nicely. Every social change we’ve experienced has had both peaceful and violent components.

    This doesn’t morally justify violence, but it does show that violence doesn’t just keep escalating until we go full on civil war. Whenever inequality or injustice gets to critical levels, some desperate people decide that nonviolence doesn’t work and that more extreme actions are needed. Suffragettes were involved in many arson campaigns. Slavery didn’t end until the Union army forced it to end. Unions got their rights to organize through armed battles and by torching factories with their bosses locked inside. The black civil rights movement required both non-violent resistance, but also violent groups like the Black Panthers waiting in the wings, offering a more violent solution if a peaceful one wasn’t found. Stonewall was a riot.

    America tends to go through periods of increasing wealth and social inequality. Things build up until some people feel so pressured, either by personal circumstance or ideology, that they believe violence is the only option. This doesn’t make this violence right or just, but it is simply part of human nature. It happens again and again and again. When the elite push the masses far enough, eventually they start killing elites and setting their property on fire. And there’s not a whole lot that can be done to prevent it, as these tend to be random crimes by detached individuals acting on their own. The elites will always overreach and respond with harsher criminal penalties. But when someone is willing to throw their life away for something, there’s really no penalties that will make a difference.

    And ultimately, that kind of violence, or threat of it, is usually what breaks the dam that previously prevented peaceful social change. Elites rarely give a single iota about the common man. In order to acquire that level of wealth and power, you pretty much have to be a sociopath in some form or another. That is as true now as it was in the age of hereditary nobility. But eventually the elite learn that something they actually care about - their own wealth or their own lives, are at risk. And even if the elite can hide themselves behind private armies, they inevitably find that their vast holdings of property aren’t so easily protected. Arson has historically played a huge role in these types of social inflection points.

    So pressure will continue to build, but society isn’t going to break. Rather, crimes against life and, especially property, will continue. I sadly expect to see a lot of arson carried out by incendiary drones in the near future. And these acts of violence will continue to grow ever more common until the sociopaths at the top realize, “wait, it’s actually costing me more money NOT to improve things for the common man, let’s throw the people some bones.”

    That’s pretty much how every right or liberty you enjoy today was achieved. Rarely does outright revolution completely overthrow the old order and bring out the literal guillotines. The French Revolution was the exception, not the rule. What we are seeing now is just the normal and inevitable course of history, that has happened time and time again. The people get pushed and exploited past a critical level, and the more unhinged among the population start taking violent action. This violence builds and builds, and eventually the elite realize it’s more profitable to accept some of those quite reasonable reforms that the non-violent folks have been politely asking for for decades.

    Take heart. This has all happened before. It is happening now. And in the future, it will happen again.

  • hightrix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    Nope. Most people in the country still live comfortably.

    Until that is not the case, nothing will happen.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    11 days ago

    Nope, it’s always a surprise! It’ll probably be some damned foolish thing in the Balkans though.

  • CrazyLikeGollum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    I doubt it will be climate change specifically. I think it will be the increasing political divisiveness. It’ll be a whole bunch of different issues, climate change included, that neither political party can agree on the reality of, much less how to address them that will continue to escalate tensions between the two major political parties until we reach the point of a second civil war.

    I think America is less than 50 years away from that point. The path we’re on ends in war. Who knows if our country will survive.

    • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      50 years is generous, I could realistically see widespread civil disorder by the end of the decade. People are pissed and verging on desperate, and I don’t blame them. It’s finally becoming blatant to the common person just how rigged the system is against the masses, and the social contract is rapidly crumbling.

  • soul@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    10 days ago

    You never know what it will actually be. In fact, it’s likely that it’ll be too late before people realize it.

  • Xaphanos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    11 days ago

    H5N1 with 50% mortality. Collapse of the economy. Food shortages. Fuel shortages. Power outages.

  • not_that_guy05@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    Not climate change.

    There’s a reason there’s American companies buying up fresh water and aquifers all over the world. When it comes to pushing and shoving, the US would have the upper hand.

    • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 days ago

      That’s a blood statement to assume they’d be able to keep guard on it from people that would be literally dying of thirst.

      • not_that_guy05@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 days ago

        Do you think they won’t protect something that will become a national security? Look at what they do with oil and “national security”.

        • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 days ago

          There’s a huge difference between oil and water when water reserves need defense, the latter of which rendering the former a non-issue.

          Water wars will make oil wars look like kindergarteners playing in a sandbox.

  • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    I would say that people losing rights hand over fist would be the breaking point, but 50% of the population doesn’t care about that apparently.

    In reality my guess is cost of living as everyone has to buy groceries or deal with health insurance, and it’s something that everyone can agree on that it sucks.

    That, or death by a thousand cuts.

    • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      Us Americans have lots of rights. They’ve all been eroded at over the years. People like rights, I’m almost sure of it. I’m sure they’ll really regret losing them.

  • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Unfortunately for all the accelerationists here that are salivating over the idea, America is not even close to a breaking point.

  • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    Political breaking point or physical breaking point?

    Politically, I’d say the whole national debt thing is going to take a toll and we’re going to see internationally backed revolutions in the US, in every part that wasn’t one of the thirteen colonies.

    Physically though? If anything, it would be something like damage to the ecosystem.

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 days ago

        So there’s this thing called MMT which essentially (vast oversimplification incoming) opines that the national debt is meaningless as long as we’re the dominant military power and everyone uses our currency (most large multinational trade deals are balanced with USD and most currencies derive a portion of their value from the country’s stockpile of USD). That theory has so far not been proven correct nor incorrect but we might be both 1) coming up on the first real test of MMT and 2) seriously breaking assumptions of MMT (BRICS has been investigating an alternative trade currency and Russia has a lot of oil and gas it wants to sell but USD sanctions have prevented).

        Is MMT correct or fantasy? Well, a lot of MMT supporters are highly paid government employees whose employer really wants them to say it’s correct but we haven’t really been able to run an experiment on it or anything.

  • 11111one11111@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    Nope. We are in the wheel of a machine driven by corporate interests protected by a government with an unmatchable military complex financed by American tax dollars being paid by a society who follows whatever carrot network media decides to hold infront of our nose. The current state of America’s governing powers is assuming the formn.01% has always dreamed of. A world where the poor get poorer while the market and it’s investing parties get richer. All governing bodies dream of a constant state of too poor to change but not poor enough to risk life or threaten the controlling body’s prosperity. America will remain at this state until people realize the fight isn’t against an opposing political belief. The fight is between the American people and the American government. For as long as this political polarity goes on, there will never be a unilaterally directed body sting enough to foce change.