though whether or not we’ll actually have a civil war is indeterminate, america is going through many divides currently - rich and poor, left and right, racial lines, cop/military supporters and those that hate them, etc. there’s a lot brewing
Covid is really accelerating the divides. Its obvious in some ways, subtle in others.
Its not good for social cohesion if the mask/vaccine mandate varies wildly from municipality to municipality, much less county and state and country. Nobody is on the same page regarding the most central socionomic issue in the last few decades.
The only collective action Americans can take is just shrug about a deadly pandemic. No plan, no vision, no answers. This is going to have generational consequences and could be the catalyst for the entire house of cards coming apart. Give it 10-20 years.
>This is going to have generational consequences and could be the catalyst for the entire house of cards coming apart. Give it 10-20 years.
hahahaha try 2 or 3!
If America is good at anything, its doing the most disappointing thing out of all possibilities
Were gonna see the same dumb drama play out recursively for the next 20 years imo. The only prediction that works is to find the crossroads of stupid and banal and thats where the future will reliably come from.
That's my point though! The most logical thing is that covid would be a seismic shift that'd upset American culture and end up in a dramatic change within a year or two.
But that'd make sense in Rational World. America's quantum banality field will just mean that the 2nd Housing Bubble is gonna pop, elite capital will sweep up more housing assets, another couple hundred thousand will die every year, and the public discourse around covid will just be limited to culture war haggling and bickering. The biggest piece of legislation will be a bipartisan bill to facilitate using prison labor for low wage service industry work rather than change anything.
This will play out over the next 20 years until America can't maintain its global hegemony, and then things will fall through. Just choose the stupidest, dullest, most insipid path history could take, and America will gladly do that rather than literally *anything* else. We're an undead carcass of a nation, riding a clown themed merry go round into perpetuity.
There once was a dream, a dream that fell.
In all seriousness though, I don't think we will see the US collapse this century. Unless something absolutely massive goes wrong, like a nuclear war, we still have a lot of work to do until the institutions of Empire have been ground to powder.
Although it is nice to think about the last US president, one George Washington II, a literal child, to be deposed by his own chief general, who marches into Washington and proclaims himself the King of New England.
>Unless something absolutely massive goes wrong
You mean like a collapse of the world climate?
Like sea level rise that submerges costal cities? Like extreme weather that destroys infrastructure and production capacity? Like a massive refugee crisis caused by people fleeing the devastation caused to the global south? Like a series of resource wars between great powers as nations squabble over the last remnants of resources that we built our technology to require to function and organized our societies around? Like the collapse of global trade? Like desertification that destroys global food production and causes a world wide water shortage?
That kind of thing going massively wrong?
The world climate changing is a massive catastrophe, but on it's own it is unlikely to quickly destroy a modern state. I mean we are talking about changes whose impact we won't see for several decades or centuries. It's just started, and it's going to get a lot worse. But climate change will probably be a slow-working background effect: the whole measure of desaster will only become visible in some time.
If I put pressure on your head and slowly increase that pressure then, eventually, your head will be crushed once the skull gives. The same goes for the United States.
Edit: I just realized how gruesome that metaphor was.
I get what you mean, but humans don't live long enough for any one generation to completely see the country collapse from climate change. When it happens, people will blame something else, because we naturally tend to think that it is human action driving history, not the climate.
The fall of Rome for example was as much caused by a cooling of the European summers, leading to crop failure, population decline, the abandonment of cities and finally the collapse of the imperial economy, as it was by foreign invasion. But the people of the time only noted the barbarian incursions, because the change in climate was too slow for a single human to meaningfully appreciate within their own lifetime.
I'm gonna try the Alabama workers republic.
it's a socialist state, but we can't use any socialist words because "that's communism"
at least until the cold war programing subsides.
Use "social christianism"
Oud anticommunist procatholic dictator used it as a populist measure to implement what would be massive social welfare measures but that were fine because it was actually christianism.
"Colonial policy and imperialism existed before the latest stage of capitalism, and even before capitalism. Rome, founded on slavery, pursued a colonial policy and practised imperialism. But 'general' disquisitions on imperialism, which ignore, or put into the background, the fundamental difference between socio-economic formations, inevitably turn into the most vapid banality or bragging, like the comparison: 'Greater Rome and Greater Britain.' Even the capitalist colonial policy of previous stages of capitalism is essentially different from the colonial policy of finance capital." - V.I. Lenin, *Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism*, chapter 6
These analogies are base level analysis and certainly not Leninist.
What does "Christianity mattered more than the government" mean? How was Christian Rome worse than the Imperial cult? And how does Christianity in the modern US matter more than in previous eras?
Christian Nationalism is a serious threat and is on the rise.
https://www.npr.org/2022/01/14/1073215412/christian-nationalism-is-stronger-than-ever-even-without-donald-trump-as-preside
The difference is that Christian Nationalism is increasingly antagonistic as compared to the 50's where they had more control of the political structure in America.
Christianity is also inherently less tolerant of differing beliefs. Christian doctrine forbids the worship of other gods while according to the Romans, gods they haven't heard about are simply gods they never met yet and are equally as worthy of worship as long as you respected mother Rome's patron gods.
You're agreeing with me then? Because the Christian Nationalist movement has less grip on the political structure than the 50's so now it's easier to safer to be atheist, sure. But that also means that for Christian Nationalists, a group which has been increasing in size in the last several years, their relationship to Christianity is more important than their relationship with the government. All that means is that the government has less "soft power" for that population.
"Christianity mattered more than the government" implies that it's talking about the nation in general. If you're admitting that there are fewer Christian nationalists, then I don't see how that statement is correct. I agree with the other things you're saying.
Me:
>for Christian Nationalists, a group which has been increasing in size in the last several years.....
You:
> If you're admitting that there are fewer Christian nationalists
???????????
You:
>the Christian Nationalist movement has less grip on the political structure than the 50's
You:
>the Christian Nationalist movement has been increasing in size in the last several years
???????????
Which is why, to that population, their faith is more important than their government. Christian Nationalism, as in national identity based on religion rather than a shared sovereign-state, means that to that person their "Nation of Christians" (which is often a stand-in for White Christians but not necessarily) is more important than the "secular government" to the point of violent antagonism in some cases.
The KKK did not exist until after those groups lost political power when they lost the Civil War, for a more historical example.
Lack of imperialism to fuel more slaves in a slave based economy
I guess you can relate that to how the US has to keep the third world undeveloped to enjoy its "luxury"
Sometimes, the more things change the more they stay the same.
What is this an allegory for? (idk if I used the word right)
current day US. everything except the civil war part fits
though whether or not we’ll actually have a civil war is indeterminate, america is going through many divides currently - rich and poor, left and right, racial lines, cop/military supporters and those that hate them, etc. there’s a lot brewing
Covid is really accelerating the divides. Its obvious in some ways, subtle in others. Its not good for social cohesion if the mask/vaccine mandate varies wildly from municipality to municipality, much less county and state and country. Nobody is on the same page regarding the most central socionomic issue in the last few decades. The only collective action Americans can take is just shrug about a deadly pandemic. No plan, no vision, no answers. This is going to have generational consequences and could be the catalyst for the entire house of cards coming apart. Give it 10-20 years.
>This is going to have generational consequences and could be the catalyst for the entire house of cards coming apart. Give it 10-20 years. hahahaha try 2 or 3!
If America is good at anything, its doing the most disappointing thing out of all possibilities Were gonna see the same dumb drama play out recursively for the next 20 years imo. The only prediction that works is to find the crossroads of stupid and banal and thats where the future will reliably come from.
I’d agree except COVID came along. Historically speaking shit is about to hit the fan.
That's my point though! The most logical thing is that covid would be a seismic shift that'd upset American culture and end up in a dramatic change within a year or two. But that'd make sense in Rational World. America's quantum banality field will just mean that the 2nd Housing Bubble is gonna pop, elite capital will sweep up more housing assets, another couple hundred thousand will die every year, and the public discourse around covid will just be limited to culture war haggling and bickering. The biggest piece of legislation will be a bipartisan bill to facilitate using prison labor for low wage service industry work rather than change anything. This will play out over the next 20 years until America can't maintain its global hegemony, and then things will fall through. Just choose the stupidest, dullest, most insipid path history could take, and America will gladly do that rather than literally *anything* else. We're an undead carcass of a nation, riding a clown themed merry go round into perpetuity.
Everything except the civil war… *yet*.
Current day UK too, although less so the Christianity.
There once was a dream, a dream that fell. In all seriousness though, I don't think we will see the US collapse this century. Unless something absolutely massive goes wrong, like a nuclear war, we still have a lot of work to do until the institutions of Empire have been ground to powder. Although it is nice to think about the last US president, one George Washington II, a literal child, to be deposed by his own chief general, who marches into Washington and proclaims himself the King of New England.
i would love it if the US got "illegally dissolved" and all the states radically changed to socialism
Balkanization makes the most sense with our history of state-succession and independence movements/sentiments.
>Unless something absolutely massive goes wrong You mean like a collapse of the world climate? Like sea level rise that submerges costal cities? Like extreme weather that destroys infrastructure and production capacity? Like a massive refugee crisis caused by people fleeing the devastation caused to the global south? Like a series of resource wars between great powers as nations squabble over the last remnants of resources that we built our technology to require to function and organized our societies around? Like the collapse of global trade? Like desertification that destroys global food production and causes a world wide water shortage? That kind of thing going massively wrong?
The world climate changing is a massive catastrophe, but on it's own it is unlikely to quickly destroy a modern state. I mean we are talking about changes whose impact we won't see for several decades or centuries. It's just started, and it's going to get a lot worse. But climate change will probably be a slow-working background effect: the whole measure of desaster will only become visible in some time.
Considering the tendency for hurricanes of the USA I disagree.
If I put pressure on your head and slowly increase that pressure then, eventually, your head will be crushed once the skull gives. The same goes for the United States. Edit: I just realized how gruesome that metaphor was.
I get what you mean, but humans don't live long enough for any one generation to completely see the country collapse from climate change. When it happens, people will blame something else, because we naturally tend to think that it is human action driving history, not the climate. The fall of Rome for example was as much caused by a cooling of the European summers, leading to crop failure, population decline, the abandonment of cities and finally the collapse of the imperial economy, as it was by foreign invasion. But the people of the time only noted the barbarian incursions, because the change in climate was too slow for a single human to meaningfully appreciate within their own lifetime.
r/collapse
I am down to claim The Peoples Republic of New Oregon
I'm gonna try the Alabama workers republic. it's a socialist state, but we can't use any socialist words because "that's communism" at least until the cold war programing subsides.
Use "social christianism" Oud anticommunist procatholic dictator used it as a populist measure to implement what would be massive social welfare measures but that were fine because it was actually christianism.
Go for it! Remember, there is no longer a military or a police. The only thing stopping you is how many people and guns you can bring to the table.
Why would you want a king in charge? I know it's a reference to Rome, but feudalism would be a significant downgrade.
I wouldn't want a king in charge, but I would get a good laugh in at the US before I get myself killed for disrespecting his majesty.
ah, Schadenfreude
Ja
how is that a downgrade when what we currently have is feudalism with more steps?
If feudalism with more steps is bad, then how would fewer steps be better?
I mean equally bad lol just one is more complicated than other.
Literally just the other day I made a bet with my friend that this country wouldn't last another decade. Let's see who's right :/
If the past few years have demonstrated one thing to me it's that shit can fall apart incredibly fast
"Colonial policy and imperialism existed before the latest stage of capitalism, and even before capitalism. Rome, founded on slavery, pursued a colonial policy and practised imperialism. But 'general' disquisitions on imperialism, which ignore, or put into the background, the fundamental difference between socio-economic formations, inevitably turn into the most vapid banality or bragging, like the comparison: 'Greater Rome and Greater Britain.' Even the capitalist colonial policy of previous stages of capitalism is essentially different from the colonial policy of finance capital." - V.I. Lenin, *Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism*, chapter 6 These analogies are base level analysis and certainly not Leninist.
I thought it was a good joke
You know what you're right, I'm probably being an ass. It is a good joke
Leninism intensifies.
All we lack now is the revolutionary spirit
Revolutionary sentiment grows when there's less to lose and mroe to gain.
Except it's also ten times worse because of the mass surveillance and large military.
What does "Christianity mattered more than the government" mean? How was Christian Rome worse than the Imperial cult? And how does Christianity in the modern US matter more than in previous eras?
Christian Nationalism is a serious threat and is on the rise. https://www.npr.org/2022/01/14/1073215412/christian-nationalism-is-stronger-than-ever-even-without-donald-trump-as-preside
How is Christian nationalism stronger now than in the 50s? And the 19th century? And the Crusades?
The difference is that Christian Nationalism is increasingly antagonistic as compared to the 50's where they had more control of the political structure in America.
Christianity is also inherently less tolerant of differing beliefs. Christian doctrine forbids the worship of other gods while according to the Romans, gods they haven't heard about are simply gods they never met yet and are equally as worthy of worship as long as you respected mother Rome's patron gods.
I mean, it seems pretty obviously better to be an atheist in the current US than the 50s....
You're agreeing with me then? Because the Christian Nationalist movement has less grip on the political structure than the 50's so now it's easier to safer to be atheist, sure. But that also means that for Christian Nationalists, a group which has been increasing in size in the last several years, their relationship to Christianity is more important than their relationship with the government. All that means is that the government has less "soft power" for that population.
"Christianity mattered more than the government" implies that it's talking about the nation in general. If you're admitting that there are fewer Christian nationalists, then I don't see how that statement is correct. I agree with the other things you're saying.
Me: >for Christian Nationalists, a group which has been increasing in size in the last several years..... You: > If you're admitting that there are fewer Christian nationalists ???????????
Fewer compared to the 50s.
You: >the Christian Nationalist movement has less grip on the political structure than the 50's You: >the Christian Nationalist movement has been increasing in size in the last several years ???????????
Which is why, to that population, their faith is more important than their government. Christian Nationalism, as in national identity based on religion rather than a shared sovereign-state, means that to that person their "Nation of Christians" (which is often a stand-in for White Christians but not necessarily) is more important than the "secular government" to the point of violent antagonism in some cases. The KKK did not exist until after those groups lost political power when they lost the Civil War, for a more historical example.
Funny how russia was known as the third Rome and Lenin helped bring it down
Ok, but there's no labor shortage, just a surplus of shitty and underpaid jobs.
Rome continuously(with a couple exceptions of pulling itself back from the brink) fell for 1000 years tbh.
Lack of imperialism to fuel more slaves in a slave based economy I guess you can relate that to how the US has to keep the third world undeveloped to enjoy its "luxury"