Pretty sure climate change is the answer.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    2 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.

    • @ClinicallydepressedpoochieOP
      link
      1
      edit-2
      2 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
    link
    English
    4
    edit-2
    2 days ago

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

  • @hightrix
    link
    233 days ago

    Nope. Most people in the country still live comfortably.

    Until that is not the case, nothing will happen.

  • @WoodScientist
    link
    283 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      22 days ago

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

      So say we all.

  • @soul
    link
    English
    123 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.

  • HobbitFoot
    link
    fedilink
    English
    333 days ago

    I feel like a Elon Musk backed Trump administration might do it.

    Musk has already stepped in a lot of shit saying that Americans don’t want to work any more as a reason for increasing H1B visas. Trump has also said that inflation isn’t going to be something his administration is going to fix; a lot of his policies will make it worse.

    Combine that with conservative media having a hard time demonizing Luigi is beginning to create a crack between the Republican leadership and its MAGA base.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      103 days ago

      I think the right-wing made a mistake engaging in populism. They’ve politically activated millions of people and are starting to lose control of the narrative. I might be mistaken, but I’ve been getting the feeling that the MAGA folks are becoming increasingly receptive to left-wing populist arguments.

      Even Steve Bannon of all people responded to the H-1B visa drama with a left-wing populist argument, where he said foreign workers who came here on H-1B visas were treated like indentured servants.

      • HobbitFoot
        link
        fedilink
        English
        23 days ago

        The right wing had to engage in right wing populism to retain its base. Mitt Romney wouldn’t have won 2016 or 2024.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          33 days ago

          Meanwhile the Democratic Party refuses to change and is losing its base, allowing the right wing to dominate the narrative. I don’t know what’s going to happen, but the optimistic side of me hopes there will finally be a left populist resurgence, just as the right wing is losing its grip.

    • @NOT_RICK
      link
      English
      53 days ago

      “There seems to be a lot of confusion about this interaction. I personally am the biggest fan of Elon on the planet and I always will be. I’m also capable of disagreeing with people I deeply respect and admire," the user wrote

      Said the conservative who was just told by Elon to go fuck his face. I hope you’re right but they seem pretty easily manipulated still.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    233 days ago

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

  • @CrazyLikeGollum
    link
    English
    193 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      33 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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    143 days ago

    The answer is ‘whatever you feel concerned about’ and multiply that by 300 million. Charles Bukowski said (paraphrasing) that it’s not the big things that will break a man, its the little things that drive men mad - like a broken shoelace.

    It’s not just going to be one big issue but an aggregation of all little issues. And boy, do we have issues.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    53 days ago

    No, it will need to get incredibly worse for anything like a revolution to occur. The only historical events I can think of to parallel would be the collapse of the Czar in Russia during WW1 and the end of the Soviet Union. The common theme is that it took huge stacks of dead people to actually motivate people to do something about their leadership.

    Until the state of things leads to basically all citizens knowing one or more of their own immediate family members dieing of being severely injured from something most people will carry on. Maybe a lot of starving people? Idk, I was surprised how suddenly the feds had money for people during the pandemic. I think they were a little scared their for a second. And of course they made hay of that being the reason for all the problems. Not PPP handouts or anything.

    TLDR, no. We need millions of dead before we are even close.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    103 days ago

    I mean, the fundamental breakdown of civility is going to be the answer, because widespread politically-motivated violence cannot happen without it. How long it will take for the country that keeps threatening to devolve into a civil war to actually do so is anyone’s guess.

    • @IchNichtenLichten
      link
      English
      13 days ago

      fundamental breakdown of civility is going to be the answer

      I mean, have you driven recently? Seems like it’s already started.

  • @not_that_guy05
    link
    9
    edit-2
    3 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      43 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
        link
        13 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”.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          33 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.