this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2025
679 points (97.4% liked)

World News

50736 readers
1728 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

For there to be any kind of real “civil war” there would need to be a very clear distinction between sides and goals alongside states declaring

That's how the US Civil War happened, but frequently a national Civil War does not have such clear boundaries and sides. See Syria for a very messy conflict where about the only thing defining one 'side' was 'not Assad' and very little agreement other than that.

Civil war would be the worst possible outcome to be sure, but a messy situation can just as easily feed a civil war.

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

happened

I'm not saying it has to be the same conditions as our "last" civil war, that might as well have taken place on another planet compared to today's political and information landscape.

I'm saying here and now, today, we would need far different political and geographic lines for there to be anything resembling a "civil war" and really what we're talking about is civil unrest and groups who may rise up in the coming years or decades willing to commit acts of violence. Even then that's not a "civil war" and many nations have come back from that kind of disturbance. Even the US has had more internal revolts, coups and domestic terror groups than we have now. (Look up the original anarchist movement in the US for a wild ride through history.)

I personally take issue with people talking about "civil war" because it doesn't help anything, if anything it removes us further from reality and reinforces the idea that "something is going to happen" by itself, that "someone is coming" to do something and create a big change. Literally, this is the same narrative the Christian right uses but theirs involves Jesus. It prevents people from investing in anything, from taking part in their community, from starting grassroots movements to change our political foundations.