this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2026
20 points (85.7% liked)
AskUSA
1196 readers
1 users here now
About
Community for asking and answering any question related to the life, the people or anything related to the USA. Non-US people are welcome to provide their perspective! Please keep in mind:
- !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !uspolitics@lemmy.world - politics in our daily lives is inescapable, but please post overtly political things there rather than here
- !flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com - similarly things with the goal of overt agitation have their place, which is there rather than here
Rules
- Be nice or gtfo
- Discussions of overt political or agitation nature belong elsewhere
- Follow the rules of discuss.online
Sister communities
Related communities
- !asklemmy@lemmy.world
- !asklemmy@sh.itjust.works
- !nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
- !showerthoughts@lemmy.world
- !uspolitics@lemmy.world
- !politics@piefed.social
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't think we are anywhere near civil war. I believe we might be on the verge of state violence against protestors.
You'll know we're on the brink of civil war when there is open combat between militia or national guard and the military and the military doesn't instantly put them down.
A military coup might be slightly more likely or at least doable. But I'm not sure there is anyone left in charge who might lead that. Plus, it is by definition treason, and no soldier takes that lightly. And the resultant government might not be what one might want.
I hate to say this, but the US isn't going to pull the rest of the world out of this mess. The way forward is through. Or wait for cholesterol to do its job and hold your breath for real elections this fall.
Agreed. The institutional resistance isn't strong enough for a real civil war. You would have to see actual defection among military, government, or business leaders. I don't see that happening.
An insurgency is far more likely but it's unclear if it could succeed against the might of the US military and intelligence agencies.
I think neither of these is particularly desirable. If the regime wins they come out much stronger, emboldened and battle-hardened.
Instead, we should be doing everything we can to destroy the US economy. This will be much harder to respond to with overwhelming force, easier to enact in secret and in public, and have more or less the same effect as fighting a military conflict without the destruction of human life.
Do you think state violence against protestors would be the precursor to civil war or at least an insurgency?
Americans are armed, right? Would state violence be met with silence?
I can't say. It's true that lots of us have guns, but the people who've been itching to use them are largely happy with the government. On the other hand, I was just seeing that Black Panthers are chilling in Philadelphia, heavily armed with serious firepower.
The thing is, if we get into a shootout with the military or ice, that will certainly lead to invocation of the insurgency act and that will effectively end democracy here. Most of us understand Trump would love a shooting war because essentially any opposition to him or his stormtroopers would be sedition.
He's testing the waters even now. How much abuse and violence will protestors endure before they do fight back? We're hanging on by a thread here. Clinging to the faint hope that somehow we will make it to the elections, and that they will result in curbing his power.
Those are some big ifs. And if we fail in November, most of us will look to 2028. I always wondered why the Germans let Hitler continue to do what he did. But now I it see it. If they moved too fast there would be resistance. But as long as they move slowly, people think it's not much worse today than yesterday — that fighting against it would be terrible and we'd probably die because there aren't enough of us.
No, I don't think there will be a moment when we throw down Trump. His presidency will end in 2028 because Democrats win big this year, or he will be a wartime president and that will end only with his natural death and what happens next will be up to... I guess Vance.
But you should know, I'm not very good at predictions. I never thought Trump had a chance in either election. So take all of that with a huge grain of salt.
Trump is the mouth piece, the real ones working him are Steven Miller and Heritage Foundation. Though there is some hope that MAGA will essentially devolve into inter fighting without him because they're so focused and centered on Trump. Vance has none of the wide range support.
Have a listen to Jon Stewart's Weekly Show podcast episode about revolution. It might alter your opinion a bit.
https://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/pdst.fm/e/pscrb.fm/rss/p/mgln.ai/e/433/claritaspod.com/measure/traffic.megaphone.fm/QCD1751661201.mp3?updated=1752337232
Bit more info on the linked podcast episode (July 10 2025):
"In an era that can feel like a tinderbox, Jon is joined by Tony Gilroy, creator of "Andor" and Oscar nominee, and Mike Duncan, bestselling author and creator of the "History of Rome" and "Revolutions" podcasts. Together, they examine what draws ordinary people into extraordinary historical moments, explore the catalysts that spark revolutions, and consider how both fictional narratives and historical analysis illuminate our present. Plus, Jon reacts to the latest Epstein file news or lack thereof."
I listened to it and enjoyed the episode.
Edit: For relevance to this week, they talk about ICE oppression and an expected incident will lead to an attempt at marshal law.
I'll listen because I like Jon Stewart, but I'm a former soldier and I've been around a while, and I don't think he nor his panel is going to say anything to change my mind. But I'll give it a listen. Who knows. He's a bright guy.
I don't expect you to change your opinion. Everyone on the internet is loyal to their own brand. It's just a very good perspective on the topic.
I don't have a brand or following or even loyalty to opinions I held yesterday if they no longer serve me today. I've changed my mind on a great many things over the course of my life, and while I do struggle with shame when I've been wrong, the truth must ultimately be served.
Which is just to say, I have my fervent beliefs but when I'm wrong, I accept that and adapt, because the truth won't bend to accommodate me. I don't have that kind of money.
Cool.