
Ask HN: How likely is a US revolution? - reducesuffering
Many countries have undergone revolutions or schisms in the past century: Arab Spring countries, Soviet Union, Cuba, China&#x2F;Taiwan, Korea, Yemen, etc.<p>Recently there have been major catalysis for social unrest, including: increasing economic inequality, novel technological shifts (automation, social media disinformation and censorship), and climate change affecting industries and migration.<p>What are your thoughts on the likelihood that the US will experience a massive upheaval and what precautions can be taken?
======
catsdanxe
Very unlikely. The constant outrage from reporters and verified twitter
accounts does not reflect the majority. The average American doesn't really
care about the issues you listed. They may virtue signal and say "oh it
horrible that tech platforms are censoring people" but they won't stop using
those platforms. With unemployment benefits that pay more than working, the
unemployed aren't going to be upset when they can't find work.

The average American is content with letting the government and corporations
fuck them in the ass while they are told and believe that they have freedom.

~~~
slovette
I love this and I agree completely with the added caveat that “freedom” be
replaced with “comfort”.

------
keiferski
Almost all of the examples you listed occurred following a war, an
intervention/support by foreign powers, or an unsustainable system collapsing.

For the US, the first two are extremely unlikely to happen, while the third is
still essentially harmless if the US is the global hegemonic power and if
Americans in general continue to desire national unity. While people are
critical of aspects of America, most still believe in the fundamental idea and
structure of the country (unlike say, the constituent USSR states.)

I don’t see any of these things changing anytime soon, so no, I would say
there will not be a revolution in the next 20 years. There may be massive
democratic change, but this is expected. The media and Reddit specifically is
not reality and I’d be skeptical of basing your analysis on such sources.

~~~
floppiplopp
I'd agree there won't be a revolution as we've seen in other countries in the
past decade or so. But I wouldn't put away some points so lightly. We're
seeing signs of foreign interference in US politics that fit the Russian
playbook, e.g. the domain registrations of those presidentially retweeted
reopen-campaigns came at least partly from outside the US. Also there is an
increasing divide internally, especially between rural and urban America.

------
kgin
The appetite for revolution is wildly overblown by reporting and the internet.
And people are underestimating the commitment it takes to have a true
revolution.

On the right, even the angriest keyboard commando uncle still wants To be home
before dark.

On the left, there hasn’t even been the commitment to even stage a single
1-day general strike.

The truth is we’re still angry as a hobby. Most people are angry about
aesthetic concerns, about the way the country should feel or look. That’s not
revolution material.

------
dntbnmpls
> Many countries have undergone revolutions or schisms in the past century:
> Arab Spring countries, Soviet Union, Cuba, China/Taiwan, Korea, Yemen, etc.

The US is nothing like those countries. As a matter of fact, all the "schisms"
in the countries you listed are due to the US.

> Recently there have been major catalysis for social unrest, including:
> increasing economic inequality, novel technological shifts (automation,
> social media disinformation and censorship), and climate change affecting
> industries and migration.

Most of the population is in the eastern hemisphere ( 6 billion people ).
Whatever problems occur with climate change, migration, etc they are going to
have to deal with it, not the US or the western hemisphere. As for social
media, most of it is under US control so not much to worry about there. It's
europe, india, china, middle east, etc who have to worry about social media
destabilizing their countries. And I suspect, it will be the US spearheading
the destabilization.

> What are your thoughts on the likelihood that the US will experience a
> massive upheaval and what precautions can be taken?

Pretty much zero. The Arab Spring countries, Soviet Union, Cuba, China/Taiwan,
Korea, Yemen, etc. all experienced upheavals because of major foreign
interference by a much stronger nation - aka the US. We are the ones that put
pressure on the soviet union until it cracked. We are the cause of the
isolation and suffering in cuba. The china/taiwan conflict is entirely a US
creation. Same with korea. Even yemen is a result of our interference via
saudi arabia.

We have no equal to even challenge us, let alone destabilize us to the point
of revolution. There is a reason why during times of trouble, the world -
including china - buys dollars/us treasuries/etc.

In other words, we create schisms around the world, we don't suffer from it.

------
badRNG
Democracies have a built-in pressure valve to allow unrest to disperse, that
is voting. Instead of feeling the need to resort to violence to have political
agency, people _vote._

Dislike growing inequality? You probably voted for Sanders. Want a return to
the pre-Trump days? You likely voted for Biden. Dislike the quarantine
measures? There are lawmakers who represent your perspective.

Once a critical mass of disaffected people is reached, they wind up having
their candidates win elections, which subsequently disperses that pressure.
While the most passionate people are still wearing campaign badges for their
favorite representative, the chances of "revolution" seems unimaginable.

~~~
blackrock
It appears that the voting process has failed.

The electoral college was supposed to prevent someone like Trump from getting
elected, but even that failed to do its job.

After the Civil War, Lincoln and the Union did not eliminate the Confederates,
and allowed them to continue to exist as a scourge on society. They have been
slowly dividing the country, and it appears they have finally succeeded.

And the prevalence of social media, has not helped the cause. Instead, it
appears to be the spark that is lighting the fire, leading to a pile of
dynamite.

At this point, the country is just too large, and too diverse. The political
outlook of the west coast, is far too different from that of the Deep South.

Maybe it’s time to consider, that they should go their own way.

The problem is the nukes. What should we do about the nukes?

~~~
captainredbeard
> Lincoln and the Union did not eliminate the Confederates, and allowed them
> to continue to exist as a scourge on society. They have been slowly dividing
> the country, and it appears they have finally succeeded.

What would you suggest, a pogrom? The Union devastated the South, going well
beyond battle related damage. Hooker destroyed vital infrastructure and
brutalized the people. To suggest further destruction and persecution is
inhumane and barbaric.

~~~
blackrock
No, nobody is suggesting a pogrom.

But, they could have been prevented from resuming power, and attaining future
positions of influence. Otherwise the Civil War was a sacrifice made for
nothing.

Lincoln should have made a law to oversee the southern states, and put in
Federal leadership, that was loyal to the Union cause. And he should have
instituted the law for 100 years, in order to wipe out any future separatist
activities from the Confederates.

But honestly, who knows. The Civil War was a long time ago, and it’s doubtful
that even this idea could have succeeded.

Which leads us to where we are now. It’s too late to do anything like that
anymore. The divisions are now too deep. We need a new solution.

------
matt_s
Nope.

Most of what you see in social media and mainstream media is intended to spark
discussions, get eyeballs/likes/follows and go 'viral' (in the digital sense).

Most people that disagree with the politics of people in office can vote them
out. None of the countries you listed, to my knowledge, are places where every
citizen has that capability.

There have been massive differences in the US since foreigners came here (i.e.
non Native Americans). They all brought their own cultural, religious and
other beliefs with them.

You should check out the book American Nations by Colin Woodard [0] it goes
into detail about how these different areas formed and who settled those areas
pretty much dictates present day politics. These aren't new concepts either -
political parties use these to decide where to campaign for decades now. A map
that represents the areas in question. [1]

0 - [https://www.amazon.com/American-Nations-History-Regional-
Cul...](https://www.amazon.com/American-Nations-History-Regional-Cultures-
ebook/dp/B0052RDIZA)

1 - [https://www.businessinsider.com/the-11-nations-of-the-
united...](https://www.businessinsider.com/the-11-nations-of-the-united-
states-2015-7)

Edit: answered the question.

------
iateanapple
A US revolution is an almost certainty over the coming decades - the American
identity has never been weaker.

The peoples are so different region to region - and are often politically
hostile to one another - what keeps everyone together?

The real question is how violent will the revolution be? I hope there is
peaceful secession.

~~~
zzzcpan
If nothing keeps everyone together, how can there be a revolution, how can
they put the differences aside and unite against the government and political
elites? On the contrary, pushing people against each other is how people are
kept from revolting. Plus throwing everyone in prison for the smallest things
(especially those likely to unite against the government), making people very
afraid of the police, controlling narratives in mass media and media
platforms, etc.

I'd say US is one of the few countries where power is not just really well
protected, but that protection is future proof. Look how all the new ways of
spreading information, new media platforms ended up in the hands of few big
domestic corporations who are obviously big supporters of the system they
exists in and are very cozy with the government, with spreading propaganda,
with censorship of pretty much whatever the government asks to the point of
censoring literally all views on certain subjects if they do not parrot
official government propaganda.

~~~
iateanapple
> how can they put the differences aside and unite against the government and
> political elites?

I doubt we will see a revolution of the people vs the elites.

More likely a group of elites at the state level will want their state to
leave the union.

------
phekunde
A country where people give excuse such as "second _amendment_ " on the topic
of gun control when kids get slaughtered in schools I don't think US citizens
have the ability to think of a revolution. Revolutions require amalgam of
intelligentsia and people with courage. The elites in US(and some other
countries) have successfully dumbed down the general populous and rendered
them ineffective of revolutions. The people in US will be sold more guns and
underground bunkers to hide and kill intruders than to join a revolution.

------
sideshowb
With politics so tribal and voters so easily influenced by adtech, one might
argue that the revolution has already quietly happened.

------
danieltillett
Massive upheaval yes, revolution no. I would say there is a reasonable chance
that the USA dollar will lose reserve currency status in the next 10 years.
When/if this happens then everything will change - for an historical parallel
look at Great Britain before and after the Great War.

~~~
keiferski
What will replace it as the reserve currency? The other options are not
particularly strong. In fact, the COVID situation has only made the dollar
stronger (as a reserve currency).

[https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/29/why-the-us-dollar-is-
still-c...](https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/29/why-the-us-dollar-is-still-
considered-such-a-safe-currency.html)

~~~
danieltillett
If I knew this I wouldn’t be posting in HN :)

China is the obvious answer, but I have this feeling that some sort of
synthetic currency (not bitcoin) will be created to fill the void.

~~~
keiferski
Unlikely that the yuan will be _the_ reserve currency unless China makes major
reforms. They seem to be headed in the opposite direction, so I don't think
this is likely in the near future. Long-term (50-100 years) it definitely
could be, though, assuming China democratizes at some point.

------
giantg2
You might have civil disobedience, maybe even on a mass scale with some
politicians or states joining in or condoning it. I don't think there will be
an actual revolution.

------
byoung2
I think we are 50-50 we will have widespread riots before the end of the year.
People were already primed for revolution with Black Lives Matter, #meToo,
Occupy movements, etc. With the recent rise in hate groups, we were already on
a path toward what happened in 1992 with the Los Angeles Riots [1]. I think
the lockdowns due to COVID-19 and the related effect on the economy, we might
be accelerating the pace.

1\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots)

~~~
badRNG
While there are genuine issues that BLM and Occupy have organized around, the
movements certainly appear largely rudderless. I don't say this to dismiss
their position, however if you ask 50 protesters what it would take to bring
about the change they would like to see, and you will get 50 different and
often contradictory answers.

Historically, successful revolutions were organized around a larger structure,
a party usually. If these groups of alienated and disaffected people had such
organization, they'd almost certainly use it to gain electoral wins, not wage
war against the government. Absent such organization, it doesn't seem likely
anything other than riots or protests will be accomplished.

~~~
watwut
> Historically, successful revolutions were organized around a larger
> structure, a party usually.

French revolution was massive confusing clusterfck of fighting parties. The
same goes for Russian revolution where there were like five armies fighting
against each other.

The fall of soviet union was also not about single larger opponent party
building power.

------
anigbrowl
A revolution is highly unlikely, but I give the odds of some irreversible
structural change (eg fragmentation) within the next 10 years >50%.

~~~
Trasmatta
Fragmentation in what way?

~~~
anigbrowl
A regional breakup/Balkanization.

------
Rerarom
I think the state has enough disparate forces that are both reactionary and
armed so that no revolution can succeed.

------
probinso
check out "it could happen here"

