A Destabilized United States, a thought exercise

sklarbodds

Administrator
Moderator
Nov 30, 2006
32,533
38,128
113
I think few would disagree with the following statements:

1) The US is the most powerful nation in the world
2) The US plays a huge part throughout the world preventing horrible dictators from doing horrible things (sometimes we cause it LOL)
3) The overwhelming majority of currencies across the world are backed by the US dollar
4) Many countries rely on the US to survive
5) Many countries economy is reliant on US participation

Assuming we all agree with 1-5 (not necessarily whether or not we want them to be true)...

What would happen to the world if the US was destabilized?

Let's say civil war breaks out or the federal government collapses (again, let's not debate why or who's fault it would be)...how would the world as a whole recover?

What about technological progress? Infrastructure?

Just curious. I feel like we're closer to that than at any point since the civil war.
 

EriktheRed

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2001
8,185
6,965
113
I think few would disagree with the following statements:

1) The US is the most powerful nation in the world
2) The US plays a huge part throughout the world preventing horrible dictators from doing horrible things (sometimes we cause it LOL)
3) The overwhelming majority of currencies across the world are backed by the US dollar
4) Many countries rely on the US to survive
5) Many countries economy is reliant on US participation

Assuming we all agree with 1-5 (not necessarily whether or not we want them to be true)...

What would happen to the world if the US was destabilized?

Let's say civil war breaks out or the federal government collapses (again, let's not debate why or who's fault it would be)...how would the world as a whole recover?

What about technological progress? Infrastructure?

Just curious. I feel like we're closer to that than at any point since the civil war.

If the United States went down the crapper it would be a global recession at a minimum.
 

Huskermatt23

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
Jan 11, 2017
5,425
11,094
113
Seattle
It would lead to another industrial revolution similar to the last time the majority progressives in the US crushed the minority racist conservatives who tried to undermine democracy and destroy America to maintain their ways in the civil war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 94husker

sklarbodds

Administrator
Moderator
Nov 30, 2006
32,533
38,128
113
It would lead to another industrial revolution similar to the last time the majority progressives in the US crushed the minority racist conservatives who tried to undermine democracy and destroy America to maintain their ways in the civil war.
If that were true, the question is could the country and/or world survive it?
 

ScarletNCream

Athletic Director
Gold Member
Jan 4, 2007
13,518
24,269
113
Yes the world would survive it. It would leave so many gaps and uncertainties and power plays in its wake I’d imagine it would result in a world war between Asia and the rest of the world.

The world does seem to have an ugly little balance that works right now
 
  • Like
Reactions: 94husker and zar45

Huskermatt23

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
Jan 11, 2017
5,425
11,094
113
Seattle
If that were true, the question is could the country and/or world survive it?
It would hurt economically for a short term, but once those tards are out of the way the economy would accelerate so fast that people will wonder why we let minority rule last so long in this country? The productive parts of the country would stop being controlled by the unproductive parts of the country. Might mean that the US will not be the hegemonic power in the world, but that would be remedied with any future war as it was with WW1 and WW2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 94husker

EriktheRed

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2001
8,185
6,965
113
It would lead to another industrial revolution similar to the last time the majority progressives in the US crushed the minority racist conservatives who tried to undermine democracy and destroy America to maintain their ways in the civil war.

Wait so the progressives in the U.S. in the early 20th century were conservatives? LOL Like Woodrow Wilson

The party shifting 10 times in convenient times does not work.
 

Huskermatt23

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
Jan 11, 2017
5,425
11,094
113
Seattle
Wait so the progressives in the U.S. in the early 20th century were conservatives? LOL Like Woodrow Wilson

The party shifting 10 times in convenient times does not work.
Apparently you need to learn some history.. the civil war was not in the early 20th century and Woodrow Wilson was not the president.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 94husker

sklarbodds

Administrator
Moderator
Nov 30, 2006
32,533
38,128
113
Apparently you need to learn some history.. the civil war was not in the early 20th century and Woodrow Wilson was not the president.
I assume he was referring to the industrial revolution, which is what you said in your initial post
 

zar45

All-American
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2016
4,693
11,769
113
I think few would disagree with the following statements:

1) The US is the most powerful nation in the world
2) The US plays a huge part throughout the world preventing horrible dictators from doing horrible things (sometimes we cause it LOL)
3) The overwhelming majority of currencies across the world are backed by the US dollar
4) Many countries rely on the US to survive
5) Many countries economy is reliant on US participation

Assuming we all agree with 1-5 (not necessarily whether or not we want them to be true)...

What would happen to the world if the US was destabilized?

Let's say civil war breaks out or the federal government collapses (again, let's not debate why or who's fault it would be)...how would the world as a whole recover?

What about technological progress? Infrastructure?

Just curious. I feel like we're closer to that than at any point since the civil war.

Russia makes a land grab. China makes a land grab. Europe rebuffs Russia. India and Australia rebuff China. Iran makes some moves. Israel nukes Iran. WWIII shakes out to greater economic devastation and general destruction than any war known to man. China probably winds up on top. Maybe.
 

Red_Hack

Assistant Head Coach
Dec 20, 2005
10,225
13,549
113
I think few would disagree with the following statements:

1) The US is the most powerful nation in the world
2) The US plays a huge part throughout the world preventing horrible dictators from doing horrible things (sometimes we cause it LOL)
3) The overwhelming majority of currencies across the world are backed by the US dollar
4) Many countries rely on the US to survive
5) Many countries economy is reliant on US participation

Assuming we all agree with 1-5 (not necessarily whether or not we want them to be true)...

What would happen to the world if the US was destabilized?

Let's say civil war breaks out or the federal government collapses (again, let's not debate why or who's fault it would be)...how would the world as a whole recover?

What about technological progress? Infrastructure?

Just curious. I feel like we're closer to that than at any point since the civil war.
Simple. China. They are outspending the USA of foreign aid already and have strategically spent that money on the votes in the UN and small nation-states to take control from the USA and Russia. Their currency is already being used in some oil markets. One of the core reasons for BitCoin's meteoric rise. Instability in the US and the 10yr note rate all spell long-term doom for the US greenback on a global stage. And that is seconded by the rise of gold.

If Trump is President on Jan 21st, you will see an economic meltdown the world over as it loses faith in the American monetary system. Although that is secondary to the Fed policy when it comes to the dollar standing. The treasonous act would simply be the match.

The agreements that China has secured in the last 4 years from some of our historically strongest allies, has already laid the foundation for this demise. All why we sat on the sidelines and pouted.
 

Huskermatt23

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
Jan 11, 2017
5,425
11,094
113
Seattle
So Woodrow Wilson very much a Democrat inviting the Klan to the Whitehouse. Derrp Derp Derp. Not such great research from your side.
Yea this might blow your mind but after the civil rights act was passed by the democratic party, all the racists and southerners jumped to the republican party that welcomed them with open arms, and still welcome them because they believe there are good people on both sides of the argument. Derp derp derp..

The republican party was once the progressive party in America, but most of the progressives left the party during the progressive movement at the turn of the century eventually finding their way to the democratic party. Southerners refused to vote Republican due to the Civil war and the policies that progressives in the republican party at the time passed that they felt hurt their way of life. Racist southerners finally made the jump to the republican party when the progressives within the democratic party started pushing for equality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 94husker

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,557
9,259
113
I think few would disagree with the following statements:

1) The US is the most powerful nation in the world
2) The US plays a huge part throughout the world preventing horrible dictators from doing horrible things (sometimes we cause it LOL)
3) The overwhelming majority of currencies across the world are backed by the US dollar
4) Many countries rely on the US to survive
5) Many countries economy is reliant on US participation

Assuming we all agree with 1-5 (not necessarily whether or not we want them to be true)...

What would happen to the world if the US was destabilized?

Let's say civil war breaks out or the federal government collapses (again, let's not debate why or who's fault it would be)...how would the world as a whole recover?

What about technological progress? Infrastructure?

Just curious. I feel like we're closer to that than at any point since the civil war.

As much as we like to believe that we are still top dog, many countries have found their footing without the USA playing big daddy. In the past 4 years the US has pulled away from a lot of the world and they seem to be doing just fine. I'm not saying that they may not have a few struggles if we were to somehow implode, but I don't think that they will be in the dire straits that some of the "American Patriots" want to believe.

As long as our new "Civil War" doesn't spill over unto their homelands I doubt that the average person will suffer much.

A destabilized America is bad for one country more than any other.... America!
 

mikecanale

Sophomore
Gold Member
Dec 24, 2010
1,458
1,737
113
I think few would disagree with the following statements:

1) The US is the most powerful nation in the world
2) The US plays a huge part throughout the world preventing horrible dictators from doing horrible things (sometimes we cause it LOL)
3) The overwhelming majority of currencies across the world are backed by the US dollar
4) Many countries rely on the US to survive
5) Many countries economy is reliant on US participation

Assuming we all agree with 1-5 (not necessarily whether or not we want them to be true)...

What would happen to the world if the US was destabilized?

Let's say civil war breaks out or the federal government collapses (again, let's not debate why or who's fault it would be)...how would the world as a whole recover?

What about technological progress? Infrastructure?

Just curious. I feel like we're closer to that than at any point since the civil war.
Who's going to fight who? Who's going to be willing to die for their left or right ideals today when things are so good for so many in America regardless of who's the president? When the Civil War started, 3 million Americans were literally in bondage. This is an issue many might be willing to die for. There's no issue close to that today.
 

H2Oman

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jun 29, 2001
9,294
12,535
113
55
Yea this might blow your mind but after the civil rights act was passed by the democratic party, all the racists and southerners jumped to the republican party that welcomed them with open arms, and still welcome them because they believe there are good people on both sides of the argument. Derp derp derp..

The republican party was once the progressive party in America, but most of the progressives left the party during the progressive movement at the turn of the century eventually finding their way to the democratic party. Southerners refused to vote Republican due to the Civil war and the policies that progressives in the republican party at the time passed that they felt hurt their way of life. Racist southerners finally made the jump to the republican party when the progressives within the democratic party started pushing for equality.
So agree with this and the classic liberals were also Republicans (and many probably still are). These labels change fast. And racism has skewed party identity more than anything. Democrats used to be the happy host but it’s been a minute (like 50-60 years at least and the transformation began, as you say, turn of the century).
 

EriktheRed

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2001
8,185
6,965
113
Yea this might blow your mind but after the civil rights act was passed by the democratic party, all the racists and southerners jumped to the republican party that welcomed them with open arms, and still welcome them because they believe there are good people on both sides of the argument. Derp derp derp..

The republican party was once the progressive party in America, but most of the progressives left the party during the progressive movement at the turn of the century eventually finding their way to the democratic party. Southerners refused to vote Republican due to the Civil war and the policies that progressives in the republican party at the time passed that they felt hurt their way of life. Racist southerners finally made the jump to the republican party when the progressives within the democratic party started pushing for equality.


LOL this is one of the biggest lies every told in bold. First of all the Republicans supported just as much if not more than the Dems. The actual Senate and House members did not do the big switch as it's called. There is almost no one that did that. There are many reasons for some of the supporters switching and some did do it for the reasons you stated, but the Evangelical vote changed hugely post-Roe. Multiple things were going on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oldschool1964

sklarbodds

Administrator
Moderator
Nov 30, 2006
32,533
38,128
113
As much as we like to believe that we are still top dog, many countries have found their footing without the USA playing big daddy. In the past 4 years the US has pulled away from a lot of the world and they seem to be doing just fine. I'm not saying that they may not have a few struggles if we were to somehow implode, but I don't think that they will be in the dire straits that some of the "American Patriots" want to believe.

As long as our new "Civil War" doesn't spill over unto their homelands I doubt that the average person will suffer much.

A destabilized America is bad for one country more than any other.... America!
If you read the link I posted, something like 61% of all foreign reserves are in the US dollar (and that's down from a previous high). We literally back more currency than gold does.

That alone is enough to have a global devastating impact.
 

sklarbodds

Administrator
Moderator
Nov 30, 2006
32,533
38,128
113
Who's going to fight who? Who's going to be willing to die for their left or right ideals today when things are so good for so many in America regardless of who's the president? When the Civil War started, 3 million Americans were literally in bondage. This is an issue many might be willing to die for. There's no issue close to that today.
There have been several on this board that certainly have argued for it...and never forget Texas wants to be their own country Bigly (and California kinda does too).
 
  • Like
Reactions: nelsonj22

Red_Hack

Assistant Head Coach
Dec 20, 2005
10,225
13,549
113
Who's going to fight who? Who's going to be willing to die for their left or right ideals today when things are so good for so many in America regardless of who's the president? When the Civil War started, 3 million Americans were literally in bondage. This is an issue many might be willing to die for. There's no issue close to that today.
AZ republicans? At least based on their Tweet.
 

scopeandtime

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
Jul 3, 2016
18,445
32,566
113
AZ republicans? At least based on their Tweet.
The dingleberries who run that account are a bunch of loser ass zoomers who couldn't walk up 5 flights of stairs. Kelli Ward would move to Mexico if things actually went south. The AZ GOP needs to be disbanded.
 

zar45

All-American
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2016
4,693
11,769
113
LOL this is one of the biggest lies every told in bold. First of all the Republicans supported just as much if not more than the Dems. The actual Senate and House members did not do the big switch as it's called. There is almost no one that did that. There are many reasons for some of the supporters switching and some did do it for the reasons you stated, but the Evangelical vote changed hugely post-Roe. Multiple things were going on.

Strom Thurmond, Iris Faircloth Blitch, James D Martin, Albert Watson, William C Cramer, Bo Callaway, Dave Treen, Floyd Spence, Speedy O Long, Trent Lott switched from Republican to Democrat. Most for explicit racism.
 

EriktheRed

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2001
8,185
6,965
113
Strom Thurmond, Iris Faircloth Blitch, James D Martin, Albert Watson, William C Cramer, Bo Callaway, Dave Treen, Floyd Spence, Speedy O Long, Trent Lott switched from Republican to Democrat. Most for explicit racism.

A quick fact check:

Strom Thurmond-He is a well known one

Iris Faircloth Blitch-was only a Dem in office

James D Martin-this guy did switch parties as he couldn't beat out the Senator within his own party. He did get elected into the house in 1966 so this counts.

Albert Watson-changed parties within the House so this counts

William C Cramer-he switched from Dem to R in 1949

Bo Callaway-he was only ever elected as a R, but it did say he supported Dems before.

Dave Treen-this counts although he never ran as a Dem before. He was in a nutty third party.

Floyd Spence-House guy that switched

Speedy O Long-He was never a Republican

Trent Lott-was only elected as one party ever


That is not a lot of people switching when you consider the time period quoted. What is interesting is people who never changed like Robert Byrd and others.
 

lifer56

Nebraska Football Hall of Fame
Gold Member
May 3, 2005
17,167
23,744
113
I think few would disagree with the following statements:

1) The US is the most powerful nation in the world
2) The US plays a huge part throughout the world preventing horrible dictators from doing horrible things (sometimes we cause it LOL)
3) The overwhelming majority of currencies across the world are backed by the US dollar
4) Many countries rely on the US to survive
5) Many countries economy is reliant on US participation

Assuming we all agree with 1-5 (not necessarily whether or not we want them to be true)...

What would happen to the world if the US was destabilized?

Let's say civil war breaks out or the federal government collapses (again, let's not debate why or who's fault it would be)...how would the world as a whole recover?

What about technological progress? Infrastructure?

Just curious. I feel like we're closer to that than at any point since the civil war.
Rather than destabilized, how about merely isolationist. I think the outcomes are similar.

China gains huge power and influence over other Asian and Pacific nations, never mind large portions of Africa, just as has occurred over the last 4 years.

Russia gains huge influence over eastern Europe and 'Eurasia' as has occurred over the last four years.

NATO and other alliances which have produced unprecedented stability since WWII go to shit.

Democracies like Hungry, Poland and the Philippines go fascist with free press suppressed and opposition parties unable to fairly contest elections.

Murderous dictators like Putie, MBS and Kim actually gain ****ing respect and credibility. Never mind a shit load of money.

The US not only becomes more irrelevant and impotent, but: 1) Our allies do as well d/t our lack of engagement; and 2) struggling democracies have zero support against forces they face, whether from places like Iran, China or Russia.

Oh, yeah, and now Iran is enriching uranium way closer to bomb grade than would ever have occurred had we remained in the nuke deal.

Technology and trade have shrunk the world. Isolation leaves us . . . ****ing isolated. That hurts us and it hurts our allies who have had our back for at least eight decades.
 

zar45

All-American
Gold Member
Jun 13, 2016
4,693
11,769
113
A quick fact check:

Strom Thurmond-He is a well known one

Iris Faircloth Blitch-was only a Dem in office

James D Martin-this guy did switch parties as he couldn't beat out the Senator within his own party. He did get elected into the house in 1966 so this counts.

Albert Watson-changed parties within the House so this counts

William C Cramer-he switched from Dem to R in 1949

Bo Callaway-he was only ever elected as a R, but it did say he supported Dems before.

Dave Treen-this counts although he never ran as a Dem before. He was in a nutty third party.

Floyd Spence-House guy that switched

Speedy O Long-He was never a Republican

Trent Lott-was only elected as one party ever


That is not a lot of people switching when you consider the time period quoted. What is interesting is people who never changed like Robert Byrd and others.

Lot of excuses right there.
 

EriktheRed

Offensive Coordinator
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2001
8,185
6,965
113
Rather than destabilized, how about merely isolationist. I think the outcomes are similar.

China gains huge power and influence over other Asian and Pacific nations, never mind large portions of Africa, just as has occurred over the last 4 years.

Russia gains huge influence over eastern Europe and 'Eurasia' as has occurred over the last four years.

NATO and other alliances which have produced unprecedented stability since WWII go to shit.


Democracies like Hungry, Poland and the Philippines go fascist with free press suppressed and opposition parties unable to fairly contest elections.

Murderous dictators like Putie, MBS and Kim actually gain ****ing respect and credibility. Never mind a shit load of money.

The US not only becomes more irrelevant and impotent, but: 1) Our allies do as well d/t our lack of engagement; and 2) struggling democracies have zero support against forces they face, whether from places like Iran, China or Russia.

Oh, yeah, and now Iran is enriching uranium way closer to bomb grade than would ever have occurred had we remained in the nuke deal.

Technology and trade have shrunk the world. Isolation leaves us . . . ****ing isolated. That hurts us and it hurts our allies who have had our back for at least eight decades.

The items listed in bold are totally made up.

China's influence just occurred in the last 4 years? RollingLaugh

Russia's influence gained only in the last 4 years? LOL Uhhh hello have you heard of Georgia? Have you heard of Ukraine? Have you heard of the Russia and German gas pipeline agreement? This is really one of your truly most embarrassing posts you've ever had. Trump gave Germany crap for this and this DIRECTLY ties into NATO. You become dependent on a nation we are helping to protect you from. Makes no sense.

Nord Stream - Wikipedia


NATO and alliances go to .... Well our mid-east alliances are more strong than ever to be honest so epic fail there. As far as NATO you are ill-advised on that topic as well. NATO greatly increased their spending since Trump came to office. NATO was a lot of promises and not much follow-through. If you were a fan of a paper army then NATO was your army. They are still trying to get Germany to pay their share as THEY are the ones always claiming risk from the Russians, but they are economically entangling themselves with the Russians.

Ten NATO members now meet 2% defense spending benchmark, but not Germany - Europe - Stripes
 
  • Haha
Reactions: lifer56

Huskermatt23

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
Jan 11, 2017
5,425
11,094
113
Seattle
LOL this is one of the biggest lies every told in bold. First of all the Republicans supported just as much if not more than the Dems. The actual Senate and House members did not do the big switch as it's called. There is almost no one that did that. There are many reasons for some of the supporters switching and some did do it for the reasons you stated, but the Evangelical vote changed hugely post-Roe. Multiple things were going on.
You are in denial. The reason the Democratic Party held power for most of the 20th century is because they pulled together a party of progressives that fled the Republican Party at the turn of the century, with labor and southerners who were primarily racists and hated republicans for the civil war. However, when the progressives became a bigger voice in the party and minorities flipped from the republicans party to the dems in the 1960s to have a voice within the party that actually dominated American politics... white southern racists jumped to the Republican Party. Evangelicals were always affiliated with the republicans so roe didn’t impact that much. Not even sure why it impacts it now. The republicans have controlled all branches of government for most of the 2000s and did nothing to overturn it, because once they do then many will have no reason to vote for them. It’s just a talking point not anything they will ever act on less they want to eliminate a chunk of their base and an issue they use to motivate people to get out and vote.
 

HuskerRick

Graduate Assistant
Gold Member
Nov 15, 2001
5,318
1,338
113
Ranson WV
Simple. China. They are outspending the USA of foreign aid already and have strategically spent that money on the votes in the UN and small nation-states to take control from the USA and Russia. Their currency is already being used in some oil markets. One of the core reasons for BitCoin's meteoric rise. Instability in the US and the 10yr note rate all spell long-term doom for the US greenback on a global stage. And that is seconded by the rise of gold.

If Trump is President on Jan 21st, you will see an economic meltdown the world over as it loses faith in the American monetary system. Although that is secondary to the Fed policy when it comes to the dollar standing. The treasonous act would simply be the match.

The agreements that China has secured in the last 4 years from some of our historically strongest allies, has already laid the foundation for this demise. All why we sat on the sidelines and pouted.
If Pervert and crook Biden is In office on January 21st, the economic meltdown the world over as it loses faith in American common sense and Morality! FIFY!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: lifer56

cavalot

Head Coach
Gold Member
Oct 3, 2003
12,557
9,259
113
If Pervert and crook Biden is In office on January 21st, the economic meltdown the world over as it loses faith in American common sense and Morality! FIFY!

What a joke. I hope someone keeps this post and throws it back in your face a couple years from now when The US at worst is back to normal.