Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Poll do you think the US will become a fascist country by 2030?

US fascism Trump Republicans Democrats police state Recession Crisis Pandemic Capitalism

  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

Poll: Do you think the US be fascist by 2030? (13 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you think the US be fascist by 2030?

  1. Yes (2 votes [15.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 15.38%

  2. No (9 votes [69.23%])

    Percentage of vote: 69.23%

  3. Yes the US is already fascist (2 votes [15.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 15.38%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1
10 year march

10 year march

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 277 posts
I have to write something here. I won't vote at least for some days to make the poll more balanced


Edit I accidentally posted it in news and current events although it does fit somewhat here

#2
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,206 posts
  • LocationLondon

It's certainly heading in that direction, judging by the last three years, although "fascism" is a pretty strong word.

 

If Trump wins again in November, I believe his next term will be even more ruthless, authoritarian and divisive than the first. He might even find a way of abolishing term limits.

 

By 2030, other factors will be coming into play – even greater economic inequality, technological unemployment, extremely sophisticated deepfakes/AI, worsening climate crises, the list goes on.

 

Barring a few periods of relative stability, I think America's overall socio-political situation will continue to intensify and worsen. Whether it descends into full-blown fascism I can't be entirely sure, but these various problems will persist until at least mid-century – until either a transition is made to a more inclusive and sustainable system, or the country becomes a complete basket case.



#3
joe00uk

joe00uk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,071 posts
  • LocationUK

Given 2030 is only ten years away, I don't think there's time for a full-blown fascist movement to sweep to power by then - especially considering that no such movement exists in any real capacity today (dissident politics is a perpetual infighting tournament, and these days at least 90% of it is online). The establishment in power today will try to continue to govern as they always have. This, after all, is the system that has enriched them so much. They will be increasingly unable to do so, however, and over the years there will more than likely be a rise in violence and turmoil like the riots the US is suffering currently. But none of that will lead to regime change by 2030. The ruling elite will continue to become more and more corrupt and incompetent and less able to deal with the problems confronting them. The country will deteriorate before their eyes and they won't lift a finger. They'd rather go down in flames with the Washington regime than regenerate it into something better. The US will be closer to collapse in 2030, but I'd be very surprised if it completed the journey that soon. That said, I fully expect the US to have collapsed entirely by 2100. It will probably go the way of Yugoslavia and balkanise into separate nations.



#4
wjfox

wjfox

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,206 posts
  • LocationLondon

 

That said, I fully expect the US to have collapsed entirely by 2100. It will probably go the way of Yugoslavia and balkanise into separate nations.

 

cj4Qewi.gif



#5
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,234 posts

I am not going to make a selection because the poll offers too few choices.

 

As to WJ Fox's and Joe00uk's comments, I think that they articulate very real possibilities.  I think several scenarios are at least theoretically possible, and the scenarios they paint tend to be on the pessimistic side of things.  A more optimistic scenario hinges in the short term on who wins the presidential contest.  While Biden may have a history and instincts of a centrist, he is not what I think should legitimately be called a fascist.  I can't see any Supreme Court picks he makes as being fascists. 

 

There are underlying problems that may push for the continued development of an authoritarian impulse:

  1. Problems related to global climate change.
  2. The continued existence of right-wing media such as Fox News, reactionary radio talk show hosts, 4chan, Brietbart News, etc.
  3. Extreme inequality of wealth and power.
  4. Foreign policy challenges, particularly those emanating from China

Counterbalancing that are grass roots efforts such as were embodied in the Sanders campaign. To date, they have not overcome the manner in which the playing field is tipped against them, with the important exception of at the level of certain localities. Still, there is at least the theoretical possibility of further growth in power and influence of such movements.  There are also demographic factors working in favor of at least a more centrist approach. Arizona seems to have transited from a solid red state to one in which both U.S. senators will be Democrats and the state as a whole will flip against Trump. While Texas is likely to support Trump this election cycle, demographic trends continue to push that state from red to at least purple. On the flip side is the question of states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Ohio.  All these states supported Trump in 2016, yet all are in play this election.  Even if Biden manages a victory, shepherding these states back to the blue side of the equation will continue to pose a challenge. 

 

Centrists argue that the Sanders types are too radical to hold on to these volatile states; while Sanders supporters argue that it was the negligence of real economic concerns in most, if not all, of these states that caused them to stray in the first place.  Both camps may perceive aspects of the truth, while working at cross purposes to each other in furthering their respective arguments.   

 

Tensions are now so great that some sort of civil war no longer seems like such an outlandish possibility.  So that is also a negative scenario of how all of this may play out.  As with the Civil War of the 19th century, there is a geographic component at work.  A critical issue may well be that of the Electoral College.  Continued overwhelming blue support in states such as New York and California counterbalanced by relatively narrow defeats in states like Texas and Florida, as well as more rural states in the South and Midwest may result in a rather constant disconnect between winners of the popular vote versus winners of the electoral college vote.  Such considerations will also play out in who controls the U.S. Senate. Efforts to rectify that problem may very well unleash titanic forces that will continue to rock the country for quite some time.  How such tensions may ultimately be resolved is anybody's guess.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#6
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,023 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA

Given 2030 is only ten years away, I don't think there's time for a full-blown fascist movement to sweep to power by then - especially considering that no such movement exists in any real capacity today (dissident politics is a perpetual infighting tournament, and these days at least 90% of it is online). The establishment in power today will try to continue to govern as they always have. This, after all, is the system that has enriched them so much. They will be increasingly unable to do so, however, and over the years there will more than likely be a rise in violence and turmoil like the riots the US is suffering currently. But none of that will lead to regime change by 2030. The ruling elite will continue to become more and more corrupt and incompetent and less able to deal with the problems confronting them. The country will deteriorate before their eyes and they won't lift a finger. They'd rather go down in flames with the Washington regime than regenerate it into something better. The US will be closer to collapse in 2030, but I'd be very surprised if it completed the journey that soon. That said, I fully expect the US to have collapsed entirely by 2100. It will probably go the way of Yugoslavia and balkanise into separate nations.

This.

 

What's more, people seem to forget that the USA has constantly, throughout its entire history, flirted with fascism. It's arguably already developed "Fascism With American Characteristics" and we've been waiting for it to perfectly follow Germany and Italy when it just doesn't have that sort of culture.

Every '20s, in fact, there's usually been some quasi-fascist  and authoritarian action in the USA. In the 1820s, we had Andrew Jackson, the one largely responsible for kickstarting the worst and most actively genocidal actions against Native Americans. 

 

The 1920s were a mess. This was the era where the USA was the global center of eugenics, extreme nativism, and ethnonationalism before the Germans took that title the next decade. The main difference is that we Americans were isolationist, not expansionist even though the only reason is because we had already effectively expanded our influence as far as we needed— the continental USA is the size of Europe and we had South America under our thumb, so there was no need for an all-American lebensraum anymore. We already did that in the 1840s!

 

But in neither of those situations could you call the USA "fascist" unless you expanded the meaning of fascism. In fact, both decades were also ironically periods where voting rights were being expanded. That's the main issue with us. We don't like being told what to do, even when we're in a cult. American fascism would be simultaneously libertarian and authoritarian. This is largely because fascism always sought to build off what we Americans were doing but tossing away certain influences (at least, once the Nazis got started; IIRC, Italian fascism was mostly rooted in the values and structure of the Roman empire and an alternative to Marxian socialism). It's a phenomenon unique to its parent nation by design, really. German fascism was never going to be the same as Italian fascism, Japanese fascism, or hell, certainly not Rwandan fascism. And American fascism won't either. When your ideology is so totally rooted in ultranationalism, that's just inevitable. Even communism— a deliberately anti-nationalist ideology— couldn't avoid national differences in style and structure.


And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#7
Cyber_Rebel

Cyber_Rebel

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 384 posts
  • LocationNew York

My views on Fascism are the same as Yuli's, in that it more closely resembles the culture that it arises out of. It would never be a 1:1 match to Hitler's Germany, no matter how much the Swastika flag waving wannabes want it to be. I like the Handmaid's Tale interpretation of what actual (religious) American Fascism would look like, as well as "A Plot Against America" which sees Charles Lindbergh rise to power instead of Roosevelt. 

 

What's happening now is more a consolidation of power under the wealthy aristocrats, while the "fascist elements" are really just working serfs and/or mercenaries of capital. They hope to become Barons or Lords if they "make it" well enough or are "knighted" by the elites in power. While hilariously believing they are challenging the ruling class under their current elected Monarch.

 

Yes, I'm suggesting that America is or arguably already has had morphed into the very late British Empire that it once rebelled against. I like the irony, especially since America is technically a successor state to said Empire anyways. Systemic collapse, however, depends on several factors, of which; political instability, climate change, or another major pandemic will expedite. Balkanization is inevitable, it's just hard to figure exactly when. 



#8
eacao

eacao

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 473 posts
  • LocationAustralia
Where’s the poll choice for “lel” ?

If you're going through hell, keep going. - Winston Churchill

You don't decide your future. You decide your habits, and your habits decide your future.
Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power. - Abraham Lincoln.


#9
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,023 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA

I just realized something else: the USA is far too capitalistic to go full-fash. We certainly have strains of fascist thought here in the idea that big business is "too woke" or "SJW," and there are plenty of types hostile to the "deep state" and "anonymous corporate elites," but the thing about fascism is that it opposed capitalism as Jewry or opposite of national values, even when it defended private property and the rights of businesses. You can think of fascism as what happens when capitalism degenerates to the point that it loses faith in itself. The USA cares so much about money and business that whatever fascist system it established would quickly wind up resembling what we already have, though maybe with Reagan-era social conservatism being rigidly dominant and uncontested in society. Just more proof of how variable fascism can be since it's rooted in nationalism.

 

 

What I do think is that the USA will begin to suffer a technological breakdown. Trump trying to fan the flames of war with Twitter (and, to a lesser extent, Amazon/Washington Post) while also stoking anti-intellectualism and nativism will likely cause Silicon Valley to seek out another home, perhaps in Germany. This moment in history— the 2020s— is very critical. If we lose the bulk of Silicon Valley now, there's no getting them back. 

But even if we didn't chase them out, the cold fact is that the USA has a psychotically hard case of Protestant Work Ethic, too. So starting around 2025 onwards and especially by 2030, when technological unemployment starts biting hard, we're going to see the USA struggle to adapt. Rugged masculine capitalism will undergo a crisis of confidence as the people who pride themselves on working with dirty hands and struggling to earn their daily bread (and, perhaps, strike it rich) while also mocking collegians for being too educated will suddenly face total obsolescence from a nebulous enemy that can't be deported or exterminated without undoing capitalism itself. The STEM fields won't be enough; indeed, it's the STEM types who are working on their own obsolescence to begin with. The USA will likely fail to transition to a technistic economy without extreme unrest, and we'd likely break up before we reached that point.

 

I can't say this would be a shift to Luddite/Christian-oriented fascism, but I do think the move towards technism will lead to an American reaction that deeply values hard work, manual labor, and traditional values, perhaps becoming the "new" Second Amendment-tier issue, even if it leads to an economy that isn't competitive even with the likes of Mexico. You'll definitely start seeing neo-masculinists and Christian fundamentalists start flying "I work and I'm proud" flags and tags, trying to lambast LGBT+ people, blacks, Mexicans, liberals, and whatnot as lazy and reliant on automation. It would also be deeply concerning for people who largely still live 10 years (or more) in the past sans smartphones and social media to suddenly see their entire expectant future go up in nanobotic smoke. Indeed, it's not limited to just hardline conservatives; everyone sans the most optimistic futurists are going to be smacked by the sudden arrival of the Future™. But the hardline conservatives are the ones who are most sure that it's possible to bring back the 1950s or 1890s in all ways, and that automation is just a bunch of sci-fi hoopla promoted by welfare-loving techno-proggies and Globalists (seriously, read the comments of any video about the 4th Industrial Revolution or artificial general intelligence that was linked by rightist Facebook pages— nothing but comments saying this is evil and usually impossible to do).

 

That's a more fascinating subject to discuss to me. Maybe I should make that sort of thread.


And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#10
joe00uk

joe00uk

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,071 posts
  • LocationUK

This is roughly how I expect the US to balkanise based on current trends by the end of the century (I couldn't be bothered to do it literally county-by-county).

 

AfACKjX.png

 

I expect the African-American population will desire their own nation - as the Black Panthers of the 1960s did with their dream of "New Afrika" in the south-eastern US. My general outline of "New Afrika" circa the late 21st Century is based on where the highest concentrations of African-Americans are (rural as well as urban) and so it's a bit different to the Black Panthers' outlines of the 1960s. It's the same logic with the Hispanic-dominated "Republica de America Latina". The Hispanic population might well dominate an area of the US much larger than that by the end of the 21st Century but like I say, based on current trends I would expect some sort of seccession movement to include these areas. I don't think they'd be very willing to just be annexed by Mexico though because now there's an entirely separate Hispanic-American identity which is too different to just be subsumed by either Mexico or the US. Florida is cut off from the rest of the RAL but that's not really that uncommon with other countries. Northern Ireland is cut off from the rest of the UK, Kaliningrad is cut off from the rest of Russia, etc. Alaska is cut off from the rest of the USA today, in fact. I expect Hawaii to become an independent nation. I thought Alaska would stay part of the white conservative Federal Republic because, well, Alaska is white and conservative and identifies very strongly with the traditional USA. Cascadia (Washington/Oregon) is white, with an increasing proportion of East Asians, but is a hotbed for radical leftism so I couldn't imagine them wanting much to do with their potentially fascist-leaning fellow whites in the Federal Republic. I know that New England is much more liberal but they're not really radical leftists in the same way that a lot of people in Cascadia are so all being the same based on today's trends, I think New England would just end up being absorbed by the Federal Republic even if it becomes a bit of a rebellious area.



#11
waitingforthe2030s

waitingforthe2030s

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 31 posts
  • LocationOrion Arm, Milky Way Galaxy.

 

 

That said, I fully expect the US to have collapsed entirely by 2100. It will probably go the way of Yugoslavia and balkanise into separate nations.

 

cj4Qewi.gif

 

You can tell this guy is just grouping things together randomly because if you've ever lived in America you'd realize this makes literally no sense.


I'm a radical demo-publiacrat.

 

This is Scatman's world, and we're living in it.


#12
Erowind

Erowind

    Anarchist without an adjective

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts

All these maps and no Appalachia. Sad.

HKS3LNk.jpg



#13
PhoenixRu

PhoenixRu

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 958 posts

I will not vote until someone give me the exact definition of "fascism". If we'll use the broad definitions like "the power of big capital plus ideology of national superiority" then USA fits perfectly: big capital, police state, the sickening ideology of exceptionalism and "moral leadership"... other hand, USA is not a totalitarian state (even though not as democratic as its apologists say) and IMHO will not become within 10-20 next years.

 

In short, fascist or not, in my eyes USA looks this way:

 

EZNmQLfWAAQ36oU.jpg



#14
SastangFever

SastangFever

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts
  • Locationhere

I will not vote until someone give me the exact definition of "fascism". If we'll use the broad definitions like "the power of big capital plus ideology of national superiority" then USA fits perfectly: big capital, police state, the sickening ideology of exceptionalism and "moral leadership"... other hand, USA is not a totalitarian state (even though not as democratic as its apologists say) and IMHO will not become within 10-20 next years.
 
In short, fascist or not, in my eyes USA looks this way:
 
EZNmQLfWAAQ36oU.jpg


If only it were totalitarian...

#15
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,023 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA

I will not vote until someone give me the exact definition of "fascism". If we'll use the broad definitions like "the power of big capital plus ideology of national superiority" then USA fits perfectly: big capital, police state, the sickening ideology of exceptionalism and "moral leadership"... other hand, USA is not a totalitarian state (even though not as democratic as its apologists say) and IMHO will not become within 10-20 next years.

See, that's something I was getting at. 

 

Even fascists themselves can't actually tell you what "fascist" really means. It's built into the very ideology itself that it really has no set ideology beyond those broad definitions. It's almost intentionally nebulous to capitalize on contradiction.

Hell, corporatism is often used as one of the hallmarks of fascism and proof that the USA is fascist. But the thing is, a "corporate group" used to mean something different from what it means now and isn't synonymou . A fusion of state and corporate power as espoused by the Italian fascists would look closer to if syndicalism and technocracy combined in a nationalist country. But then again, isn't a corporation also technically a corporate group?

 

See, it's very nebulous. It's easy to argue for and against, especially now that fascism is so maligned. Even overtly fascist groups like Golden Dawn or the Hindutva movement can claim they're not fascist because what even is fascism? 

And even though the USA meets all the requirements of ur-fascism now, so did it in 1920. I mean, if you think racism and enduring nationalism is bad now, try imagining a period where KKK membership was at three million and the group could hold massive state-sanctioned parades in Washington D.C. This being a group that had something closer to a völkisch nationalist myth, complete with a state-backed racial caste system that basically made it so that non-whites (mainly blacks, Jews, and Asians but also Eastern Europeans and Irish) lived in a totalitarian, very rigidly hierarchical police state where they could be freely murdered, extorted, abused, and displaced for any reason. Meanwhile, women and native Americans were being granted the right to vote and the government was actively trying to shrink itself if anything, which doesn't sound very fascist. By the 1950s, we actually did have the strongly centralized federal government with a military-industrial complex that would've made the Nazis blush, complete with similar social attitudes and desire to spread dictatorial regimes, so perhaps you could claim the 1950s were "softcore fascist." But people would still argue with you. And how could the present really be fascist when we have such social progressivism? Or maybe, is it possible fascism could develop socially progressive ideals while retaining its economic and political features? Surely not, though! Despite the fact we wave more Stars and Stripes than the Nazis hang up swastikas & regularly worship military action, conflict, and American exceptionalism, we allow the fags to be free and let anarchists say they hate everything about us. No fascist would ever do that!
Or maybe that's fascism's most perfect victory— convincing its subordinates that it's not fascism but in fact its opposite, even going so far as to camouflage itself as its old enemies to gain even more power.

 

 

Or maybe we're not fascist at all and it's all just a big honest coincidence.

 

 

As stated before: it's just very nebulous. 


And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#16
Erowind

Erowind

    Anarchist without an adjective

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts
Adding some nuance. I don't think America is Fascist today nor will it be in 10 years. But it does have fascistic elements. America has vast forced labor camps across the country with a population in the millions that are populated primarily by drug "offenders" and other such petty crimes that even should a society disprove of are only proportional in legal penelty to a petty fine, not enslavement. The population of these forced labor camps too skews disproportionately towards racial groups that are othered by society, specifically Black people. This is fascistic, it would be truly fascist if the forced labor camps ever turned into death camps.

#17
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,023 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA

^ Why specifically death camps? Fascist Italy didn't even have concentration camps until the mid-1930s, but the British empire did in the 1890s, as did the USA in the 1940s (and arguably two during the Civil War).


And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#18
Outlook

Outlook

    Arab Muslim

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,384 posts
  • LocationBarbary Lands
relevant Timeghost video explaining fascism

Outlook's secret song of the ~week: https://youtu.be/Gnyr3sbdKkU

#19
SeedNotYetSprouted

SeedNotYetSprouted

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts

This is roughly how I expect the US to balkanise based on current trends by the end of the century (I couldn't be bothered to do it literally county-by-county).

 

AfACKjX.png

 

I expect the African-American population will desire their own nation - as the Black Panthers of the 1960s did with their dream of "New Afrika" in the south-eastern US. My general outline of "New Afrika" circa the late 21st Century is based on where the highest concentrations of African-Americans are (rural as well as urban) and so it's a bit different to the Black Panthers' outlines of the 1960s. It's the same logic with the Hispanic-dominated "Republica de America Latina". The Hispanic population might well dominate an area of the US much larger than that by the end of the 21st Century but like I say, based on current trends I would expect some sort of seccession movement to include these areas. I don't think they'd be very willing to just be annexed by Mexico though because now there's an entirely separate Hispanic-American identity which is too different to just be subsumed by either Mexico or the US. Florida is cut off from the rest of the RAL but that's not really that uncommon with other countries. Northern Ireland is cut off from the rest of the UK, Kaliningrad is cut off from the rest of Russia, etc. Alaska is cut off from the rest of the USA today, in fact. I expect Hawaii to become an independent nation. I thought Alaska would stay part of the white conservative Federal Republic because, well, Alaska is white and conservative and identifies very strongly with the traditional USA. Cascadia (Washington/Oregon) is white, with an increasing proportion of East Asians, but is a hotbed for radical leftism so I couldn't imagine them wanting much to do with their potentially fascist-leaning fellow whites in the Federal Republic. I know that New England is much more liberal but they're not really radical leftists in the same way that a lot of people in Cascadia are so all being the same based on today's trends, I think New England would just end up being absorbed by the Federal Republic even if it becomes a bit of a rebellious area.

 

Yeah...no. There are definitely issues of race relations in this country, and there are certainly members of each race who'd want to stick to themselves, but the vast majority of each people still wants to coexist with the other peoples of the country. The people that want to separate based on race are ethno-nationalists. There are plenty of white nationalists like Jared Taylor and that sly cumstain Stefan Molyneux, and a few black nationalists like Louis Farrakhan and Umar Johnson. However, like I said, they are a very small and vocal minority of their particular group.

 

There will always be racism because humans are tribalistic chimps. The only way to change this, as Cyber Rebel stated before, is to ascend into technological or supra-biological forms with altered neurology.



#20
Outlook

Outlook

    Arab Muslim

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,384 posts
  • LocationBarbary Lands
But will that even shake away tribalism? What if tribalism is logical? Maybe there's a reason it remained with human intelligence.

This whole things comes with the presumption that violence and tribalism is bad or primal and regressionist. It is the most human belief ever created.

EDIT: And I remember PhoenixRu had the most perfect post related to this..He simulated the difference between an open, peaceseeking space civilization and a quiet, isolationist, aggressive space civilization in terms of the fermi paradox and what happened was the aggressive isolationist civilizations killed off the rest.

And one last thing, people heavily underestimate the idea of trust within intelligence. Trust is such a large and crucial part of it and yet no one talks about it nearly enough (at least in public discussions), and I think it's at the center of almost every social or ethical decision.

Can I trust somebody I have nothing in common with more than someone I have something in common with? And so factionalism answered "No, not really."
Outlook's secret song of the ~week: https://youtu.be/Gnyr3sbdKkU





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: US, fascism, Trump, Republicans, Democrats, police state, Recession, Crisis, Pandemic, Capitalism

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users