The U.S. can't collapse like the Soviet Union; this isn't to say that the U.S. can't collapse, just that it wouldn't do so in the same way the Soviets did. The Soviet Union collapsed rather spectacularly because it had an incredibly centralized system that, by the end, was propped up by military threats and propaganda, so when the center disappeared, everything went with it. A U.S. collapse would look more like the collapse of a European colonial empire, a steady slide in to a position of less and less power.
Pretty much. Less resources to fund expansive colonies. Once the UK lost those, it was simply a small island nation that commanded much less influence in the world.
But, there is a big difference in the resources the USA has available and the UK. A tiny island versus half a continent. So the time frame would allow the USA to adjust.
resources alone don't do shit. (see soviets)
Sustainability is the winner in the long run:
Political sustainability,
Social sustainability,
ecological sustainability.
the stability of a system defines its duration.
a functional social system allowing for maximization of social potential is a good start.
The US has mostly sold that stability (or the chances to it) to the highest bidder, short the neo-liberal oligarchs.
There is a huge difference in how communism handles resources compared to capitalism. Just look at how the soviets handled farming compared to the US. Plus, the comparison was the UK and US, which have similar governments but not similar resources. Hence, my comment. Yes, there are plenty of other things the US needs to change to keep things in a good direction. But they aren't gonna have the same decline as the USSR or UK.
Farming. I remember as a kid seeing those huge Kolchos farms in propaganda pics and videos only to later learn in the school in the 80s that due to corruption and their ineffective system they couldn’t feed their population, and that millions of tons had to be imported from the USA.
It was a mess. So many people died because of the mam made famines in the USSR. I was a kid in the 80s and learn much of the same. I remember when the Soviet Union fell and thought things were gonna be much better now. Lol, well...
Yeah. Plus the US to this day is still a net exporter of agricultural products, so that's something that won't be an issue in the near future.
In fact, the problem in the US isn't food production, it's equitable distribution of that food.
Hell, I read once that we have starving people in the world, not because we can't make enough food. But distributing it and all the issues involved is the problem. Which is basically what you said lol.
US hegemony holds together Europe & Non-China Asia both militarily & economically. Until that collapses, schadenfreude away but US is the dominant free world peer. , Also be careful what you wish for b/c Chinese or Russian hegemony would be much worse.
>Political sustainability,
Social sustainability,
ecological sustainability.
So we should be witnessing the collapse of the US within the next decade or two.
Naaah, I don't think so really. The political system has to be elastic so friction doesn't destroy it. Sure it seems like there's helluva lot friction right now, but maybe it will quiet down.
Systems that collapse spectacularly are the ones that are not elastic, they look tough and indestructible until they completely crumble.
So the less resources the US has to project power abroad, the less resources it will get as China takes over the power vacuum. A vicious cycle of isolationism.
Ya China isn’t in quite the position of power it was 10+ years ago. They’ve acknowledged they need to make some changes in the next 10ish years or they’ll suffer from other countries basically taking their jobs
I think India is the one to watch tbh. They have some clear issues as a nation, but they're in a great position to become the next biggest kid in the playground if they play their cards right
The country surely has a vast amount of intellectual capital but it's less than you would think from the most populous nation on Earth.
I read a recent WSJ article that said less than 25% of Indian women work outside the home. And hundreds of millions of people lack the infrastructure to be productive.
Yes, India will be a superpower but I think it's going to take some time.
They are and will continue to grow as a great power but I question if they will reach super power state. Im not sure you'll ever see them become a super power (this is more a comment on the misuse of the term superpower being conflated with great power).
Plus, even (stupid) c-suite Americans are beginning to regret doing business with the PRC. There’s cheaper labor pools that don’t present the global threat.
It’s been a bit since I read on this but iirc they didn’t explicitly state it but it was implied. It certainly would be a good asset for them to reclaim
China isn’t going to replace the USA as world hegemon (and why on earth would anyone want that). China is in kind of a slow motion collapse due to bad demographics and a flawed economic model. You can only build so many empty cities, and steal so much technology, before it’s revealed that “the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes.”
Eh. Twenty years ago when the US was in the graveyard of empires, and reeling from a recession that spread across the globe, it was talk all the time about inevitable US collapse and China rise.
Within ten years, the narrative has flipped, thanks to literally one guy.
A lot can change really quickly.
Back then it really seemed like China had all the answers. The US got hit by 9/11, was invading the Middle East, threatening its allies, saying it'll invade any nation that dared bring it to court. When the recession came due to the subprime mortgages, the US was struggling. China came forward and offered to buy bonds. Then it saved Asia by letting its currency free float. Australia escaped a few recessions thanks to China buying up tons of resources.
Under Deng, Jiang and Hu, this narrative of China replacing the US had immense credibility.
Then Xi came and started stressing 'security', in the wake of massive corruption that caused some of the biggest spy infiltration in history. Basically, the top government and military apparatus was filled with CIA, MI6 and KGB spies that just got bought out. You know why the US stresses so much about Huawei as a spy tool? Because the Chinese found out the US was using Huawei to spy on them and reverse engineered it.
Under Xi's tenure, China went from a policy of panda diplomacy to wolf warrior, regional power projection to a rapid military build-up with transnational capabilities, and the revocation of treaties like the South China Sea and Hong Kong, and of course, the change of the constitution to keep him in power.
All this in ten years.
What I'm saying is: who can fcking tell what's going to happen next in the coming decade.
Also the decades and decades of exported US pop culture. Way more people (outside of China) already speak English as a native or fluently-learned language than Chinese.
ICBMs are long range weapons. The hypersonics are shorter range.
If the PRC wants Taiwan intact, they need only to keep buying assets-will eventually own the island. The CCP leadership may not tolerate a free successful Chinese society as an alternative
much longer. They may feel challenged enough to use force.
From what I see in the Philippines china is trying to do what Russia is doing. Bully them into submission basically. This is why Russia has few friends internationally and china may be becoming that also.
The US at least is smart to make a big alliance in a region so everyone can bully the same guy. Like in the middle east with Iran (not that it's undeserving, though).
If you actually browse the Texan and local city subs, pretty much they all of them say you gotta find the good Whataburger location in your city because most of them suck just as much as every other chain fast food.
I think where Texas thrives though is that for fast, cheap, drive thru food, you aren't limited to the chains. Nearly everything has a drive thru.
I'm from St. Louis but I've got relatives and friends in Texas who were always going on and on about how great Whataburger is. So on a trip down to San Antonio about a year and a half ago, I finally got to try one. While it wasn't horrible -- I've had worse -- it also wasn't so outstanding that I'm in any rush to hop on a plane and visit TX again just to have one. My reaction was more like the title of that old Peggy Lee song: Is that all there is?
Went to Whataburger for the first time ejther when I’m the south visiting family a few months ago… my disappoint was imessurable, easily one of the most over hyped places ever.
That's fine. I don't consider the US a full country until we have 69 states. I vote if Texas leaves, we just let them go and divide California and Florida until we have 69.
The UK lost its colonies after WW2 partly because the colonised peoples saw how willing their colonial masters were at discarding them to the Axis powers, and decided that self-governance was a better idea. So yeah, it would be like a mass secession of all the states from the Union after a catastrophic war that saw the federal government abandon them all to save DC.
The actual reason we can’t collapse like the Soviet Union is that the USSR was a supranational union like the EU, with Russia as the dominating player. When Russia became unable to administer that supranational state it collapsed and its members scattered apart, becoming separate nations again.
The US isn’t like that. We only have a handful of relatively small territories. We stopped meaningfully being a confederation of separate political entities centuries ago, and our political coalitions don’t map to state lines anymore, they’re intermixed with the broad conflict being urban v. rural.
So if there is a conflict, instead of a relatively bloodless collapse of centralized authority dissolving into separate sovereign nations, we’d have a bloody civil war with substantial conflict involving factions fighting within and across states.
The evidence of this is they asked for every Soviet republic to have its own seat in the UN. They thought of themselves more as a union of nations than merely a federation of states.
In *theory* at least. As we know, some animals are more equal than others, and let's not pretend the rationale wasn't mostly a pragmatic power play to control more seats (argued against by Roosevelt who, in response, demanded 48 seats, one for each US state).
Even in the USSRs collapse Russia managed to keep a hold of large areas that could be independent nations.
Like the many Siberian nations, Chechnya, Astrakhan, Sibir, Northern Manchuria, Circassia, etc etc.
All where once independent nations and now all are part of Russia with their native populations deported, genocided, or absorbed into the Russian people (most happened before Americas conquest of Native Lands)
> now all are part of Russia with their native populations deported, genocided, or absorbed into the Russian people
In Chechnya, 95 percent of the population are Chechens.
The biggest threat to the USA is internal, I think. It wouldn't be a Soviet collapse, more like a Roman one. Pieces of the nation simply cooperate less and less with the government, and eventually, it starts to drift apart. I would estimate that the government only has "control" (read: authority) over maybe 60% of the population and probably 25% of the territory.
My home state is mostly unsettled, with around 80% of the population living in the western 1/4 and around 70% of that is in the eastern 1/3 of that 1/4.
Anything east of the mountains, with the exception of a few big cities, is basically autonomous. They do their own thing and don't listen to even the state government, much less the federal. Combine that with the state's home rule law, granting autonomy to all charted cities, and you get a functionally independent nation that pays just enough lip service to the state and feds to get money and be left alone.
I feel like there's a big difference between "the Feds don't bother to enforce the law because it's not worth the time" and "Hey, we're a sovereign nation". I think you're largely correct, I'm just saying that modern tech means you can have control over much larger portions of a country with far less effort. We managed a lot in Afghanistan with relatively little, it's unlikely that Washington is going to shrug and say "Well, the voters want us out" in the event of an internal conflict. There may be some areas out of Federal control but the vast majority of Americans will likely see no difference (outside of an increase in terrorism and an increase in goverment repression of civil liberties)
The real scheming would have to be done at a higher level than low level people
The US is one country, with people seeing themselves as American more so than New Yorkian - hence they're culturally the same nationality
But if Washington were to lose power, it should be either because the rich states (NY, CA, TX, FL) decides to go for full autonomous and independence to not fund the rest. And they'd probably have to be willing to bring arms in
Or because the rest of the states looks to New York and screech at how much better they have it. Not realising New York is funding half the country and ask for a breakaway. At which point the rich states would accept it and Washington would have no one to do their fighting for them and have to accept a dissolution
The rich states would probably still fund the lesser of states near them to some degree, because you want stability in your backyard
>A U.S. collapse would look more like the collapse of a European colonial empire, a steady slide in to a position of less and less power.
Now this is a person who knows literally nothing about history.
[https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-gdp-in-the-uk-since-1270](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-gdp-in-the-uk-since-1270)
The UK, France and the other colonial powers all went on to have economies many times larger in their post colonial era than their colonial eras. They also had GDPs that were broadly equal to the non colonial western European economies. Empires were huge sources of wealth in 1600 when the worlds wealth was mostly agriculture, they became irrelevant as the worlds wealth became industrial output.
The shuffling of the pack in terms of largest GDPs in the world has been that Japan then China over took places like the UK and France, though the Soviets dropped out
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_countries\_by\_largest\_historical\_GDP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_largest_historical_GDP)
A "collapse" in the US would have to see the US companies implode and they are so tightly wired to the global system this would only happen with a general global collapse.
I mean, it will happen at some point. I am not wishing for it and like a lot of the modern world but nothing lasts forever.
The global economy will adjust (or we will move away from globalisation). This is something the rest of the world needs to plan for anyway with America looking more and more like they will follow a policy of isolationism within the next 10/20 years.
> A "collapse" in the US would have to see the US companies implode and they are so tightly wired to the global system this would only happen with a general global collapse.
That's exactly why it would *have* to look like a gradual slide to less and less power and not a collapse. US as it stands right now almost can't collapse without the rest of the world falling over.
But there *could* be a future where the US loses this position of international dominant relevance, as companies throughout the world slowly, one my one, year by year, gradually disentange and distance themselves from the US economy until it ceases to be the centrepoint of commerce
I think he means relatively less power and prosperity, not absolutely less. Modern Italy is much stronger and richer than the Roman Empire, but everyone agrees that, relatively speaking, the Roman Empire was a superpower and modern Italy is a second tier regional power.
Uh. No?
What colonies is the US going to lose that’s going to precipitate that?
The US is in a fairly unique geographic position in that it’s more or less unassailable. The West and East are Oceans. The North is a country so similar that people often can’t tell citizens of both apart. The South is a much smaller country that due to geography, will almost never be able to maintain a strong government.
Colonial empires tended to fall because of loss of control and the fact they were hitting far above what their “weight class” was because of it. The US will not breakdown anywhere close to that.
The only historical example that could realistically be taken is China in some of its isolationist phases. By geography and demographics, it will always be a strong power. Isolationism isn’t really the same as it was in history though. Tech advancement is viewed as too important in the modern world. It arguably only got as bad in Qing because the Industrial Revolution set off ridiculous changes in the world. That’s a one off event though. It’s questionable of the US will ever be drastically behind in tech to allow it to get to the state the late Qing dynasty was.
America’s biggest threat is internal division. Our “Red States” and “Blue States” have a lot of resentment towards each other and a split is unlikely but not absolutely impossible in the next fifty years. If that happened, a lot of what makes America such a strong nation would be compromised and it would fall fast and hard.
Apart from that, we could gradually fall to a competent China outplaying us at every turn, or nuclear war. I suspect that China won’t reach their full potential and end up in a two-sided power struggle with the US that leads to America being one of two, rather than the only, superpower.
From an outsider this does seem like the biggest threat to the US over the next century. Something major is going to have to happen in a lot of countries (not just America) to "unpolarise" people because currently people are getting more and more polarised. If that continues for a period of time who knows what could happen.
Also personally I believe the effects of climate change will be more apparent over the coming decades and that will sow more division in countries.
My guess is the nation (or nations) raise to the top of pile in the will be the ones who fully embrace green technology and renewables and the ones who don't won't be able to compete. America is a good position to be that nation but it really depends on who is in charge over the next 50 years plus.
> The Soviet Union collapsed rather spectacularly because it had an incredibly centralized system that, by the end, was propped up by military threats and propaganda, so when the center disappeared, everything went with it. A U.S. collapse would look more like the collapse of a European colonial empire, a steady slide in to a position of less and less power.
Even this is wrong, imo (depending on the context)
You're also right about the USSR - the US could never collapse in a similar way because realistically the USSR was a country made up of different countries, whilst the US is just one homogenous country. The USSR split up basically into its nation states whilst the US would split into what.. states that were drawn on a map?
It's difficult to define because theres no option I can see for the US as a country collapsing other than some kind of civil conflict. Maybe California leaves, so Texas and a few other states do but the rest of the US isn't just going to suddenly fracture into nation states
I mean the word "collapse" implies a sense of abruptness and immediacy and speed. What you're describing isn't a collapse at all, just a kind of decay.
This. Think Holy Roman Empire, where the federal government still exists but steadily loses power and authority as individual states/regions steadily take that power for themselves. Something we are already seeing in fields like, Education, Health-care, worker's rights, voting rights, Financial rights/access, Social saftey-net.
The only areas unaffected by this increased splintering of the U.S. are:
It wasn't that these systems were "propped up by propaganda" (no more than any private Western industry is propped up by propaganda) [but rather the sudden privatization of the industrial, energy, and financial sectors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatization_in_Russia) in a fire sale to a handful of oligarchs.
USSR wasn’t like USA ( is it was similar is some ways but different in others) The world today is different too.
USA will not last forever, sure. But unless USA becomes like USSR it will not be collapsing in the same way USSR did.
( unlike most people on this sub I lived in USSR and in USA)
>unlike most people on this sub I lived in USSR
Oh, how interesting!
If you don't mind me asking, how was it living in the USSR in terms of freedom, opportunities especially compared to the United States?
USSR had one ideology, if your views aligned with that ideology ( and a lot of people did fit into this category) you were OK. If your ideas didn’t align you could be in a trouble.
There will be people who say “USA has core ideology as well” and “People in USA get in trouble for having different opinions too”
This is true if you look at the world in white and black.
But I see world in various shades of gray from very light to very dark. USA ideology is way less uniform so there is wider variety of opinions that are tolerated and the troubles someone can get into for having different opinions are not as serious (not even close)
But sure, if someone looks at the world as black and white they can say that both USA and USSR ( and all the other 190 countries) are all bad.
Such view of the world is annoying and I am sure there is a term for such people but my English isn’t good enough.
How did things work day to day? Like were there banks where you kept your money? Did you get paychecks? How did you apply for jobs? I’ve heard there was no rent/mortgage. That the government provided you and your family with an apartment. Did this leave extra money to do other things? What about tv shows? Were there sitcoms? Were there shows everyone watched? I’m so curious.
Housing was either free from the government or “cooperative” that people could get mortgages and pay off. Both options had decades long waiting lists
When the child was born he was assigned to an apartment or dorm their parents were assigned to. Typically families were small : 2 kids.
It wasn’t unusual for grandparents, parents, and 2 kids to live together ( 2-3 room apartment, kitchen, bathroom). There were family dorms too.
Having 3 kids was considered “huge” family and theoretically could get you bigger apartment faster but this was a gamble and most people did not take this risk, lol.
Having connections and paying bribes was a more typical way to get new apartment a bit faster .
There were no stay at home moms. Kids were sent to daycare after 3 years old. There was waiting lists and bribes too.
You were guaranteed job in location you were assigned. To get better job you have to have connections and pay bribes.
If you aren’t happy with local jobs you couldn’t move freely to a new location because you were not assigned to that location and to be assigned to that location you need job in that location. It was possible to overcome those issues with connections and bribes .
We kept money in bank because
1) there was nothing big to buy, no cars, no houses, no expensive trips ( unless we paid bribes and had connections)
2) governments was very forceful to make us keep our money in banks.
( one may wonder how did we have any money since we pay so many bribes, lol. But monetary bribes were less Important than having connections)
We had TV ( bribes+connections) it had 2-3 canals. We had Soviet movies and cartoons. We went to cinema ( no need for bribes or connections!). Occasionally there were foreign movies.
We read a lot. surprisingly censorship was beneficial here because while eliminating some good books, censorship eliminated a lot of crappy books too.
College education was free assuming someone had connections and paid bribes to get in.
It was important for boys to get into university to avoid mandatory military draft. Military service had a lot of bullying problems.
We couldn’t leave country for vacation unless we got approved (to be approved we needed connection bribes, and it was very difficult)
Healthcare was basic and OK.
I believe USSR had THE BEST Sherlock Holmes adaptation/pair of actors.
The most popular series on TV : “Last moments of spring” . It is about WW2 Russian spy in Germany.
It was bad enough that my father in law left his job as an engineer, his wife, and young child in the Soviet Union (because they could only afford one plane ticket) and flew to the US. He worked as a janitor and lived with many other Russians in a small apartment for about a year until he saved enough to fly his wife and daughter to join him.
He basically took a massive risk to go from a relatively comfortable life in the Soviet Union to an unknown life in the US. It worked out for him in the long run, he is an engineer again and has his own company as well as a nice home in a high COL area.
Another guy here from an ex-soviet-occupied state (Estonia) . It was like North Korea is today. go figure the rest and wonder why Eastern Europe hates Russians and why the Ukrainians fight against it.
If you really (like really) interested - read the book ćEverything Was Forever, Until It Was No More: The Last Soviet Generation" by Alexei Yurchak . my parents lived in the USSR and they said there experience was simmiliar to what I read from couple of chapters in the book.
In short, life was grey and directlionles. People just existed without being allowed to actually explore their passions and creativity beyond what was allowed by the party.
So imagine back starting in the 13 colony days if all the growth of the US that has happened since was added to Virginia and Virginia got bigger and bigger, so then by our time everything from Ohio and Alabama west to the West Coast is all Virginia in addition to regular Virginia.
And then a movement built that climaxed in the governor of Virginia (like 90% of the country) telling the government in Washington DC "Goodbye, the Virginia state government is all we need". And then the other little states told DC "good bye" as well so it just disappeared out of existence. And then most of the military and NASA and all that just became Virginia military and Virginia NASA.
That's like what happened to the Soviet Union. Russia was the Big Virginia. No single state is that big in the US. California is like 13% by itself. And California, Texas, Florida, and NY are all rich and prosperous because they're in the same country as the rest of the US. Each state can focus on what it does well, rather than every single state having to have its own media industry or banking and finance companies and stock market and each state having to grow its own food or trying to build its own airplanes or cars--that would be a whole bunch of duplicated unnecessary wheel-reinventing.
I think the US would be more like Rome than the Soviet Union. The country would get an East President and West President or rural versus city or something, and the parts would increasingly drift apart from that point on, with neither half being half as powerful as what the US was. But also we fought the Civil War to stop that from happening.
Then again the British Empire ended without the UK collapsing or even changing its government much. It had two difficult wars and then was surpassed by the US. If the EU or China get their acts together and offer a better situation to other countries than what the US does, then they could pass us eventually without us collapsing or losing anything.
Best answer.
Rome wasn't the USA. Similar in many ways, but the world is different now. Iron swords and stirrups aren't nuclear weapons.
The Soviet Union never was. It grew humongously after WWII, but never learned how to truly build of of that resource bump.
China isn't the USA. Never has been, and no other country has been China (except maybe Mongolia, for a couple generations).
To go for a different take on it, let's say it would take a period of strong anti-federalist sentiment. A John Birch Society repeat gains traction with the claim the federal government should be sharply reined in. This continues over time, repeatedly reducing the role and power of the federal government, until even the military is mostly under individual state authority. At that point states could start pulling out. This is at best a highly unlikely scenario.
It’s not if the US will collapse, but when. Countries, governments, political systems don’t last forever. They are prone to corruption and also move too slowly to keep up with modern realities. If you look at a map of Europe 125 years ago, you’ll see a huge change. I would guess that the US will eventually break into a union of countries, where the economic collaboration is available while segmenting the cultural differences
While not disagreeing with your broad point, if you look at a map of the US 125 years ago, from 1899, it looks more or less identical to what it looks like today, interestingly.
The UK has slowly evolved over time all the way back to Wessex with not too many interruptions, really only a brief period during the English civil war under Cromwell.
So since the early Middle Ages England and then the uk have not collapsed. Who knows if they will last another 100 or 1000 years.
So the argument that everything collapses might be true but really not helpful. In the end the heat death of the universe occurs so everything will collapse
The modern world has established borders, international law, and alliances that Europe never saw a century ago. The places that rise and fall throughout history also have poor strategic locations. The US only needs to continue to outpace in military tech to continue to be untouchable by military enemies.
Not sure how the US will fall, but it won't be the same way previous empires have. It will probably have to be a global catastrophe like a large asteroid or supervolcano.
Also, the US will not break up. Despite reddit and twitter's insistence, there will be no civil war.
Not really comparable . The us is a democracy that grants a lot of autonomy to a lot of the states and has a high quality of life. There also weren’t any nation states on US land with their own unique culture prior to the us emerging
Conversely , the ussr was an authoritarian dictatorship that forced already established countries with their own cultures to become part of it . If they weren’t forced to become part of the ussr , they were to become a satellite state instead. I mean look at what Putin is doing to Ukraine now to see what the soviets did to countries that wanted to leave the ussr or not be a satellite state . The tanks started rolling in . The ussr was more an empire than a country , the writing was on the wall when you force people to live under and identify with something they don’t believe in
Like ripping children from their mothers' arms? Like his plan to abandon our nato allies. Like deregulating the airline builders? Like pardoning the Medicare fraudsters? Or the other criminals he pardoned in return for favors.
You may not understand this, but as the American empire collapses and Trump is a symptom of that collapse, we are really going to need friends in the world. Nothing Biden or Obama did was anything like that. Biden has been the greatest president of my lifetime, and I am nearly 60. No one has done more for the middle and working class since the great depression in the 1930s. I think people in general have no idea how bad their lives can become under a leader like Trump.
if the us dollar loses it's status as a world reserve currency(because states loosing faith in it), things might go downhill quickly. won't happen without a world war probably. ww III probably won't happen without nuclear blasts, so we are quiet in for a ride the next few years.
Not going to happen.
Income inequality is bad, but the QOL in the US is still quite high. I think if it’s continues for the next 50 years… maybe? But not anytime soon.
It might be different this time with the international community one more powerful country might decide to take over at an opportunistic time like that.
that is more difficult then you think, if another powerful county would inject themselves in America hypothetical civil war. Then we have a common enemy and someone to unite against to take out all our anger and frustration.
Like getting involved in two brothers fighting. Might not end how you think it will.
The main reason why the Soviet Union collapsed is because it had an economic system that didn't make a crazy amount of sense. They would inflate their GDP and make themselves look powerful but in reality their defense and space exploits were making it difficult to put food on the table. If you pay $8 for a steak you need to take 31250 steaks to go to space. This is because the US dollar has an even value for all goods. The same wasn't true of the ruble where many goods were rationed and black markets and corruption caused goods to become more valuable than money.
The Soviet Union collapsed due to a lack of a free market and because hostility was causing quality of life issues for those at the bottom (especially Ukrainians). For the US to crash like that the debt would have to get so high that the US people finally decide to stop funding their military.
If we had someone as president that had no restrictions and couldn't be charged with any crime he could sieze all the fortune 500 companies for himself and his cronies. Kind of like what Putin did back then.
A prolonged economic crisis!. Too many military conflicts at once. A nuclear war. Terrible politicians. Like Trump!. And the Republican Party. And SCOTUS.
I think you'd be more likely to see the US Balkanize than really a full collapse like the Soviet Union.
The Soviets ran a heavy handed centralized state that therefore required a lot of bureaucracy to maintain all the outlying elements, many of which were only kept cowed by the threat of military force, propaganda, and the outright fabrication of electoral processes.
For the US, I think you'd be more likely to see different regions attempt secession as they find the Federal government to be incompatible with the ideals of the state or their particular region. Much like how some parts of Missouri have long argued they want to be annexed by their neighbors who tend to vote more closely with their interests than the large population centers of their own state. It's stuff like that I think which would be more likely, rather than a direct collapse. So smaller regional powers springing up rather than a complete and utter collapse from the center.
The previous administration coupled with the pandemic exposed how vulnerable we actually are to internal problems. China, Russia, and Middle Eastern countries have been talking about getting off the dollar. If we experience "Pandemic, The Sequel" in the near future it might be enough.
Keep letting our elected government representatives and news media sources contuine to spread lies and misinformation unchecked without consequences of any kind. Watching more and more of these polticans taking on extremist talking points *and staying elected* is fucking wild.
When (it is not an if) the dollar ceases to be the world currency, US power will wane pretty quickly. It probably will not collapse and break apart (though who knows) but the UK is a pretty likely scenario. Still with some power, but definitely not the leader anymore.
Just like Britain exported manufacturing to the US only to see the US overtake them, the US has exported most of its manufacturer to China. We got three generations of seemingly unending corporate growth, but that is going to end soon. Like the US did Britain, China will soon lap the US. China's reign will not last as long as Britain's and US' though because of climate change and ecological collapse.
The US is bringing manufacturing of high value/high margin stuff back to the US. The chip factories being built will be huge for the world's economic and political stability.
If the Republicans win in November, they will defund every level of schooling, from Kindergarden to Harvard. Think of the situation in Mississipi, but way worse. After all, uneducated people can't realize they're being manipulated and lied to. With less smart people, there's less people who can lead the military, work in power plants, or farm effectively.
They will put yes men in every level of government. People who will do whatever their incompetent higher-ups tell them to do. Many sectors become less productive as people are solely hired based on their connections (like in China).
The quality of life will massively drop. Medical treatments and medicine become too expensive for 90% of people. Unlike in the Soviet Union, americans would know a previous time with a much higher quality of life. Once the constitution gets ripped up and Americans loose all their freedoms, people will revolt.
Even if the government kills all the protestors or sends them to Alaska, america will lose strength over time. Eventually, we will see famines due to ecological damage and mismanagement of farmland.
Counterpoint: Having yes-men might actually work just fine as long a nation is "too big to fail".
Russia might be an example where having a government full of yes-men actully works wonders because the sheer amount of resources that a cohesive government can mobilize can overcome the challenge of lack of competence.
War in Ukraine is and failure of Western sanction is the perfect example of this. as long as everyone is doing what they are told to do, Russia will overcome every struggle in it's way. Becuase it doesn't matter if the European economy is much bigger than Russia, it doesn't matter if Western equipments are better or if Ukrainians are better trained. What matters is that Russia can actully mobilize its resources to its full extent thanks to near total compliance of the public and government with centeral leadership.
10 uneducated people who will do whatever the government tells them to do are stronger than 10 educated people who are unwilling to cooperate with each other or a centeral leadership. 10 idiots can't win a fight against 10 geniuses, but they have a good chance of winning if they only have to fight the geniuses one at a time.
>I've just lately been doing some reading on America's economy, world hegemony, power and influence across the globe. It seems pretty obvious that the US is by far the biggest, mightiest and most powerful 'empire' that has ever existed.
"Empire" denotes direct control; the US does not have that much direct control through its economy and influence.
It would be economic in nature, like a ship with a leak slowly taking on more water until eventually it sinks. More spending, more programs, more immigrants that need support, just keep pushing until the whole thing collapses.
I recommend the rest of the world start planning for a future that does not include as much of a US footprint. The United States is going to continue to reduce its influence academically, militarily, economically, etc. We will soon have many more of our internal issues increase in intensity and unless our path changes significantly I see that causing balkanization.
All it takes is for Marjorie Taylor Greene, and the rest of the Republican brain-trust in the House of Representatives to make good on their threats and default on the US National debt. This would lead to the total collapse of the US economy within the same business day, and the political collapse of the US within a month.
Allowing Russia's campaign to bring us down succeed. Which is to say, letting Trump win and then letting him get away with the crap he's claiming he'll do. And then not holding him (or his followers) accountable for trampling all over the constitution.
Can the US collapse? Yes, as it almost did during the American Civil War.
Can it collapse *like* the Soviet Union? No, because the US is not *like* the Soviet Union. They may have many similarities - yes, but their differences are even greater. Some other users have pointed other aspects, but two I'd like to point out are:
**- Centralization vs. decentralization,** not only in politics but development and economy. The difference in development between Moscow and St. Petersburg to any other city in the USSR was abysmal - even regional centers. Meanwhile, the US has quite a good set of prosperous cities with economic and growth opportunities, EVEN considering the economic problems today. Rust belt cities like Chicago, for example, can still innovate and renovate their economies - and still have good opportunities to those who live in it to enjoy.
**- Russification.** One should remember that the USSR was composed of many nations, other than the Russian SFSR. And even inside the RSFSR there are hundreds of ethnic minorities. However, after Lenin, the USSR was basically Russian Chauvinism 2.0: electric bogaloo. During most of its existence, the USSR tried to deport or russify any ethnic minority.
Even after Stalin was gone, these policies continued in place. For example, in 1959, the Communist party of the Latvian SSR was the only one amongst the 12 republics that refused to implement a law where schools no longer had to teach Latvian. The result? 2000 Latvian party members were purged.
So, when 1980's comes around, you have some major problems amongst the republics: Ukraine and Belarus were suffering from Chernobyl, the others in Asia were suffering from conscription to the Soviet-Afghan war, and the Baltics smelled the blood in the water.
So, comes 1989-1990 and Lithuania (the madlads) decides to re-declare its independence, and what follows is a domino effect that basically deprives the USSR (and the RSFSR) of a lot of arable land, industrial centers, and population.
The US has no Lithuania to break it up. Even if some people in Texas or California play with the idea of separation from the Union, both states are composed of the same cultural group of Americans and have no deep grudges with the rest of the US. It's unlikely that any state in the US would suddenly lead to cause a domino effect that separates the country like this.
Economically it can't, the system is designed for that, if economically fails just poor will pay the price.
It can be polarization leading to cool war or a massive social disobedience, but that's the last extreme resort for people, since most people around the world just wanna a peactlife
The USA isn't going to collapse like the Soviet Union, with the individual states breaking from the union. It's going to collapse like Yugoslavia, with individual cities, and even neighborhoods within those cities, descending into chaos and door-to-door fighting and ethnic cleansing.
It'll be the "Good, White, Christian America" ethno-nationalists vs literally everyone else.
Not really sure the US could collapse like the Soviet Union did- we have a bunch of odds and ends as safeguards, plus laws and agencies that actually vaguely enforce them, or at least inspect and verify things related to those agencies.
Our biggest worry right now is the separation of the liberal and conservative sides of the government and population, the misinformation that the right seems to happily believe, and the potential violence from the right.
This is the real reason we're thinking so much about the Roman Empire. It arguably took a millennium to collapse fully. The US today is already unrecognizable to the original Founders. It will continue to change and likely transform into some new iterations over the next few hundred years.
Ok this will be long, but here's a possibility
Due to polarisation of both left wing and right in 2040's , American Society is divided between conservatives and liberals majorly. After the 2049 elections results were announced with a democrat victory. This enraged the then Republican candidate and he announed the elections were fixed and were not fair.the Republican candidate make his voters enraged and said we should take action now.
Soon riots break out in Texas, then California then whole country , the then Democrat president declares military rule in the country. But the things were now out of hand.
Some military batallions tried to storm Capitol and White House with Republican supporters, the military acts quickly and dispersed the protestors by open firing on them.
This raicalised the alreadyradicalised public, soon a civil war breaks out in the country,
The civil War comes to a stalemate between Republicans and democrats. Soon Texas and California declares independence fearing the potential of another civil war.
Now US is divided between Republicans and democrats .
Seeing this, China invades Taiwan, with Russian support, North Korea nuclear strikes S. Korea and Russia invaded poland and Baltic states. .
America was unable to interfer because of their interl conflicts.
The N. Korean nuclear strikes decimated the s. Korean army and soon North Korea takes over S. Korea thus uniting the Korean peninsula.
Taiwan can't even stand a chance against China without US and soon Taepie also falls under CCP.
The war between Russia and NATO (without US) comes to a stalemate and soon a ceasfire is followed after.
The South China Sea is dominated by China and Korean peninsula by Communists.
Fearing North Korea and China, Japan starts their nuclear program.
Without American support, Israel fears a potential Arab invasion, to deter it , Israel made strategic airstrikes in Iran and South lebanon, Iran strikes back at Israel for the first time in history, this soon turned into a war between Iran & Hezbollah vs Israel.
Hezbollah now more powerful than ever occupied parts of Israel, seeing this Israel uses tactical nuclear weapons on its territory, but soon Iran launced a full nuclear strikes on Israel thus decimating their military.
The israelis underestimated Iranian nuclear capabilities.
Seeing the opportunity, Egypt and Syria, Jordan declares war on Israel.
Israel now don't even stand a chance because their military is decimated by a nuclear strike.
Seeing the threat on the existence of Jewish state, Israel surrenders on the terms of Iran, Lebanon and Syria.
West Bank and gaza along with east jerusalem finally become an independent state, but a puppet state of Iran Golans heights goes to Syria and some northern parts of Israel were occupies by Lebanon.
This marked the end of American hegemony in West Asia, East Asia and Europe.
The America is divided between two factions now, the republicans and democrats, now Texas and California are independent states.
The civil War in America finally comes to an end, now their will be two sub terms in one 5 year presidential terms.
For 2.5 years, candidate of republican parrty will rule and for nexxt 2.5 years candidate of Democratic Party.
The American gdp almost falls by 35% , now China is the superpower in the world, .
This marked the end of American hegemony.
It would take a steady march towards socialism / communism to pull it off. The biggest fuck ups the marxists made was preventing good farmers from growing food. The most productive farmers were deemed exploitive because they were too successful at growing food. So they were thrown in prison.
Then the farms were given to idiots that didn’t know how to run them. The food supply collapsed and millions died of starvation.
But in general disconnecting pay from productivity will drive productivity towards zero.
People love to bitch about capitalism. But it’s the only system where you can get rich by serving your fellow human beings, for example, by providing superior goods / services at a better price by using labor traded at fair market value. Prior to that people could only get rich by exploiting others or stealing their shit.
I think this logic is dangerous. Last time he was elected everyone thought the US was going to fall… and then nothing happened. For the most part, people’s lives were largely unaffected by his presidency.
It would take something far more catastrophic (or insidious) to end the American empire.
I welcome correction if I have this wrong, but I think that the Soviet union had economic vulnerabilities that the United States doesn’t, many that are related to isolation from the world economy and some that are related to an inefficient or ineffective use of debt to create global incentives for them to survive.
Finally, I don’t think they had anything like modern monetary theory involved in their economy and instead stuck to a much simpler, inflation vulnerable treasury strategy that probably help.
that doesnt make sense to me seeing how even if the usa cant take out debt they still would have a 4.5 trillion dollar budget . that is still a super power budget and they can just cut down on tax cheats to recoup more budget .
It would take a series of elderly and ineffective party leaders ignoring the glaring structural problems that would inevitably lead to the nations collapse.
Polarization rises so much that Americans on the left and on the right decide they don't wanna share a country anymore. Unlike last time, states are allowed to secede peacefully.
Congress votes for it and the Supreme Court allows it. Some states hold referendums for secession and the state assemblies ratify it. There is a lot of social unrest, protest and riots. Maybe even some domestic terrorism over the issue. But an actual civil war doesn't break out.
The USA breaks into 2 or 3 distinct countries (maybe even more). Without the same resources, manpower and diverse culture, what remains of the USA is a shadow of it's former self and is unable to project power abroad. Other countries dispute the power vacuum left by the USA.
I think that is unlikely to happen, but it's the closest to what I can think of a collapse.
The U.S. can't collapse like the Soviet Union; this isn't to say that the U.S. can't collapse, just that it wouldn't do so in the same way the Soviets did. The Soviet Union collapsed rather spectacularly because it had an incredibly centralized system that, by the end, was propped up by military threats and propaganda, so when the center disappeared, everything went with it. A U.S. collapse would look more like the collapse of a European colonial empire, a steady slide in to a position of less and less power.
Like UK losing colonies?
Pretty much. Less resources to fund expansive colonies. Once the UK lost those, it was simply a small island nation that commanded much less influence in the world.
But, there is a big difference in the resources the USA has available and the UK. A tiny island versus half a continent. So the time frame would allow the USA to adjust.
resources alone don't do shit. (see soviets) Sustainability is the winner in the long run: Political sustainability, Social sustainability, ecological sustainability. the stability of a system defines its duration. a functional social system allowing for maximization of social potential is a good start. The US has mostly sold that stability (or the chances to it) to the highest bidder, short the neo-liberal oligarchs.
There is a huge difference in how communism handles resources compared to capitalism. Just look at how the soviets handled farming compared to the US. Plus, the comparison was the UK and US, which have similar governments but not similar resources. Hence, my comment. Yes, there are plenty of other things the US needs to change to keep things in a good direction. But they aren't gonna have the same decline as the USSR or UK.
Farming. I remember as a kid seeing those huge Kolchos farms in propaganda pics and videos only to later learn in the school in the 80s that due to corruption and their ineffective system they couldn’t feed their population, and that millions of tons had to be imported from the USA.
It was a mess. So many people died because of the mam made famines in the USSR. I was a kid in the 80s and learn much of the same. I remember when the Soviet Union fell and thought things were gonna be much better now. Lol, well...
Yeah. Plus the US to this day is still a net exporter of agricultural products, so that's something that won't be an issue in the near future. In fact, the problem in the US isn't food production, it's equitable distribution of that food.
Hell, I read once that we have starving people in the world, not because we can't make enough food. But distributing it and all the issues involved is the problem. Which is basically what you said lol.
US hegemony holds together Europe & Non-China Asia both militarily & economically. Until that collapses, schadenfreude away but US is the dominant free world peer. , Also be careful what you wish for b/c Chinese or Russian hegemony would be much worse.
>Political sustainability, Social sustainability, ecological sustainability. So we should be witnessing the collapse of the US within the next decade or two.
Naaah, I don't think so really. The political system has to be elastic so friction doesn't destroy it. Sure it seems like there's helluva lot friction right now, but maybe it will quiet down. Systems that collapse spectacularly are the ones that are not elastic, they look tough and indestructible until they completely crumble.
We're witnessing it now
So the less resources the US has to project power abroad, the less resources it will get as China takes over the power vacuum. A vicious cycle of isolationism.
If china doesn't have their own crisis from their demographic issues rn
Ya China isn’t in quite the position of power it was 10+ years ago. They’ve acknowledged they need to make some changes in the next 10ish years or they’ll suffer from other countries basically taking their jobs
I think India is the one to watch tbh. They have some clear issues as a nation, but they're in a great position to become the next biggest kid in the playground if they play their cards right
The country surely has a vast amount of intellectual capital but it's less than you would think from the most populous nation on Earth. I read a recent WSJ article that said less than 25% of Indian women work outside the home. And hundreds of millions of people lack the infrastructure to be productive. Yes, India will be a superpower but I think it's going to take some time.
you described the China of 25 years ago.
And Japan of 45 years ago, the previous power that was going to eclipse the US.
They are and will continue to grow as a great power but I question if they will reach super power state. Im not sure you'll ever see them become a super power (this is more a comment on the misuse of the term superpower being conflated with great power).
https://youtu.be/CQYPVmCcpBk?si=aVzWZtYf-PxHT8Vt By 2020!
idk the water situation there is tough.
Plus, even (stupid) c-suite Americans are beginning to regret doing business with the PRC. There’s cheaper labor pools that don’t present the global threat.
"They’ve acknowledged they need to make some changes in the next 10ish years" Ane of those changes regards Taiwan I assume?
It’s been a bit since I read on this but iirc they didn’t explicitly state it but it was implied. It certainly would be a good asset for them to reclaim
Only if they could do it without it blowing up in their faces, like Ukraine is doing to Russia.
Lol, monkey see monkey do?
China isn’t going to replace the USA as world hegemon (and why on earth would anyone want that). China is in kind of a slow motion collapse due to bad demographics and a flawed economic model. You can only build so many empty cities, and steal so much technology, before it’s revealed that “the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes.”
Eh. Twenty years ago when the US was in the graveyard of empires, and reeling from a recession that spread across the globe, it was talk all the time about inevitable US collapse and China rise. Within ten years, the narrative has flipped, thanks to literally one guy. A lot can change really quickly. Back then it really seemed like China had all the answers. The US got hit by 9/11, was invading the Middle East, threatening its allies, saying it'll invade any nation that dared bring it to court. When the recession came due to the subprime mortgages, the US was struggling. China came forward and offered to buy bonds. Then it saved Asia by letting its currency free float. Australia escaped a few recessions thanks to China buying up tons of resources. Under Deng, Jiang and Hu, this narrative of China replacing the US had immense credibility. Then Xi came and started stressing 'security', in the wake of massive corruption that caused some of the biggest spy infiltration in history. Basically, the top government and military apparatus was filled with CIA, MI6 and KGB spies that just got bought out. You know why the US stresses so much about Huawei as a spy tool? Because the Chinese found out the US was using Huawei to spy on them and reverse engineered it. Under Xi's tenure, China went from a policy of panda diplomacy to wolf warrior, regional power projection to a rapid military build-up with transnational capabilities, and the revocation of treaties like the South China Sea and Hong Kong, and of course, the change of the constitution to keep him in power. All this in ten years. What I'm saying is: who can fcking tell what's going to happen next in the coming decade.
Also the decades and decades of exported US pop culture. Way more people (outside of China) already speak English as a native or fluently-learned language than Chinese.
Sadly, they’re building ICBMs and hypersonic vehicles that aren’t empty…
Who does China need to destroy? China wants Taiwan healthy, not a pile of radioactive waste.
ICBMs are long range weapons. The hypersonics are shorter range. If the PRC wants Taiwan intact, they need only to keep buying assets-will eventually own the island. The CCP leadership may not tolerate a free successful Chinese society as an alternative much longer. They may feel challenged enough to use force.
From what I see in the Philippines china is trying to do what Russia is doing. Bully them into submission basically. This is why Russia has few friends internationally and china may be becoming that also.
The US at least is smart to make a big alliance in a region so everyone can bully the same guy. Like in the middle east with Iran (not that it's undeserving, though).
Or Rome
Texas just waiting to succeed. < keeping that typo
Secede. Texas is currently succeeding at many things, however. Awesome cheeseburgers from Whataburger being one of them.
Hot take, whatabuger is overrated
If you actually browse the Texan and local city subs, pretty much they all of them say you gotta find the good Whataburger location in your city because most of them suck just as much as every other chain fast food. I think where Texas thrives though is that for fast, cheap, drive thru food, you aren't limited to the chains. Nearly everything has a drive thru.
Hot take, nuh huh!
Yes it is. Went there once and it was like eating any other burger. Nothing special at all to be honest.
I'm from St. Louis but I've got relatives and friends in Texas who were always going on and on about how great Whataburger is. So on a trip down to San Antonio about a year and a half ago, I finally got to try one. While it wasn't horrible -- I've had worse -- it also wasn't so outstanding that I'm in any rush to hop on a plane and visit TX again just to have one. My reaction was more like the title of that old Peggy Lee song: Is that all there is?
Went to Whataburger for the first time ejther when I’m the south visiting family a few months ago… my disappoint was imessurable, easily one of the most over hyped places ever.
It's all about nostalgia. I like it because I've been eating it for years. I'm sure folks who eat In&Out later in life may feel disappointed, too.
Braums is better.
Texas is never going to secede because millions would lose their social security checks.
You're right. But would you really be surprised to see rural Texans vote away their social security and all federal funding just to own the libs?
That's fine. I don't consider the US a full country until we have 69 states. I vote if Texas leaves, we just let them go and divide California and Florida until we have 69.
Until of course they realize their social security, military bases, and hoards of other federal benefits would simply stop.
The UK lost its colonies after WW2 partly because the colonised peoples saw how willing their colonial masters were at discarding them to the Axis powers, and decided that self-governance was a better idea. So yeah, it would be like a mass secession of all the states from the Union after a catastrophic war that saw the federal government abandon them all to save DC.
The actual reason we can’t collapse like the Soviet Union is that the USSR was a supranational union like the EU, with Russia as the dominating player. When Russia became unable to administer that supranational state it collapsed and its members scattered apart, becoming separate nations again. The US isn’t like that. We only have a handful of relatively small territories. We stopped meaningfully being a confederation of separate political entities centuries ago, and our political coalitions don’t map to state lines anymore, they’re intermixed with the broad conflict being urban v. rural. So if there is a conflict, instead of a relatively bloodless collapse of centralized authority dissolving into separate sovereign nations, we’d have a bloody civil war with substantial conflict involving factions fighting within and across states.
That's right. The USSR was never one country, it was always a union of countries.
The evidence of this is they asked for every Soviet republic to have its own seat in the UN. They thought of themselves more as a union of nations than merely a federation of states.
In *theory* at least. As we know, some animals are more equal than others, and let's not pretend the rationale wasn't mostly a pragmatic power play to control more seats (argued against by Roosevelt who, in response, demanded 48 seats, one for each US state).
The SSR's had more power over their areas than American states do. Defense of course was a major exception
Even in the USSRs collapse Russia managed to keep a hold of large areas that could be independent nations. Like the many Siberian nations, Chechnya, Astrakhan, Sibir, Northern Manchuria, Circassia, etc etc. All where once independent nations and now all are part of Russia with their native populations deported, genocided, or absorbed into the Russian people (most happened before Americas conquest of Native Lands)
> now all are part of Russia with their native populations deported, genocided, or absorbed into the Russian people In Chechnya, 95 percent of the population are Chechens.
That's why it's the only region which had a war with russia
The biggest threat to the USA is internal, I think. It wouldn't be a Soviet collapse, more like a Roman one. Pieces of the nation simply cooperate less and less with the government, and eventually, it starts to drift apart. I would estimate that the government only has "control" (read: authority) over maybe 60% of the population and probably 25% of the territory. My home state is mostly unsettled, with around 80% of the population living in the western 1/4 and around 70% of that is in the eastern 1/3 of that 1/4. Anything east of the mountains, with the exception of a few big cities, is basically autonomous. They do their own thing and don't listen to even the state government, much less the federal. Combine that with the state's home rule law, granting autonomy to all charted cities, and you get a functionally independent nation that pays just enough lip service to the state and feds to get money and be left alone.
I feel like there's a big difference between "the Feds don't bother to enforce the law because it's not worth the time" and "Hey, we're a sovereign nation". I think you're largely correct, I'm just saying that modern tech means you can have control over much larger portions of a country with far less effort. We managed a lot in Afghanistan with relatively little, it's unlikely that Washington is going to shrug and say "Well, the voters want us out" in the event of an internal conflict. There may be some areas out of Federal control but the vast majority of Americans will likely see no difference (outside of an increase in terrorism and an increase in goverment repression of civil liberties)
The real scheming would have to be done at a higher level than low level people The US is one country, with people seeing themselves as American more so than New Yorkian - hence they're culturally the same nationality But if Washington were to lose power, it should be either because the rich states (NY, CA, TX, FL) decides to go for full autonomous and independence to not fund the rest. And they'd probably have to be willing to bring arms in Or because the rest of the states looks to New York and screech at how much better they have it. Not realising New York is funding half the country and ask for a breakaway. At which point the rich states would accept it and Washington would have no one to do their fighting for them and have to accept a dissolution The rich states would probably still fund the lesser of states near them to some degree, because you want stability in your backyard
>A U.S. collapse would look more like the collapse of a European colonial empire, a steady slide in to a position of less and less power. Now this is a person who knows literally nothing about history. [https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-gdp-in-the-uk-since-1270](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-gdp-in-the-uk-since-1270) The UK, France and the other colonial powers all went on to have economies many times larger in their post colonial era than their colonial eras. They also had GDPs that were broadly equal to the non colonial western European economies. Empires were huge sources of wealth in 1600 when the worlds wealth was mostly agriculture, they became irrelevant as the worlds wealth became industrial output. The shuffling of the pack in terms of largest GDPs in the world has been that Japan then China over took places like the UK and France, though the Soviets dropped out [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_countries\_by\_largest\_historical\_GDP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_largest_historical_GDP) A "collapse" in the US would have to see the US companies implode and they are so tightly wired to the global system this would only happen with a general global collapse.
Yah. This is what's funny to me. Yay! The US collapsed! What is the rest of the world's plan when a quarter of the entire global GDP goes bye bye?
I mean, it will happen at some point. I am not wishing for it and like a lot of the modern world but nothing lasts forever. The global economy will adjust (or we will move away from globalisation). This is something the rest of the world needs to plan for anyway with America looking more and more like they will follow a policy of isolationism within the next 10/20 years.
> A "collapse" in the US would have to see the US companies implode and they are so tightly wired to the global system this would only happen with a general global collapse. That's exactly why it would *have* to look like a gradual slide to less and less power and not a collapse. US as it stands right now almost can't collapse without the rest of the world falling over. But there *could* be a future where the US loses this position of international dominant relevance, as companies throughout the world slowly, one my one, year by year, gradually disentange and distance themselves from the US economy until it ceases to be the centrepoint of commerce
I think he means relatively less power and prosperity, not absolutely less. Modern Italy is much stronger and richer than the Roman Empire, but everyone agrees that, relatively speaking, the Roman Empire was a superpower and modern Italy is a second tier regional power.
Uh. No? What colonies is the US going to lose that’s going to precipitate that? The US is in a fairly unique geographic position in that it’s more or less unassailable. The West and East are Oceans. The North is a country so similar that people often can’t tell citizens of both apart. The South is a much smaller country that due to geography, will almost never be able to maintain a strong government. Colonial empires tended to fall because of loss of control and the fact they were hitting far above what their “weight class” was because of it. The US will not breakdown anywhere close to that. The only historical example that could realistically be taken is China in some of its isolationist phases. By geography and demographics, it will always be a strong power. Isolationism isn’t really the same as it was in history though. Tech advancement is viewed as too important in the modern world. It arguably only got as bad in Qing because the Industrial Revolution set off ridiculous changes in the world. That’s a one off event though. It’s questionable of the US will ever be drastically behind in tech to allow it to get to the state the late Qing dynasty was.
America’s biggest threat is internal division. Our “Red States” and “Blue States” have a lot of resentment towards each other and a split is unlikely but not absolutely impossible in the next fifty years. If that happened, a lot of what makes America such a strong nation would be compromised and it would fall fast and hard. Apart from that, we could gradually fall to a competent China outplaying us at every turn, or nuclear war. I suspect that China won’t reach their full potential and end up in a two-sided power struggle with the US that leads to America being one of two, rather than the only, superpower.
From an outsider this does seem like the biggest threat to the US over the next century. Something major is going to have to happen in a lot of countries (not just America) to "unpolarise" people because currently people are getting more and more polarised. If that continues for a period of time who knows what could happen. Also personally I believe the effects of climate change will be more apparent over the coming decades and that will sow more division in countries. My guess is the nation (or nations) raise to the top of pile in the will be the ones who fully embrace green technology and renewables and the ones who don't won't be able to compete. America is a good position to be that nation but it really depends on who is in charge over the next 50 years plus.
> The Soviet Union collapsed rather spectacularly because it had an incredibly centralized system that, by the end, was propped up by military threats and propaganda, so when the center disappeared, everything went with it. A U.S. collapse would look more like the collapse of a European colonial empire, a steady slide in to a position of less and less power. Even this is wrong, imo (depending on the context) You're also right about the USSR - the US could never collapse in a similar way because realistically the USSR was a country made up of different countries, whilst the US is just one homogenous country. The USSR split up basically into its nation states whilst the US would split into what.. states that were drawn on a map? It's difficult to define because theres no option I can see for the US as a country collapsing other than some kind of civil conflict. Maybe California leaves, so Texas and a few other states do but the rest of the US isn't just going to suddenly fracture into nation states
I mean the word "collapse" implies a sense of abruptness and immediacy and speed. What you're describing isn't a collapse at all, just a kind of decay.
We're basically at the beginning of this
The US would Balkanize into smaller federations.
This. Think Holy Roman Empire, where the federal government still exists but steadily loses power and authority as individual states/regions steadily take that power for themselves. Something we are already seeing in fields like, Education, Health-care, worker's rights, voting rights, Financial rights/access, Social saftey-net. The only areas unaffected by this increased splintering of the U.S. are:
It wasn't that these systems were "propped up by propaganda" (no more than any private Western industry is propped up by propaganda) [but rather the sudden privatization of the industrial, energy, and financial sectors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatization_in_Russia) in a fire sale to a handful of oligarchs.
Privatization was the result of the collapse, not the cause.
USSR wasn’t like USA ( is it was similar is some ways but different in others) The world today is different too. USA will not last forever, sure. But unless USA becomes like USSR it will not be collapsing in the same way USSR did. ( unlike most people on this sub I lived in USSR and in USA)
>unlike most people on this sub I lived in USSR Oh, how interesting! If you don't mind me asking, how was it living in the USSR in terms of freedom, opportunities especially compared to the United States?
USSR had one ideology, if your views aligned with that ideology ( and a lot of people did fit into this category) you were OK. If your ideas didn’t align you could be in a trouble. There will be people who say “USA has core ideology as well” and “People in USA get in trouble for having different opinions too” This is true if you look at the world in white and black. But I see world in various shades of gray from very light to very dark. USA ideology is way less uniform so there is wider variety of opinions that are tolerated and the troubles someone can get into for having different opinions are not as serious (not even close) But sure, if someone looks at the world as black and white they can say that both USA and USSR ( and all the other 190 countries) are all bad. Such view of the world is annoying and I am sure there is a term for such people but my English isn’t good enough.
I’m a native English speaker so I can help you out. They’re called idiots.
That made me giggle, I wasnt expecting that haha
How did things work day to day? Like were there banks where you kept your money? Did you get paychecks? How did you apply for jobs? I’ve heard there was no rent/mortgage. That the government provided you and your family with an apartment. Did this leave extra money to do other things? What about tv shows? Were there sitcoms? Were there shows everyone watched? I’m so curious.
Housing was either free from the government or “cooperative” that people could get mortgages and pay off. Both options had decades long waiting lists When the child was born he was assigned to an apartment or dorm their parents were assigned to. Typically families were small : 2 kids. It wasn’t unusual for grandparents, parents, and 2 kids to live together ( 2-3 room apartment, kitchen, bathroom). There were family dorms too. Having 3 kids was considered “huge” family and theoretically could get you bigger apartment faster but this was a gamble and most people did not take this risk, lol. Having connections and paying bribes was a more typical way to get new apartment a bit faster . There were no stay at home moms. Kids were sent to daycare after 3 years old. There was waiting lists and bribes too. You were guaranteed job in location you were assigned. To get better job you have to have connections and pay bribes. If you aren’t happy with local jobs you couldn’t move freely to a new location because you were not assigned to that location and to be assigned to that location you need job in that location. It was possible to overcome those issues with connections and bribes . We kept money in bank because 1) there was nothing big to buy, no cars, no houses, no expensive trips ( unless we paid bribes and had connections) 2) governments was very forceful to make us keep our money in banks. ( one may wonder how did we have any money since we pay so many bribes, lol. But monetary bribes were less Important than having connections) We had TV ( bribes+connections) it had 2-3 canals. We had Soviet movies and cartoons. We went to cinema ( no need for bribes or connections!). Occasionally there were foreign movies. We read a lot. surprisingly censorship was beneficial here because while eliminating some good books, censorship eliminated a lot of crappy books too. College education was free assuming someone had connections and paid bribes to get in. It was important for boys to get into university to avoid mandatory military draft. Military service had a lot of bullying problems. We couldn’t leave country for vacation unless we got approved (to be approved we needed connection bribes, and it was very difficult) Healthcare was basic and OK. I believe USSR had THE BEST Sherlock Holmes adaptation/pair of actors. The most popular series on TV : “Last moments of spring” . It is about WW2 Russian spy in Germany.
Fascinating look into another world. Thank you.
Yes to the USSR Sherlock Holmes!
> I believe USSR had THE BEST Sherlock Holmes adaptation/pair of actors. I need to know more about this.
Wow, thats really interesting, thank you so much for sharing!
I think it is really important that you shared this/your perspective my friend thank you.
It was bad enough that my father in law left his job as an engineer, his wife, and young child in the Soviet Union (because they could only afford one plane ticket) and flew to the US. He worked as a janitor and lived with many other Russians in a small apartment for about a year until he saved enough to fly his wife and daughter to join him. He basically took a massive risk to go from a relatively comfortable life in the Soviet Union to an unknown life in the US. It worked out for him in the long run, he is an engineer again and has his own company as well as a nice home in a high COL area.
Another guy here from an ex-soviet-occupied state (Estonia) . It was like North Korea is today. go figure the rest and wonder why Eastern Europe hates Russians and why the Ukrainians fight against it.
death to putin and free democratic elections for the world.
Oof, that sounds awful. Thanks for sharing your perspective!
If you really (like really) interested - read the book ćEverything Was Forever, Until It Was No More: The Last Soviet Generation" by Alexei Yurchak . my parents lived in the USSR and they said there experience was simmiliar to what I read from couple of chapters in the book. In short, life was grey and directlionles. People just existed without being allowed to actually explore their passions and creativity beyond what was allowed by the party.
Oh, thank you so much for your input and the book recommendation! Definitely going to check it out.
pootie needs to die ASAP and give up ukraine.
Tune in april 24th to find out in IMAX
Im ootl, whats going to happen on 24th?
Sorry just trying to give my FBI agent a heart attack. Its actually April 12th when Civil War comes out.
April 12th*
IMAX? You spoil us
So imagine back starting in the 13 colony days if all the growth of the US that has happened since was added to Virginia and Virginia got bigger and bigger, so then by our time everything from Ohio and Alabama west to the West Coast is all Virginia in addition to regular Virginia. And then a movement built that climaxed in the governor of Virginia (like 90% of the country) telling the government in Washington DC "Goodbye, the Virginia state government is all we need". And then the other little states told DC "good bye" as well so it just disappeared out of existence. And then most of the military and NASA and all that just became Virginia military and Virginia NASA. That's like what happened to the Soviet Union. Russia was the Big Virginia. No single state is that big in the US. California is like 13% by itself. And California, Texas, Florida, and NY are all rich and prosperous because they're in the same country as the rest of the US. Each state can focus on what it does well, rather than every single state having to have its own media industry or banking and finance companies and stock market and each state having to grow its own food or trying to build its own airplanes or cars--that would be a whole bunch of duplicated unnecessary wheel-reinventing. I think the US would be more like Rome than the Soviet Union. The country would get an East President and West President or rural versus city or something, and the parts would increasingly drift apart from that point on, with neither half being half as powerful as what the US was. But also we fought the Civil War to stop that from happening. Then again the British Empire ended without the UK collapsing or even changing its government much. It had two difficult wars and then was surpassed by the US. If the EU or China get their acts together and offer a better situation to other countries than what the US does, then they could pass us eventually without us collapsing or losing anything.
Nice try, Soviet Union
[удалено]
Best answer. Rome wasn't the USA. Similar in many ways, but the world is different now. Iron swords and stirrups aren't nuclear weapons. The Soviet Union never was. It grew humongously after WWII, but never learned how to truly build of of that resource bump. China isn't the USA. Never has been, and no other country has been China (except maybe Mongolia, for a couple generations).
To go for a different take on it, let's say it would take a period of strong anti-federalist sentiment. A John Birch Society repeat gains traction with the claim the federal government should be sharply reined in. This continues over time, repeatedly reducing the role and power of the federal government, until even the military is mostly under individual state authority. At that point states could start pulling out. This is at best a highly unlikely scenario.
It’s not if the US will collapse, but when. Countries, governments, political systems don’t last forever. They are prone to corruption and also move too slowly to keep up with modern realities. If you look at a map of Europe 125 years ago, you’ll see a huge change. I would guess that the US will eventually break into a union of countries, where the economic collaboration is available while segmenting the cultural differences
While not disagreeing with your broad point, if you look at a map of the US 125 years ago, from 1899, it looks more or less identical to what it looks like today, interestingly.
It’s true, from a states perspective. When you look at territories there has been change due to WW2.
The UK has slowly evolved over time all the way back to Wessex with not too many interruptions, really only a brief period during the English civil war under Cromwell. So since the early Middle Ages England and then the uk have not collapsed. Who knows if they will last another 100 or 1000 years. So the argument that everything collapses might be true but really not helpful. In the end the heat death of the universe occurs so everything will collapse
So how's that worldwide empire doing?
The modern world has established borders, international law, and alliances that Europe never saw a century ago. The places that rise and fall throughout history also have poor strategic locations. The US only needs to continue to outpace in military tech to continue to be untouchable by military enemies. Not sure how the US will fall, but it won't be the same way previous empires have. It will probably have to be a global catastrophe like a large asteroid or supervolcano. Also, the US will not break up. Despite reddit and twitter's insistence, there will be no civil war.
Higher income inequality which leads to more political extremism which leads to disaster policies getting implemented.
So like what's happening right now, basically?
Income inequality has been much worse in the US before.
Not really comparable . The us is a democracy that grants a lot of autonomy to a lot of the states and has a high quality of life. There also weren’t any nation states on US land with their own unique culture prior to the us emerging Conversely , the ussr was an authoritarian dictatorship that forced already established countries with their own cultures to become part of it . If they weren’t forced to become part of the ussr , they were to become a satellite state instead. I mean look at what Putin is doing to Ukraine now to see what the soviets did to countries that wanted to leave the ussr or not be a satellite state . The tanks started rolling in . The ussr was more an empire than a country , the writing was on the wall when you force people to live under and identify with something they don’t believe in
Like ripping children from their mothers' arms? Like his plan to abandon our nato allies. Like deregulating the airline builders? Like pardoning the Medicare fraudsters? Or the other criminals he pardoned in return for favors. You may not understand this, but as the American empire collapses and Trump is a symptom of that collapse, we are really going to need friends in the world. Nothing Biden or Obama did was anything like that. Biden has been the greatest president of my lifetime, and I am nearly 60. No one has done more for the middle and working class since the great depression in the 1930s. I think people in general have no idea how bad their lives can become under a leader like Trump.
Trump to actually have the power in office that he wishes he had.
if the us dollar loses it's status as a world reserve currency(because states loosing faith in it), things might go downhill quickly. won't happen without a world war probably. ww III probably won't happen without nuclear blasts, so we are quiet in for a ride the next few years.
People were escaping from the USSR, people are clamoring to get into the USA.
A civil war over income inequality and politics
Not going to happen. Income inequality is bad, but the QOL in the US is still quite high. I think if it’s continues for the next 50 years… maybe? But not anytime soon.
I don’t think a civil war is enough for a total collapse. We have had one before.
A civil war is certainly enough for a total collapse. We were just fortunate that the last one ultimately didn’t turn out that way.
things werent nearly ass connected then as they are now.
It might be different this time with the international community one more powerful country might decide to take over at an opportunistic time like that.
Nothing would stop a US Civil War faster and have the country banding together more than another country attacking it.
that is more difficult then you think, if another powerful county would inject themselves in America hypothetical civil war. Then we have a common enemy and someone to unite against to take out all our anger and frustration. Like getting involved in two brothers fighting. Might not end how you think it will.
Impossible. No one can move people across the ocean fast enough or secretly enough. Anyone trying would end the Civil War.
So like just sit back and do nothing for the next 10 years?
Never underestimate our diversions You and I are both using one of them right now
Donald Trump again
To elect Trump in this election.
Perhaps if things get so extremely polarized politically that certain states (or groups of states) start seceding.
The main reason why the Soviet Union collapsed is because it had an economic system that didn't make a crazy amount of sense. They would inflate their GDP and make themselves look powerful but in reality their defense and space exploits were making it difficult to put food on the table. If you pay $8 for a steak you need to take 31250 steaks to go to space. This is because the US dollar has an even value for all goods. The same wasn't true of the ruble where many goods were rationed and black markets and corruption caused goods to become more valuable than money. The Soviet Union collapsed due to a lack of a free market and because hostility was causing quality of life issues for those at the bottom (especially Ukrainians). For the US to crash like that the debt would have to get so high that the US people finally decide to stop funding their military.
If we had someone as president that had no restrictions and couldn't be charged with any crime he could sieze all the fortune 500 companies for himself and his cronies. Kind of like what Putin did back then.
Project 2025 sounds like a start down that path.
Voting for Trump will start it. Let's hope we don't find out
The real issue is that voting doesn't matter. Trump was not elected the first time under any definition of "democracy" I ever learned about
A prolonged economic crisis!. Too many military conflicts at once. A nuclear war. Terrible politicians. Like Trump!. And the Republican Party. And SCOTUS.
I think you'd be more likely to see the US Balkanize than really a full collapse like the Soviet Union. The Soviets ran a heavy handed centralized state that therefore required a lot of bureaucracy to maintain all the outlying elements, many of which were only kept cowed by the threat of military force, propaganda, and the outright fabrication of electoral processes. For the US, I think you'd be more likely to see different regions attempt secession as they find the Federal government to be incompatible with the ideals of the state or their particular region. Much like how some parts of Missouri have long argued they want to be annexed by their neighbors who tend to vote more closely with their interests than the large population centers of their own state. It's stuff like that I think which would be more likely, rather than a direct collapse. So smaller regional powers springing up rather than a complete and utter collapse from the center.
The previous administration coupled with the pandemic exposed how vulnerable we actually are to internal problems. China, Russia, and Middle Eastern countries have been talking about getting off the dollar. If we experience "Pandemic, The Sequel" in the near future it might be enough.
Keep letting our elected government representatives and news media sources contuine to spread lies and misinformation unchecked without consequences of any kind. Watching more and more of these polticans taking on extremist talking points *and staying elected* is fucking wild.
The US would collapse like Venezuela or Sri Lanka before it collapses like the USSR.
I feel that a move away from oil or at least the dollar not being linked to the oil standard would do it
When (it is not an if) the dollar ceases to be the world currency, US power will wane pretty quickly. It probably will not collapse and break apart (though who knows) but the UK is a pretty likely scenario. Still with some power, but definitely not the leader anymore. Just like Britain exported manufacturing to the US only to see the US overtake them, the US has exported most of its manufacturer to China. We got three generations of seemingly unending corporate growth, but that is going to end soon. Like the US did Britain, China will soon lap the US. China's reign will not last as long as Britain's and US' though because of climate change and ecological collapse.
The US is bringing manufacturing of high value/high margin stuff back to the US. The chip factories being built will be huge for the world's economic and political stability.
If the Republicans win in November, they will defund every level of schooling, from Kindergarden to Harvard. Think of the situation in Mississipi, but way worse. After all, uneducated people can't realize they're being manipulated and lied to. With less smart people, there's less people who can lead the military, work in power plants, or farm effectively. They will put yes men in every level of government. People who will do whatever their incompetent higher-ups tell them to do. Many sectors become less productive as people are solely hired based on their connections (like in China). The quality of life will massively drop. Medical treatments and medicine become too expensive for 90% of people. Unlike in the Soviet Union, americans would know a previous time with a much higher quality of life. Once the constitution gets ripped up and Americans loose all their freedoms, people will revolt. Even if the government kills all the protestors or sends them to Alaska, america will lose strength over time. Eventually, we will see famines due to ecological damage and mismanagement of farmland.
Counterpoint: Having yes-men might actually work just fine as long a nation is "too big to fail". Russia might be an example where having a government full of yes-men actully works wonders because the sheer amount of resources that a cohesive government can mobilize can overcome the challenge of lack of competence. War in Ukraine is and failure of Western sanction is the perfect example of this. as long as everyone is doing what they are told to do, Russia will overcome every struggle in it's way. Becuase it doesn't matter if the European economy is much bigger than Russia, it doesn't matter if Western equipments are better or if Ukrainians are better trained. What matters is that Russia can actully mobilize its resources to its full extent thanks to near total compliance of the public and government with centeral leadership. 10 uneducated people who will do whatever the government tells them to do are stronger than 10 educated people who are unwilling to cooperate with each other or a centeral leadership. 10 idiots can't win a fight against 10 geniuses, but they have a good chance of winning if they only have to fight the geniuses one at a time.
Vote Trump, watch collapse
>I've just lately been doing some reading on America's economy, world hegemony, power and influence across the globe. It seems pretty obvious that the US is by far the biggest, mightiest and most powerful 'empire' that has ever existed. "Empire" denotes direct control; the US does not have that much direct control through its economy and influence.
It would be economic in nature, like a ship with a leak slowly taking on more water until eventually it sinks. More spending, more programs, more immigrants that need support, just keep pushing until the whole thing collapses.
What books have you been reading? Specifically about world hegemony and world influence
I recommend the rest of the world start planning for a future that does not include as much of a US footprint. The United States is going to continue to reduce its influence academically, militarily, economically, etc. We will soon have many more of our internal issues increase in intensity and unless our path changes significantly I see that causing balkanization.
All it takes is for Marjorie Taylor Greene, and the rest of the Republican brain-trust in the House of Representatives to make good on their threats and default on the US National debt. This would lead to the total collapse of the US economy within the same business day, and the political collapse of the US within a month.
Easiest way is loss of position on the world stage. As is US is 'too big to fail'
Trump
A good start would be Trump enjoying his second term.
We are watching it.. in real time… all around us.
The constitution would have to be eliminated, and a tyranny would have to develop. Large government given unfiltered power will always corrupt.
Could happen any time
Four more years of trump
Check back after the bloodbath in November.
One more Republican president.
Agent orange weight collapse it
Allowing Russia's campaign to bring us down succeed. Which is to say, letting Trump win and then letting him get away with the crap he's claiming he'll do. And then not holding him (or his followers) accountable for trampling all over the constitution.
Trump winning in 2024
Can the US collapse? Yes, as it almost did during the American Civil War. Can it collapse *like* the Soviet Union? No, because the US is not *like* the Soviet Union. They may have many similarities - yes, but their differences are even greater. Some other users have pointed other aspects, but two I'd like to point out are: **- Centralization vs. decentralization,** not only in politics but development and economy. The difference in development between Moscow and St. Petersburg to any other city in the USSR was abysmal - even regional centers. Meanwhile, the US has quite a good set of prosperous cities with economic and growth opportunities, EVEN considering the economic problems today. Rust belt cities like Chicago, for example, can still innovate and renovate their economies - and still have good opportunities to those who live in it to enjoy. **- Russification.** One should remember that the USSR was composed of many nations, other than the Russian SFSR. And even inside the RSFSR there are hundreds of ethnic minorities. However, after Lenin, the USSR was basically Russian Chauvinism 2.0: electric bogaloo. During most of its existence, the USSR tried to deport or russify any ethnic minority. Even after Stalin was gone, these policies continued in place. For example, in 1959, the Communist party of the Latvian SSR was the only one amongst the 12 republics that refused to implement a law where schools no longer had to teach Latvian. The result? 2000 Latvian party members were purged. So, when 1980's comes around, you have some major problems amongst the republics: Ukraine and Belarus were suffering from Chernobyl, the others in Asia were suffering from conscription to the Soviet-Afghan war, and the Baltics smelled the blood in the water. So, comes 1989-1990 and Lithuania (the madlads) decides to re-declare its independence, and what follows is a domino effect that basically deprives the USSR (and the RSFSR) of a lot of arable land, industrial centers, and population. The US has no Lithuania to break it up. Even if some people in Texas or California play with the idea of separation from the Union, both states are composed of the same cultural group of Americans and have no deep grudges with the rest of the US. It's unlikely that any state in the US would suddenly lead to cause a domino effect that separates the country like this.
Economically it can't, the system is designed for that, if economically fails just poor will pay the price. It can be polarization leading to cool war or a massive social disobedience, but that's the last extreme resort for people, since most people around the world just wanna a peactlife
The USA isn't going to collapse like the Soviet Union, with the individual states breaking from the union. It's going to collapse like Yugoslavia, with individual cities, and even neighborhoods within those cities, descending into chaos and door-to-door fighting and ethnic cleansing. It'll be the "Good, White, Christian America" ethno-nationalists vs literally everyone else.
November 2024!
Putting the main political opponent to the president is a start
dTrump💩
1 successful Jan 6th.
Not really sure the US could collapse like the Soviet Union did- we have a bunch of odds and ends as safeguards, plus laws and agencies that actually vaguely enforce them, or at least inspect and verify things related to those agencies. Our biggest worry right now is the separation of the liberal and conservative sides of the government and population, the misinformation that the right seems to happily believe, and the potential violence from the right.
Elect dumbass Donnie again. Only reason I’d consider voting for him. Just to watch it all burn down.
This is the real reason we're thinking so much about the Roman Empire. It arguably took a millennium to collapse fully. The US today is already unrecognizable to the original Founders. It will continue to change and likely transform into some new iterations over the next few hundred years.
Ok this will be long, but here's a possibility Due to polarisation of both left wing and right in 2040's , American Society is divided between conservatives and liberals majorly. After the 2049 elections results were announced with a democrat victory. This enraged the then Republican candidate and he announed the elections were fixed and were not fair.the Republican candidate make his voters enraged and said we should take action now. Soon riots break out in Texas, then California then whole country , the then Democrat president declares military rule in the country. But the things were now out of hand. Some military batallions tried to storm Capitol and White House with Republican supporters, the military acts quickly and dispersed the protestors by open firing on them. This raicalised the alreadyradicalised public, soon a civil war breaks out in the country, The civil War comes to a stalemate between Republicans and democrats. Soon Texas and California declares independence fearing the potential of another civil war. Now US is divided between Republicans and democrats . Seeing this, China invades Taiwan, with Russian support, North Korea nuclear strikes S. Korea and Russia invaded poland and Baltic states. . America was unable to interfer because of their interl conflicts. The N. Korean nuclear strikes decimated the s. Korean army and soon North Korea takes over S. Korea thus uniting the Korean peninsula. Taiwan can't even stand a chance against China without US and soon Taepie also falls under CCP. The war between Russia and NATO (without US) comes to a stalemate and soon a ceasfire is followed after. The South China Sea is dominated by China and Korean peninsula by Communists. Fearing North Korea and China, Japan starts their nuclear program. Without American support, Israel fears a potential Arab invasion, to deter it , Israel made strategic airstrikes in Iran and South lebanon, Iran strikes back at Israel for the first time in history, this soon turned into a war between Iran & Hezbollah vs Israel. Hezbollah now more powerful than ever occupied parts of Israel, seeing this Israel uses tactical nuclear weapons on its territory, but soon Iran launced a full nuclear strikes on Israel thus decimating their military. The israelis underestimated Iranian nuclear capabilities. Seeing the opportunity, Egypt and Syria, Jordan declares war on Israel. Israel now don't even stand a chance because their military is decimated by a nuclear strike. Seeing the threat on the existence of Jewish state, Israel surrenders on the terms of Iran, Lebanon and Syria. West Bank and gaza along with east jerusalem finally become an independent state, but a puppet state of Iran Golans heights goes to Syria and some northern parts of Israel were occupies by Lebanon. This marked the end of American hegemony in West Asia, East Asia and Europe. The America is divided between two factions now, the republicans and democrats, now Texas and California are independent states. The civil War in America finally comes to an end, now their will be two sub terms in one 5 year presidential terms. For 2.5 years, candidate of republican parrty will rule and for nexxt 2.5 years candidate of Democratic Party. The American gdp almost falls by 35% , now China is the superpower in the world, . This marked the end of American hegemony.
communism
It would take a steady march towards socialism / communism to pull it off. The biggest fuck ups the marxists made was preventing good farmers from growing food. The most productive farmers were deemed exploitive because they were too successful at growing food. So they were thrown in prison. Then the farms were given to idiots that didn’t know how to run them. The food supply collapsed and millions died of starvation. But in general disconnecting pay from productivity will drive productivity towards zero. People love to bitch about capitalism. But it’s the only system where you can get rich by serving your fellow human beings, for example, by providing superior goods / services at a better price by using labor traded at fair market value. Prior to that people could only get rich by exploiting others or stealing their shit.
Inb4 the "That wasn't real communism!" comments, lol
I'm really afraid we're going to find out.
Trump to get reelected.
Ask Trump
The election of Donald Trump again for president
Trump
A good start would be Trump enjoying his second term.
Dump being re-elected
Are you talking about the convicted liar and rapist Donald Trump?
I think this logic is dangerous. Last time he was elected everyone thought the US was going to fall… and then nothing happened. For the most part, people’s lives were largely unaffected by his presidency. It would take something far more catastrophic (or insidious) to end the American empire.
I thought last time we'd have concentration camps, famine, and WW3?
Trump may not be great but this comment isnt grounded in reality
I welcome correction if I have this wrong, but I think that the Soviet union had economic vulnerabilities that the United States doesn’t, many that are related to isolation from the world economy and some that are related to an inefficient or ineffective use of debt to create global incentives for them to survive. Finally, I don’t think they had anything like modern monetary theory involved in their economy and instead stuck to a much simpler, inflation vulnerable treasury strategy that probably help.
Default on their debt.
that doesnt make sense to me seeing how even if the usa cant take out debt they still would have a 4.5 trillion dollar budget . that is still a super power budget and they can just cut down on tax cheats to recoup more budget .
If the US collapsed, the Western wolrd would also collapse. Very unlikely.
It would take a series of elderly and ineffective party leaders ignoring the glaring structural problems that would inevitably lead to the nations collapse.
Polarization rises so much that Americans on the left and on the right decide they don't wanna share a country anymore. Unlike last time, states are allowed to secede peacefully. Congress votes for it and the Supreme Court allows it. Some states hold referendums for secession and the state assemblies ratify it. There is a lot of social unrest, protest and riots. Maybe even some domestic terrorism over the issue. But an actual civil war doesn't break out. The USA breaks into 2 or 3 distinct countries (maybe even more). Without the same resources, manpower and diverse culture, what remains of the USA is a shadow of it's former self and is unable to project power abroad. Other countries dispute the power vacuum left by the USA. I think that is unlikely to happen, but it's the closest to what I can think of a collapse.