Ditto … Well, mrAru has marketable skills though he is 56 and we really don’t have any real financial resources that would make us interesting enough to some other country to let us emigrate in.
I suppose we could buy a boat large enough to live on, and take to the sea. If we have it registered and insured in the US I think we can both still get social security, his military retirement pay [which gets deposited into the Navy Federal Credit Union, oddly] and I think we would still qualify for Tri-Care medical. [Unless/until Puerto Rico bails out of being a US protectorate, ditto the US Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands we could lurk in those waters, and be within 12 miles of being outside the US just in case.]
The Liberte would work, 50 foot Elco flattop cruiser, one could definitely add a pair of Tesla battery banks, plate the top with solar panels, convert the lighting and systems to the new high effeciency LEDs and such, mrAru mentioned once that one could actually convert to an electric drive auxiliary for long slow daylight transits [I checked, landfall to landfall Newfoundland to Greenland is 1800 miles, too long for the normal bunkerage for the average Elco, but if one uses electric drive solar powered, one can make the transit and sea anchor overnights] There is enough space to store food, and in a number of areas of the world one can fish with handlines, and near islands dive for goodies [I used to dive in Virgina Beach off the Bay Bridge Tunnel islands and bring back mussels from a friend who likes them] and chandlering a boat for 4 people is fairly easy in most ports.
There is another couple that could bail with us, to give us enough warm bodies to keep a topside watch 24 hours a day at need - there are some areas where it isn’t safe to actually spend more than rechandlering time in port - it had been advised to get out to sea, off the main shipping lines by at least 75 miles [outside average zodiac and small motor craft loaded with enterprising fishermen out to snag a new boat…] to sea anchor for the night.
That sounds like a dominent party system (say, Singapore), not fascism (say, Turkmenistan).
I’m not expecting to see a true dominant party system in the U.S. let alone fascism, but for those who do, here are a few ideas:
Spend time gaining a deep understanding of VPN technology, so you’ll be able to hide it from those who examine your laptop.
Get one or two foreign passports. This may not be practical for you right now, but will if you follow my next bullet item.
Focus on saving money and stashing it abroad. You need this because a fascist America isn’t going to send social security payments to possible opponents abroad, and ariving penniless in a new country isn’t likely to work.
My wife can go away if she likes. She’d like to move to Florence or some other place in Italy. I don’t want to run, I want to fight and take some of them with me.
Violence almost always fails. (Which is why I have a lot of respect for pacifists despite not being one.)
In the U.S., efforts to achieve political ends with violence have repeatedly failed. Think Whiskey Rebellion, Civl War, Weather Underground, 9/11.
In the U.K., peasant rebellions failed over and over. That’s why they didn’t think the American revolution would succeed. Most revolutions fail.
India typically has several insurgencies going. The Agnipath Scheme violence, which started just this week. is yet another likely doomed example. Conceivably, I’m wrong, and Modi will give in this time, but that’s not how it usually works.
And in the rare instances where left of center violence works, there usually is a reaction unpleasant to idealists (French Revolution leads to Napoleon, Russian to Stalin).
On what basis? Who is doing anything to stop it? The only reason they didn’t succeed last time was because of a handful of office holders who refused to succumb. Since then they have systematically ensured that no Republican will stand in the way in the future. They have systematically avoided any attempts to quell voter suppression. They have a Supreme Court in place that will not review any “political” disputes. They hold an automatic advantage on the constitutionally gerrymandered Senate. They have gerrymandered the majority of statehouses within an inch of their lives. And they have a plan on the table to ignore any popular vote and send Republican electors to the next presidential electoral college regardless of the vote results. What exactly stands in their way?
How did that fail? It was enormously successful. It deftly helped throw the United States into turmoil and has in the long term made is much less effective as a world leader. It also drew the United States into disastrous conflict that earned us generations of enemies around the world. It pushed us into openly becoming torturers. We caused the deaths of millions, to no one’s benefit. And we wasted billions. No one will quite trust us again after our appalling behavior after 9/11.
Your looking at land, not people. We can easily come up with a list of red states, Republican governor, third world health indicators, attempts by the GOP to obstruct voting by black people, and low vaccination rates. It’s like porn, I know it when I see it.
So I think you’re just cherry picking your cases here and excluding things that happened because of violence or the threat of violence. For instance, civil rights happened largely on the back of civil unrest and the threat that people would become increasingly radicalized to make it happen. The peaceful, nice stuff was good too - it was really a two-pronged approach - but this goes to the whitewashing I described in an earlier post. We think that the civil rights movement was all MLK making nice speeches and a bunch of white people being moved and peacefully changing (because that’s how the powers that be want to portray it and it gives us warm, fuzzy feelings too), but the reality is that the civil unrest and threat of greater civil unrest was a key component in moving society to accept changes in civil rights.
It’s not just actual violence, but the threat of violence, that is effective. Throughout most of history, there has been a struggle between the powerful trying to exploit the less powerful in every way they can, up until the less powerful become so pissed off (or so numerous) that they’re willing to violently revolt against the powers that be. And so history is this balancing match between how much the powerful can piss off the powerless before people start storming the gates and chopping off their heads.
In the modern day, the tools the rich are using are keeping everyone busy with wage slavery, keeping everyone dependent on their employers/owners by keeping them renting, making it hard to get healthcare, etc. They’re also using sophisticated propaganda networks like the conservative echo chamber and AI-powered social media disinformation to make people their own oppressors, like the conservatives who fight so hard to cut their own medicaid and food stamps. They think this new bag of tricks is going to keep the peasants from revolting, and maybe they’re right. They’re pushing us harder than they were since any time since the gilded age. Despite being the country being far richer and more peaceful pretty much any part of our history, people are struggling more than any time since the great depression to keep afloat.
Basically, if you take the “until they rise up and kill you part” away from the “exploit people until…” part, the rich are just going to run absolutely roughshod over the rest of us, as is currently happening. They think they can keep pushing us and pushing us and accumulating more wealth and power and we’ll never do anything about it no matter how far they go. Only violence, the threat of violence, the threat of non-participation/general strike, and sabotage are going to change that. Both parties in the US are captured by the rich, and soon our elections will be completely fake - there is no democratic route to fix this problem.
I wonder what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the still-living 9/11 planner, might say about that. We probably should allow a New York Times reporter to interview. hIm (not sure if KSM is interested).
I’m thinking he would see Biden’s upcoming trip to Israel as a downer, and to Saudi Arabia as worse. .
Americans have this idea that they can just move to a better country whenever they want, so if things turn shitty here, they’re going to bail. But they’re in for a rude surprise - no one else wants you just because you’re an American, and other countries are much more strict about controlling their own immigration than the US is (even though it’s popular to bash the US for being racist for any talk of securing our borders, most other countries in the world are on fucking lockdown compared to us).
No, you need either some sort of familial connections (can be looser or tighter depending on countries), or some skill set that’s in high demand in that country, or you can be rich. But if you’re just the average American there’s no reason for Europe/Canada/Australia/wherever to take you.
I’m going back to school and I know when I get my grad degree and licensure I can get an accelerated path to permanent Canadian residency. That’s not my primary motivation for changing careers, but it’s a significant part of my future options. I don’t know how long it’s going to be tolerable to live in the US. I’m also considering third world countries as an option but that’s going to be a risky venture with climate change - they’re going to be hit harder by it, and have fewer resources to deal with it.
I’m looking at counties that are dominated by ‘Red’ (predominately Republican) voters. Although the population of ‘Blue’ voters might slightly outnumber the ‘Red’, they are overwhelmingly consolidated in urban and suburban areas and are not going to take kindly to the notion that they should relocate to whatever state that you identify as suitable for ‘Red’ occupation because you believe your state should be ‘Blue’.
I mean, if we’re going to arbitrarily cut away states and move things around because of how we feel about them I’m going to start with Florida and then Missouri (which we can replace with a large inland sea/water park). We can also combine the Dakotas together into one state, give Oklahoma back to the native tribes, and move the US Capitol to Truth or Consequences, NM because I want to remind elected officials of what is expected of them.
You’re failing to consider the possibility that it might be you fighting to leave the Union. If the imagined future of the OP comes to pass, with the Red State forces dominating the Federal government, would you want your state to stay in the Union?
A good place to start is all the states that are going to make abortion illegal the second Roe v. wade is overturned. Every wearing a gun and not a mask? Red state. Banning books? Red State.
Like I said, there won’t be a managed dissolution because America doesn’t do complex. It will be a collapse.