The odds of the US turning into a totalitarian hellhole similar to eg. Nazi Germany

[Aimless]

Misleading title, I admit. I don't think that an American proponent of lax/non-existant gun laws bases his views on the odds of the US turning into a state that marches Jews off to the gas chambers.

What's piqued my interest are the doomsday scenarios that crop up on both sides of any ideological divide we see on this forum. Whatever the US does, whatever little incremental change it makes in whatever direction, we end up discussing the apparently inevitable horrific nightmare future world that change will bring about.

Many of you are deeply interested in history and in politics and love to learn from the mistakes of the past. How justified are these fears, in your view?

[Nessus]

I'm the resident apocalypse nut/Cassandra, so my views are probably well-know... Briefly, I think the risk is great enough that I'm genuinely worried about it, as the ultimate price can lead to a species-wide destruction, or even the destruction of the only known biosphere. Of course, if everybody's dead, it won't matter anymore, but...

I have no idea what the chances are on a more precise scale, very hard to gauge.

[Veldan Rath]

Again, check your history.

While not as grotesque in human suffering the civil rights abuse WAS grotesque when the US rounded up a section of our population and interred them during the same War because they looked different. With the erosion of our 1st and 5th amendment rights (see my link in the other thread) we ARE on the path.

Currently it's a crime to carry a certain amount of cash (as in the police can take it without a warrant).
The Drug War being an excuse to carry out no knock warrants.
The War on Terror being an excuse to detain AMERICANS on US soil.

Do we need to go on?

[wiggin]

Minx - I think there are two separate issues here. The first is whether these claims are a good debate tactic. In principle, the answer is no: nearly any reductio ad absurdum argument can only be used to stifle debate rather than encourage it. See: Godwin's Law et al. I never was on a debate team in school, but from my understanding from someone who was on a very good one, a very common argument was to link your opponents position to the risk of global thermonuclear war, thus disproving their point. This is point-scoring, not a serious exchange of views - and it may be appropriate for a debate tournament, but it's not useful for a real policy discussion.

On the other hand, there's a second issue mentioned in your post - whether such extreme scenarios are possible or likely. I would argue that they are certainly possible, and maybe even likely. Civilizations - even fairly admirable ones - can fall into all sorts of awful circumstances in a depressingly short period of time. It could be a threat from a legal code or political conditions, a war, changing climate, economic stresses, demographic changes, religions, resource shortages, etc. We have yet to find the perfect form of government which is indefinitely stable and robust to serious disruptions. To be concerned about these issues is not ridiculous, but to be single-mindedly concerned about them is.

Humans are incredibly bad at rational risk management. We're bad at assigning probabilities to certain risks and assessing their costs. We're bad at planning for them appropriately and thinking about them holistically - both in terms of the costs of risk mitigation and the costs of catastrophic failure. I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned about these risks given our poor track record in the past.

[Loki]

There has actually been no historical example of a democratic country with a GDP per capita of over $6,000 a year becoming non-democratic. Since 1945, there has been no example of any even remotely prosperous democracy becoming an autocracy. Furthermore, one of the greatest predictors of democratic stability is the number of years a country has been a democracy, an indicator on which the US does quite well.

[Knux897]

All this "doomsday" crap is just a trend it seems to me. Similar to how WWI caused an age of uncertainty in Europe, 9/11 seems to have caused an age of uncertainty in the United States and other western countries.

[Dreadnaught]

Any civilization can fall apart.

If I were to get cynical about it, I would imagine a lower-population society with little ethnic diversity and a tradition of a strong, all-encompassing state is more likely to be tempted by totalitarianism.

But seriously, why is Amerika more likely to degenerate into a totalitarian hellhole?

[wiggin]

There has actually been no historical example of a democratic country with a GDP per capita of over $6,000 a year becoming non-democratic. Since 1945, there has been no example of any even remotely prosperous democracy becoming an autocracy. Furthermore, one of the greatest predictors of democratic stability is the number of years a country has been a democracy, an indicator on which the US does quite well.

Isn't that a pretty small club to start with? Compared to the broad sweep of history, I think it's very challenging to make this argument as being anything other than a retrospective analysis of the last century. I would caution about putting too much faith in its predictive power.

For the record, I am quite bullish on the US for a number of reasons, but I don't discount the possibility of something bad happening in the next century or two.

[Loki]

Isn't that a pretty small club to start with? Compared to the broad sweep of history, I think it's very challenging to make this argument as being anything other than a retrospective analysis of the last century. I would caution about putting too much faith in its predictive power.

For the record, I am quite bullish on the US for a number of reasons, but I don't discount the possibility of something bad happening in the next century or two.

There are more countries there than you think, including much of Latin America and Eastern Europe.

Come to think of it, Venezuela and Russia both broke this rule (outdated studies ), but it's not like either is a totalitarian regime.

[Being]

Whatever the US does, whatever little incremental change it makes in whatever direction, we end up discussing the apparently inevitable horrific nightmare future world that change will bring about.

There are no FDRs in this world anymore. Presidential term limit made sure of that. We are now stuck with two year policy cycles that accomplish nothing more than buttressing plutocracy, which is just another form of totalitarianism.

[EyeKhan]

Briefly, I think the risk is great enough that I'm genuinely worried about it, as the ultimate price can lead to a species-wide destruction, or even the destruction of the only known biosphere.

Humanity's not capable of destroying the entire biosphere. Even a full scale nuclear conflagaration would not completely sterilize the land masses, much less the deep ocean ecosystems, which wouldn't even notice anything had happened.

Also - current American culture is very different from post WW1 German culture. The odds of this nation becoming a Nazi style fascist dictatorship are slim to none. We're much more likely to end up like Mexico with a smallish privledged upper class while the majority lives in relative poverty - and voting for it freely each election. Indeed that seems the goal of conservative politics these days....

[EyeKhan]

Any civilization can fall apart.

Up until bringing Russia into the war, is it a fair description that Nazi Germany was a civilization falling apart? Does limiting freedom of the citizens necessarily = falling apart??? Does rounding up and exterminating certain ethnicities necessarily = that?

[Veldan Rath]

Well, I wouldn't call gassing millions of people civilized.

[Ominous Gamer]

There has actually been no historical example of a democratic country with a GDP per capita of over $6,000 a year becoming non-democratic. Since 1945, there has been no example of any even remotely prosperous democracy becoming an autocracy. Furthermore, one of the greatest predictors of democratic stability is the number of years a country has been a democracy, an indicator on which the US does quite well.

This seems like an insanely small sample, and only going back 1 generation, when you consider the scope of how far back you can consider humans to have picked up the concept of living with a society mindset.
Expanding past the age of my parents, I wonder if anything would change if you include places that simply cease to be after falling apart.

-----

What I've wondered is if the US process of democracy has changed enough over the years that it is now in such a state that could make us less able to respond to a possible global econcomic collapse. We already have mini dictatorships popping up in sinking cities thanks to emergency financial managers.

[EyeKhan]

Well, I wouldn't call gassing millions of people civilized.

But that didn't cause the collapse of the Nazi State. Really, your statement is about moral sensibilities. In the decades after the US Civil War (which was clearly a time of social and political upheaval & partial collapse) the nation became stronger and more organized than ever, while at the same time committing genocide on the plains. Slaughtering men, women and children and herding the surviving remnants onto reservations isn't a very moral thing to do, by today's standards anyway, but it certainly did not coincide with collapse of US civilization.

[Veldan Rath]

But that didn't cause the collapse of the Nazi State.

No, but wouldn't you call it a good indicator that something was going wrong fast?

[Ominous Gamer]

No, but wouldn't you call it a good indicator that something was going wrong fast?

If the purge/cleansing(?) was able to run its course, do you think the resulting country would still be going down that path? Or is it all about volume? Cause there are still plenty of cilivized countries that kill their own citizens for being different.

[Veldan Rath]

I'm gonna back up and re-start at EK's question about Nazi Germany and Dread's sidestep.

The question wasn't really the fall of civilization, but if the US could decline into something similar to a horrid State as Nazi Germany. Again, such a rapid decline is improbable. For the US, with social media and today's culture such a decline would need to be in small bites.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=VgrktRgjBXk

[Ominous Gamer]

Healthcare within the first page. Right on track

[Veldan Rath]

Did you stop there? or did you go onto see the part of the National Defense Act (a clear violation of the 5th)?

[Loki]

I'm gonna back up and re-start at EK's question about Nazi Germany and Dread's sidestep.

The question wasn't really the fall of civilization, but if the US could decline into something similar to a horrid State as Nazi Germany. Again, such a rapid decline is improbable. For the US, with social media and today's culture such a decline would need to be in small bites.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=VgrktRgjBXk

Except that's not how totalitarian regimes come to power. It's always in one fell swoop. You're trivializing the horrors perpetrated by all the totalitarian regimes in the world by suggesting that the US is even a hundred steps away from that same fate.

[Veldan Rath]

Your contradicting yourself. If it's one fell swoop then it wouldn't matter how many steps we are away.

Also, just because it has always be how you have suggested doesn't it could happen 1 piece at a time? I'm telling you that it how it would most likely work here due to the very nature of the US. One fell swoop would be so obvious that the country would not stand for it, where as nibbling away at our protections over time does work on our short attention span populace.

[Loki]

Your contradicting yourself. If it's one fell swoop then it wouldn't matter how many steps we are away.

Also, just because it has always be how you have suggested doesn't it could happen 1 piece at a time? I'm telling you that it how it would most likely work here due to the very nature of the US. One fell swoop would be so obvious that the country would not stand for it, where as nibbling away at our protections over time does work on our short attention span populace.

Except your argument is we're getting there one step at a time. That's not the way it works. There's mass instability, a lack of faith in democratic institutions, a lack of government legitimacy, terrible economic conditions over a sustained period of time, etc. Again, there's no historical precedent of a country with a lengthy democratic history becoming a totalitarian state.

Because people aren't that stupid. They might be willing to give away relatively minor rights or rights that don't directly affect them, but totalitarianism entails giving away all rights. America has a large middle class, a free press and independent judiciary, strong belief in the constitution, a strong economic base, and numerous checks and balances. Any one of those factors would prevent a totalitarian regime from arising, let alone all of them combined.

[Nessus]

Humanity's not capable of destroying the entire biosphere.

Cite please.

[Ominous Gamer]

Wasn't there a report going around a few days ago showing the record low amount of faith people have is just about everything? Talking about how it could lead to a possible move away from society as we know it.

EDIT: In Nothing we Trust


i like to think the uptick in religion is a sign of desperation.

America has a large middle class, a free press and independent judiciary, strong belief in the constitution, a strong economic base, and numerous checks and balances. Any one of those factors would prevent a totalitarian regime from arising, let alone all of them combined.

I'm curious if something like this can be reached with election hijacks. We are still in the process of learning how badly our electronic voting systems were manipulated in 2010 and 2008, and our major media outlets are controlled in a such a way that once secured, it could easily be kept under wraps. Our free flow of information online is a far cry from being large enough to challenge something of that size, and even if it ever reached that tipping point something like SOPA of CISPA could keep that in check.

The best defense is SCOTUS, and they have been notorious for dividing along party lines lately.

We all laugh at Russia for allowing it happen, and its seems the public is aware of the fraud, but nothing changed.

[GGT]

...
Also - current American culture is very different from post WW1 German culture. The odds of this nation becoming a Nazi style fascist dictatorship are slim to none. We're much more likely to end up like Mexico with a smallish privledged upper class while the majority lives in relative poverty - and voting for it freely each election. Indeed that seems the goal of conservative politics these days....

Agreed That makes our campaign and voting processes something to watch carefully.

As OG points out, much of the "erosion" in democracy is happening at city/state levels with Benton Harbor as a sad example of that.

Veldan, any state laws that require police to check papers (with a level of ethnic profiling) and allow for detention are more worrisome than any citizenry gun laws, IMO.

[Loki]

Wasn't there a report going around a few days ago showing the record low amount of faith people have is just about everything? Talking about how it could lead to a possible move away from society as we know it.

i like to think the uptick in religion is a sign of desperation.

I'm curious if something like this can be reached with election hijacks. We are still in the process of learning how badly our electronic voting systems were manipulated in 2010 and 2008, and our major media outlets are controlled in a such a way that once secured, it could easily be kept under wraps. Our free flow of information online is a far cry from being large enough to challenge something of that size, and even if it ever reached that tipping point something like SOPA of CISPA could keep that in check.

The best defense is SCOTUS, and they have been notorious for dividing along party lines lately.

We all laugh at Russia for allowing it happen, and its seems the public is aware of the fraud, but nothing changed.

A) Actions mean more than words. For all the whining about our institutions, few people are openly defying them. Or even defying them in instances when they would face no punishment (or a weak punishment) for doing so. People still go to the police if they have a problem. They still read newspapers. They still vote. Etc.

B) America was always a religious country. The period from the 1960s to the 1980s was outside the norm. So is your point that Americans have been desperate for most of their history?

C) You're grossly exaggerating the extent of the problem. Every democracy is going to have some minor voting problems. To equate that with fake elections is ridiculous. There's also the fact that we have pretty damn good polling in this country, and it would be quite obvious if the election results were widely off from the polls.

D) Good luck finding any country where the judges are fully neutral. An independent judiciary means the judges aren't taken orders from the government (or military). There's no evidence that the SC justices are doing the bidding of politicians.

E) You're assuming that all corporations have the same interest and that interest also coincides with the interest of the government. Both are deeply flawed assumptions. There are plenty of mainstream news sources that attack the government. Even if Fox supports a Republican president, MSNBC attacks him. If MSNBC supports a Democratic president, Fox attacks them. More and more people are also getting their news from a wider variety of sources, including foreign sources, which makes it all the harder for the US government to put forward one official line. I'd also like you to give an example of a single totalitarian state where corporations had significant influence over government policy.

F) In sum, the US has its problems, but it has all the characteristics of a modern democracy, and has virtually every factor that maintains democracy working in its favor. There has been no historical precedent of a country nearly as democratic, as prosperous, or with a similar history of democratic rule becoming a totalitarian state, and there's no reason to think that trend is about to change.

[Ominous Gamer]

A) Actions mean more than words. For all the whining about our institutions, few people are openly defying them. Or even defying them in instances when they would face no punishment (or a weak punishment) for doing so. People still go to the police if they have a problem. They still read newspapers. They still vote. Etc.

some faith is still better than none. One shouldn't ignore the issues because there are people that still use the service. Look at your rabidness towards unions for example. And exactly, how popular is pot? and whats the prison population like for minor offenses?

B) America was always a religious country. The period from the 1960s to the 1980s was outside the norm. So is your point that Americans have been desperate for most of their history?

What sources are you using to claim those 20 years being outside the norm? Gallop has a poll those shows self-identified christians in America has been declining for 5 decades.

This land was settled by modern man due to desperation.

C) You're grossly exaggerating the extent of the problem. Every democracy is going to have some minor voting problems. To equate that with fake elections is ridiculous. There's also the fact that we have pretty damn good polling in this country, and it would be quite obvious if the election results were widely off from the polls.

It doesn't have to be widely off, just off by enough. I'm not suggesting fake either. This country is full of fence people, and just as full of nuts. Just look at how long it took to weed them out of the Republican primary.
Also doesn't address the idea of something being obvious, and the population caring enough, or having enough power to do something about it.

Theres a line between glitches, and how our voting systems are managed.

D) Good luck finding any country where the judges are fully neutral. An independent judiciary means the judges aren't taken orders from the government (or military). There's no evidence that the SC justices are doing the bidding of politicians.

Perhaps, but it wouldn't take much to change this if it came down to it. Its not to hard to picture the SCOTUS siding with business interests and their political connections over individuals. What with their recent rulings on eminent domain and personhood.

E) You're assuming that all corporations have the same interest and that interest also coincides with the interest of the government. Both are deeply flawed assumptions. There are plenty of mainstream news sources that attack the government. Even if Fox supports a Republican president, MSNBC attacks him. If MSNBC supports a Democratic president, Fox attacks them. More and more people are also getting their news from a wider variety of sources, including foreign sources, which makes it all the harder for the US government to put forward one official line. I'd also like you to give an example of a single totalitarian state where corporations had significant influence over government policy.

The illusion of choice is still an illusion. and when has foreign news stopped our government from lying or from even attempting to influence those same foreign sources, and besides most of that information can be taken care of with sopa nd cispa like legislation.

--------

I'm not saying America is going to flip into a totalitarian society at first, but the way our democracy works, you only need enough control to ensure the means to whatever end you want. Once you reach that point and manage to secure it, its democracy only in name, ie Mexico and Russia.

[EyeKhan]

If the purge/cleansing(?) was able to run its course, do you think the resulting country would still be going down that path? Or is it all about volume? Cause there are still plenty of cilivized countries that kill their own citizens for being different.

This is what I was thinking - - - if a genocidal purge runs its course, the resulting society ought to be more stable, at least socially.

[EyeKhan]

Cite please.

What mechanism do you propose humanity would use to sterilize the planet? I assume you argue we would do this accidentally rather than intentionally, right?

Some I can think of:

A. Nuclear weapons --
- flash burn: we currently don't have enough weapons to produce enough fireballs to sterilize the entire planet's surface with nuclear flash, and in a war the weapons would be targeted strategically so many areas of the world would be untouched

- radiation: many species have proven to be very resistant to radiation damage, and it isn't clear that deadly levels of radiation would blanket the entire surface of the planet anyway, given the strategic nature of nuclear exchange and the short half-life of the worst of the resulting radioactive materials

- nuclear winter: I believe recent research has discounted how serious a nuclear winter would be and in any case such things are very regular on a geologic time scale from events like volcanic eruptions and meteors

B. Environmental ---
- global warming: I suppose if we managed to generate a self-reinforcing greenhouse effect the ultimately resulted in a Venus like atmosphere, then the entire planet would be sterile of life as we know it. However, I've not seen any credible argument this could actually happen. Have you?

- pollution other: like what? Toxic chemical water/ air emissions from factories, solid waste landfilling/ burning/ dumping in the oceans, oil spills, groundwater salination/ contamination, soil salination, runoff from mining/ construction/ clear cutting/ farming into streams, rivers, lakes and oceans, herbicides, insecticides? How would any of this sterilize the planet? One species toxic oil spill is anotehr species food supply and that's probably true with every kind of pollution...

- genetic engineering: gene mod plants, animals, micro-organisms.... If we aren't responsible, we could mess the world up with this stuff. We could inadvertantly create a virus or bacterium to kill everyone, or kill all mamals, or kill all vertebrates, etc. But sterilize the world? How would that happen? The vast majority of living things on the planet are bacteria and they literally live everywhere in a diversity we humans have yet to catalog.

C. Astro Terrorism: So let's say the asteroid mining venture actually pans out, and rather than mine in situ and send ore packages back to Earth (which is what I would do), the plan is to bring an asteroid into orbit, and let's say some savvy terrorist manages to hack mission control and crash the asteroid into the planet. Ok, that would be bad. If it's big enough, everyone dies. Maybe every organism over the size of an ant dies. Ok, but that leaves a hell of a lot of life left on Earth, and life has proven itself able to recover from such events nicely enough.

D. Gray Goo -- this is still science fiction

E. Other?

* * * * * * * * *

If you believe humanity has the capability to kill all life on the planet, I think the burden of proof is on you to provide a plausible mechanism. I don't see one.