The Next 12 Months Part VI: Breaking Points

America is headed for civil war and there’s no pretending otherwise.

Venezuelan migrant lets America know he feels about us. And how to feel about him. Source

AUTHOR’S NOTE: To avoid an excessively long essay, the final installment of The Next 12 Months will be published in two parts. Together, they’ll constitute “Part VI,” but bear different subtitles. My hope is that it’ll make the essays better for reading in a single sitting and easier to follow.

We’ve made it to the final installment of The Next 12 Months series! It took much longer to complete than I’d hoped, so I appreciate you sticking with it all the way through to the end.

The Next 12 Months Part VI will be a culmination not just of the series, but about much of what I’ve written about since the beginning of We’re Not At The End, But You Can See It From Here. It’s here I’m going to tie a lot of these concepts and stories together to formulate a single narrative. It’s also going to be one of my darker, drearier posts, but let’s face it: this blog has never been about how everything’s going to be fine in the end. Maybe with enough time, it will. But not for the foreseeable future.

With that, let’s begin the end, shall we?

Something Big Is Brewing

In Part V, I made note of how my views concerning the prospect of civil war have changed during the two years I’ve been running this blog. One area where I’ve been consistent in from the beginning to now regards the prospect of internal conflict in this country. Whether it erupts into full-blown civil war or not, I think internal conflict is not only 100 percent guaranteed to occur, I also believe it’s happening as we speak, if only in nascent form.

But now I’m also beginning to think that the risk of civil war is now far greater than it was just a short time ago. Again, I made note of it in Part V, but in case I seemed a little wishy-washy about it, I want to say it loud and clear for everyone to hear:

America is headed for civil war and there’s no pretending otherwise.

Now that I’ve made you gasp in terror, let me clarify: I’m not saying civil war will happen. I’m just saying the road the country is currently on is one that’ll lead us to civil war. Sometimes, you don’t arrive at your destination, for better and worse. Civil war is obviously one destination we don’t want to arrive at, but as I keep saying, the dry tinder keeps piling up, the intractability of our differences more glaring by the day. Even when I considered the risk of civil war to be low to insignificant, I nonetheless believed, as I do still, America would be brought to the brink of civil war by the end of the decade. The tension is just too high for it not to. Whether we go over the cliff is another question.

Our intractable political differences are arguably the hottest flashpoint, but they’re not the only reason why the country is headed for civil war. Few people have done as good a job at convincing me how high the risk of it is than Rudyard “Whatifalthist” Lynch via his commentary usually delivered through his excellent YouTube videos.

Here’s Lynch delivering a lecture on his thesis at an event hosted by The Natural Law Institute:

Rudyard Lynch. Source

I recommend you watch the entire video (click the hyperlink labeled “Source” under the screencap) when you have time. For anyone unfamiliar with Lynch’s work, it’s the perfect introduction for learning what he’s all about. For our discussion, look at the screencap above and consider what he considers ambient conditions in the days, weeks, months, and years leading up to civil war.

How many of those conditions exist at present? How many of those conditions have we seen in the last several years? At the moment, all six are present in varying degrees. Political disunity requires no explanation. Inequality exists in the U.S., though it’s far from destabilizing levels like in Latin America. Protests, often turning violent, occur often across the U.S., and we saw in 2020 the capacity exists for widespread civil unrest. Leftists in the U.S. are certainly fanatical, with the Right less so, though January 6, 2021 showed the Right too had some teeth. I think it’s a stretch to say most people are poor and even the poor enjoy a high standard of living. That said, most Americans are financially strapped. There’s definitely tremendous tension in the air and social trust is at an all-time low. Americans eye one another as suspiciously as ever.

At the same time, things aren’t that bad, either. America is clearly not a peaceful place; it’s become quite disorderly. Anarcho-tyranny is the order we live under. Still, we’re still far off from being like Brazil or South Africa. It’s important not to take the concept of “Thirdworldization,” which is very real, too literally.

But that’s also just it - Brazil and South Africa became what they are today through a series of events that broke down the prevailing order. Lynch pointed out that Moscow and Paris looked just fine from the outside prior to their respective revolutions. Sometimes, the cataclysm, the SHTF, isn’t where the worst happens. After Germany lost World War I and its empire collapsed, the country endured a couple years of political crisis, including a mild civil war. Only afterwards did the infamous Weimar Republic emerge, hyperinflation struck, eventually leading to the emergence of the Third Reich under Adolf Hitler. Life in the Soviet Union was miserable, but after its collapse, Russians lived through even crazier times in the 1990s, something I’m sure many thought impossible after all they’d endured.

The examples go on and on. Sometimes, the SHTF, even if it involves a collapse of some sort, is just the beginning of a dark age with seemingly no end.

Whether in 2024 or 2025, that initial triggering crisis is coming. The country is destabilizing, and it cannot stabilize without first enduring a crisis of some sort. There’s no capacity, no pathway, no will for resolving any of our problems, having passed the point of no return long ago. Society’s will to resist has been broken and, collectively, we’re content to be along for the ride.

Timely as he usually is, Lynch released a new video a few days ago, distilling why he believes the U.S. is on the verge of civil war. The video is a must-watch. Lynch has never been a “doomer” in the sense he senses catastrophe all around him, using only cold, undeniable facts to back up his arguments. If anyone out there’s still on the fence about how much danger this country is truly in, if this video doesn’t change your mind, nothing will:

Lynch makes a convincing case. That said, I’m not sure the 2024 election will serve as that tripwire, even as I agree violence will increase over the next 12 months. The reason is because the country first needs to suffer a fatal political or strategic defeat, such as losing a major war or global influence, placing the viability of the prevailing order in jeopardy. I’m sure one can find an example in history where a civil war erupted even while a country was still a major power (though I can’t think of any at the top of my head), but it seldom happens like this. A big-time political or strategic defeat makes all other disasters much more likely to occur.

I devoted Part IV of this series to this topic, so I don’t want to rehash it too much. At the same time, it’s something which constantly needs to be part of any conversation concerning the future of the country. It’s easy to think some internal problem will befall it. But the first blow will probably come as a result of external affairs. A country as big and powerful as the U.S. lives and dies with the way it relates with the outside world. It couldn’t become a superpower without first achieving internal stability, but once it became a superpower, its internal stability became contingent on remaining top dog on the global stage. I bristle at the characterization of America today as an empire, but in some ways, it is, and all empires share this feature: power overseas translates to power back home.

As of 2024, U.S. power overseas is waning. What’s more, our overseas activities no longer translate to better conditions at home. The central theme to much of our problems today - economy, foreign policy, immigration - is that we’ve long ago exceeded the point of diminishing returns. Our global influence now amounts to a vanity project for top-shelf activists and bureaucrats, something for them to feel powerful and self-righteous, the same way they behave right here at home.

When that global power is lost, what purpose will the prevailing order serve, given that the foundation for its entire existence is world leadership? Will it just go quietly into the night? Or, more likely, will it find a new purpose and fight like hell to remain in charge? When the consequences of losing power - budget problems, economic downturn, political crisis - kick in, at a time when political tensions are already high, no less, what’s the likelihood of a soft landing? Maybe in a more homogeneous, culturally cohesive society, we could manage a smooth transition.

That’s not America today. Whether it happens this year or in another, the country isn’t prepared to survive a political or strategic calamity without too much drama. The ties that bind us together are frayed to non-existent. And that calamity is unavoidable at this point.

Even if we accept that the superpower’s days are done, it still leaves us with the question of why? Surely, becoming less powerful on the world stage isn’t enough to unravel society on its own? It’s not, but going from being a superpower to just another country on the planet leads to a crisis in identity and purpose. A country that loses sight of what it is and what they’re here for will often end up fighting itself to discover that identity and purpose, just like a person. Societies are, in many ways, living organisms. They’re also organisms with many smaller organisms within, many of whom decide they cannot live with each other. That’s where widespread violence stems from.

There are always many different reasons, but there typically exists one single reason which ends up triggering large-scale violence. The same way the first American Civil War was the result of years of intractable disputes, but only really kicked off over slavery, the next American Civil War will be the culmination of many different issues, but will be triggered over one or two critical issues for which compromise is utterly impossible.

Ultimately, all civil conflicts come down to two fundamental questions: Who are we? Who is all this for? Whether it escalates to the level of civil war or not, the American internal conflict will be fought in an attempt to settle these two questions once and for all.

Immigration: A Make-Or-Break Issue

Few issues get to the heart of who we are and who all this is far more than immigration. Most Americans appear to understand this, like never before.

In a recent poll conducted by Issues & Insights, the body politic senses that immigration could be the issue we finally come to blows over [bold mine]:

In the final query, I&I/TIPP Poll asked: “An estimated 25 states support Texas Gov. Greg Abbott in building a fence, even though the Biden administration opposes it. How concerned are you that such a broad conflict could turn into an actual conflict or even war between the states over illegal immigration.”

“War between the states”? Apparently, it’s not at all far-fetched. Many Americans see illegal immigration as a make-or-break issue.

Among those responding to the I&I/TIPP Poll, 49% said they were either “very concerned” (18%) or “somewhat concerned” (31%) that the widening differences over illegal immigration could turn into open conflict. In contrast, just 38% said they were “not at all concerned (14%)” or “not very concerned” (24%).

Remember that Americans have, for at least a few years now, been more alert to the possibility of civil war occurring soon. But until now, there hasn’t really been a consensus on over what specific issue it might begin. It seems like the sight of hordes crossing the border and the recent stand-off between the U.S. and Texas might’ve given the public a good hint as to what that casus belli for conflict might be.

Interestingly, Independents diverge from Democrats and Republicans on this concern:

Democrats and Republicans are nearly identical in their feelings: Democrats break 54% concerned vs. 34% not concerned, while Republicans are 55% concerned, 36% not concerned. Independents? They aren’t as worried. While 41% are concerned, 46% aren’t.

There are three possible explanations for the comparative lack of concern among Independents. One possibility is, by virtue of being Independents, they aren’t partisans and therefore don’t view politics as existentially as do their Democrat and Republican counterparts. Another possibility is that Independents are effectively “normies” and harbor normalcy bias. The third possibility is that people like me are wrong and the situation isn’t as perilous as we think. Personally, I’d love to be wrong, but I wouldn’t feel as I did if I didn’t have good reason to.

A point Rudyard Lynch raised in his “Why the 2024 Election will start a Civil War” video is that normies will say a civil war won’t happen, but cannot explain why not. Certainly, those of us raising the possibility have the burden of making the argument, but civil wars aren’t exceptional events in a civilization’s life cycle, either. Scholars like Peter Turchin, Neil Howe, and William Strauss have used data to prove that a major crisis occurs around ever 80 years or so. The idea we’re just going to keep rolling along and getting through it has no basis in history whatsoever. It’s just that we don’t want bad things to happen to us.

Back to immigration. The Regime has a long list of ways in which it increasingly destabilizes the country, while also reinforcing its increasingly tyrannical rule. But immigration is the one issue which dictates whether America gets to be a country at all. In Part III, I noted that Americans have an overall positive view of immigration, but aren’t thrilled with the idea of millions entering the country annually, legally or not. Public opinion is decisively anti-illegal immigration, but the Regime seems more intent than ever in allowing them into the country.

In the wake of blinking in the stand-off versus Texas, the Biden administration pivoted to the claim that it lacks the necessary authorities to be able to control the border. The president took cover behind the claim that the law prevents him from taking tougher action to secure the border, an utterly absurd assertion - if true, then it calls into question what use the highest office of the land serves if it cannot even secure the boundaries which define the country. The administration then promoted a so-called “bipartisan” border control bill which was widely panned by critics, as it amounted to a negotiated continuance of illegal entry, married with some tougher policies. It was defeated in Congress. As it goes with just about everything in American politics, the bill does very little to directly address the main problem.

I’ve discussed this all in detail in past entries, but one point I want to re-emphasize is how masses of entrants, both legal and illegal, have a majority of Americans feeling like they’re at risk of replacement. It’s not just Whites; Asians, Blacks, even Hispanics are getting the sense the Regime regards them as expendable. It couples with the increasingly prevalent belief that following the rules offers no benefits; if anything, it costs more to do so than not. Then couple that with the increasing level of disorder; Venezuelan illegal migrants, in particular, have been responsible for a wave of crimes in our major cities.

From the New York Post:

It’s a crime wave that has raised fears across the city: robbers on mopeds snatching people’s phones from their hands and speeding off.

In one especially brazen attack, moped-riding bandits dragged a 62-year-old woman down a Brooklyn street in December.

After the phones are stolen, the victims’ bank accounts are drained of cash, with fraudulent transactions in both the US and South America, and the phones themselves are sent to Colombia to be wiped, reprogrammed and sold.

Now The Post can disclose that the pattern of robberies is being linked by law enforcement to a brutal Venezuelan gang that is sending its members to New York as part of the migrant wave — and using its sprawling criminal empire to launder the proceeds of the crimes.

Not that criminals respect law enforcement, but these Venezuelan migrants appear to not fear them at all. Here’s a mob of them assaulting two New York City Police officers attempting to take a suspect into custody:

Four suspects wanted for this assault were later apprehended, but not in New York. Instead, they were apprehended in Arizona. Arizona.

More:

Separately, sources told The Post last Saturday there were concerns that a gang that assaulted two police officers in Times Square could be linked to Tren de Aragua. It was unclear whether a 15-year-old Venezuelan arrested Friday over the Times Square shooting of a tourist has ties to the gang.

The 15-year-old referenced above was part of robbery when he shot at a security guard who attempted to stop them. He missed, instead striking a 39-year-old Brazilian tourist in the leg. She recovered from her injuries, thankfully.

More concerning is the Tren de Aragua gang. Here’s a rundown on them:

Tren de Aragua, meaning Aragua Train, started in 2012 among trade union members in the Aragua province of Venezuela who turned a planned railroad into an opportunity for grift, and has exploded since into a violent gang involved in robberies, drug dealing and human trafficking across South America.

The Venezuelan government officially sees it as a criminal enterprise and sent in 11,000 soldiers on September 23 last year to take back a prison under the gang’s control in Tocorón, in the country’s interior.

But, The Post is told, its members have also been used as enforcers for the Cartel of the Suns drug-trafficking network, which the US Department of Justice alleges is run by Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro from his presidential palace in Caracas.

They have established presences in Colombia, Peru, Brazil and Chile under leader Niño Guerrero (“Warrior Kid”), whose real name is Héctor Rusthenford Guerrero Flores and who escaped the prison raid safely along with around 80 other senior leaders.

Their violent practices have shocked even the most hardened in South America, particularly their willingness to kill women.

They’re here in the U.S. now. America has imported millions and all their problems with them. We might be years away from an actual civil war. Still, is it hyperbole to say America already appears to be embroiled in low-level armed conflict?

At the heart of the anxiety is a sense that there may not even be a way to fix this, that it may be too late to do anything about it. I certainly feel this way. There’s been talk, including from Donald Trump, of pursuing a mass national deportation effort, but this is likely to run into serious political obstacles and maybe even forceful resistance from the Left. If they really wanted to stop illegal immigration, they’d make a serious effort to do so, instead of coming up with excuses for why they can’t. Like I’ve said before, there’s no indifference when it comes to illegal immigration.

Even if illegal immigration stops today, the demographic future of the U.S. is largely set in stone. The YouTube channel “KaiserBauch” released a video explaining why. Watch it when you have a chance:

There are those who gloat over the fact America and the broader West has gotten more diverse, seeing it as a good thing that the White majorities are getting replaced, even as they criticize anyone on the Right who dares suggest such a thing is occurring. At the same time, it’s no longer just Whites who feel they’re at risk of replacement. This suggests, if not in 2024, we could see a day when Americans of all races decide enough is enough and support hard-line attempts at removing illegals and slowing immigration in general.

That day is likely far off in the future. KaiserBauch’s latest video explains why. Though focused on Europe, many of the lessons can be applied to the U.S. It’s over a half-hour long, so you may want to watch it later:

The gist of it is this: people may want less immigration in general, but the Overton Window has not shifted far enough for people to support more aggressive attempts to remove migrants. A key point KaiserBauch brings up is that the political balance hasn’t shifted decisively in the favor of the Right to where some of these harder-line policies are politically feasible. To the extent a “silent majority” exists, polling data shows it’s hardly as radically right-wing as some believe.

Commenter “Kulak,” who runs his own Substack, had this on X in response to the video:

Remigration 100% will happen. it can happen peacefully under current governments, or it can happen violently under the revolutionary regimes that slaughter the current governments.

There is no scenario where it does not happen.

But KaiserBauch concedes that policies like remigration will happen in the event of a revolution or some other major political realignment. Until it actually happens, however, remigration isn’t likely, which was KaiserBauch’s point. So Kulak’s argument here is a bit of a nonsequitur.

More:

But every year it doesn't happen the inevitability of ethnic conflict rises, more of the post-war humanitarian order is discredited, and the inevitable outcome and correction becomes more horrifying and permanent.

The things I hear out of ordinary people’s mouths today would be horrifying and unthinkable coming from right-wing extremists 5-10 years ago.

The reputation of the Austrian painter is somehow being rehabilitated, not via any success of neo-nazis (who largely have not gained in prominence) but via sheer hatred of the current regime, and by extension, everything and everyone who made the current regime possible

I've heard the children and grandchildren of ww2 veterans denounce their grandfather's victory.

The will to make mass deportations happen is only going to rise, and rise, until the regime either gives in... or it is destroyed, because the instinct to ethnic conflict against invading foreigners is so primally overwhelming.

And if the international order, judiciary, and “democracy” try to define mass deportations as genocide, or "impossible" under the Nuremberg regime, the populace is already signaling their will to do away with the post Nuremberg world

I agree that every year this problem goes unaddressed, the likelier the prospect of racial/ethnic conflict. We’re seeing a little bit of that already. That said, I have to question the extent to which ordinary people are saying such horrifying things. As KaiserBauch points out, social media amplifies voices, creating the impression of a silent majority which doesn’t really exist. There’s no getting around the fact most people aren’t extremists, even if they might express an extremist viewpoint here and there. It’s often stated a small percentage can spark a revolution, but there’s a lot of wishful thinking involved. For one, it assumes this small percentage will succeed in their aims.

The reality is that the most that can be done about illegal immigration is to secure the border, restrict immigration more generally, deport illegals immediately upon discovery, and give legal migrants very little room for error as they make the case for long-term residence. None of this ought to be beyond the pale, but for far too many, it is. To them, the five-time deportee who returns to the U.S. for a sixth time and kills a 10-year-old is a price worth paying to keep America diverse and vibrant. Being deported five times and coming back a sixth time to kill a child isn’t just a crime, but a moral affront. Yet we cannot even agree on how many times a person can be deported, let alone whether they should be deported at all.

Is it any wonder Americans think immigration is the issue we might go to war with each other over? To go back to something I posted in Part V:

Source

America hasn’t been able to answer either of those two questions for generations. This identity crisis is now causing conflicts the system cannot resolve. When peaceful solutions become impossible, it leaves but one alternative.

The “Great Destabilization”

I’ve often stated that the dividing lines of the American internal conflict are currently being drawn and they may not be drawn the way we expect. It’s probably not going to be as simple as Left vs. Right, Democrat vs. Republican, or even Globalist vs. Nationalist.

I think the line will be drawn in the sand over something more fundamental. What’s at stake here isn’t even political, though it can certainly be politicized. What’s at stake here is the United States itself. The right of every American to have a place to call home, to have a history, an identity. We can have none of these things without establishing a peaceful, orderly society rooted in the understanding that nice things can only come with a credible threat of violence against those who break the rules.

What we have instead in America is anarcho-tyranny. The state possesses a credible monopoly on violence, but so do the criminals. Sure, criminals are often arrested, charged, convicted, or sometimes even killed. Still far too many get off with sentences that don’t fit the severity of the crime. Living among us are career criminals, with multiple felony convictions, stints in prison, still out and about terrorizing the public. People who are clearly not fit for life in civil society are permitted to roam freely, while taxpaying citizens are forced to adjust their lifestyles to avoid victimization or pretend they don’t notice. Meanwhile, the rest of us better make sure we pay every dollar of our taxes and meet all regulations, otherwise, we cannot have a livelihood. It’d all make sense if the rule-breakers weren’t allowed to be part of society. But they’re right there, living among us, enjoying many of the same benefits of civilization as the rest of us.

The logic of anarcho-tyranny is, ironically, underpinned by the concept of “equality under the law” taken to its most ridiculous extreme. We’re all guilty and innocent at once, existing on the same moral plane as those who commit the most horrendous of acts. It shouldn’t be beyond the pale to say that someone who shoots and kills a grandfather over a minor vehicle collision deserves the needle, or worse. Those who steal, then assault an employee who dares try to stop them, don’t deserve anything less than a lengthy residency in a cold prison cell.

Meanwhile, the Regime and those who form their base of support give comfort, at best, or aid, at worst, to the enemies of civil society. All the while, those who attempt mass murder are labeled “white non-Hispanic” though they clearly aren’t in a blatant attempt to implicate the Regime’s boogeyman demographic for society’s worst problems, while obfuscating the truth about crime from the public. We’re told that Blacks, 14% of the population, are 60% of gun violence victims, with not a word about who’s pulling the trigger. After every mass shooting, such as the most recent incident during the Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl victory parade, the focus is on how to disarm the populace, as though we’re all equally capable of the same heinous acts. We’re forced to swallow oxymoronic logic: nobody needs guns because we have nothing to fear from others, yet we’re all as dangerous as the most hardened of criminals, so we cannot be trusted with guns.

Then you have the insufferable “protesters,” who are doing far more than peacefully voicing their grievances. I don’t know about you, but defacing the Constitution is hardly peaceful protesting and the fact even those charged with defending the display don’t do a thing about it right away is a sure sign of who’s really in charge of this country. It’s not Americans, that’s for sure.

Anyway, longtime readers have heard all this before. Anarcho-tyranny is only as effective as it is because, as a populace, we’re demoralized. Meanwhile, the criminals, the “peaceful protesters,” their more civilized sympathizers, and the Regime are moralized like never before. If there’s any group in the country for whom there exists no question as to the moral righteousness of their cause, it’s the activist-criminal-cosmopolitan axis. Not only is it creating strange bedfellows, it’s also creating an increasingly zero-sum environment where one side is forced, under coercion, to subsidize the behavior and lifestyles of the other.

What do I mean by this? A reader’s response to a Wall Street Journal op-ed has drawn a lot of attention in recent days:

Source

Let’s loop our friend Kulak back into the discussion:

Source

For the record, I’m pretty certain nobody’s having seven kids, not even poor Blacks. In fact, Black birth rates aren't significantly higher than that of Whites. And while I think a right-wing backlash is coming, I don’t think it’ll be anywhere near as ferocious as some people think.

But here’s the thing: Whites are over 57 percent of the population still. Blacks are less than 13 percent. Yet their birth rates aren’t far apart. That means a greater proportion of Blacks are reproducing than are Whites.

The issue isn’t that Whites are in danger of being out-bred by Blacks. That’s statistically improbable, as we don’t have the demographics of South Africa. It’s to say that you have one group, a minority, who may not possess economic power, but possesses cultural and political power, living with far less regard for the consequences than another group, the majority, who possesses economic power, but far less cultural and political power. The group living with less regard for the consequences feel licensed to do whatever they want, while everyone else needs to clean up after. It’s like when you have mobs of “youths” robbing and trashing stores - who cleans up the mess? More importantly, what if, one day, we all decided to quit cleaning up their messes?

A point I’ve raised time and again: society is held up by people who show up, put in the work, and follow the rules. If we all decided to quit at once, society would collapse in a flash. The Regime wants us to believe they’re the ones who keep civilization running, but as far-left former Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said in June 2020 in a rare instance of blunt honesty: if nobody obeyed the law, we wouldn’t be able to enforce the law.

This isn’t a call for us all to give up and let it all fall apart. That’d be a cure worse than the disease. It’s a wake-up call: the respondent to Kulak’s post is correct, we are increasingly being forced to question and justify our own existence, our own lifestyles, in the name of climate change, racial justice, inequality, etc., while the Regime and their most-favored classes have no such expectations imposed on them. If a massive brawl breaks out at a Black college convention, we’re supposed to assume it could happen anywhere, among any people, if we’re allowed to notice at all. Meanwhile, we’re subjected to daily litanies of certain classes “lacking access” to education. If people have things stolen from them, the moral fault is said to lie with the person who dared display such valuables. Meanwhile, we cannot ascribe any moral culpability to the thieves. The examples go on and on.

Here’s one more before we wrap this up:

Source

These problems would be enough on their own, but the effort to control our speech and thoughts on the matter is creating an atmosphere of scorching hostility. It’s hard to know what anyone really thinks about any of this, since nobody, especially not a White person, would dare say so openly in today’s fear-based climate. Still, it defies the imagination to think nobody notices, either. The reason why “bigots” are derided isn’t just because they might say distasteful things. It’s because, sometimes, they’re not wrong.

It’s unfathomable to think our society is being destabilized in such a deliberate fashion, yet we’re not allowed to register an objection, not openly. But here we are. We are still at a point where, for most Americans, what’s being talked about here are silly culture wars which distract from supposedly “real” problems. With time, more, if not all, Americans will come to understand these are the most real of problems any society will face. We built civilization to ensure ourselves one more day. Only stability can guarantee many one-more-days. They may seem frivilous today, but as the veneer of civilization erodes, so will the guarantee of one more day, and along with it, our own lives.

Superpower Collapse + Replacement + Destabilization = Civil War

Hence, we arrive at my thesis, over two years in the making. From 2024 to 2025, the big concern for the U.S. is the end of its run as a superpower. It’ll remain a global power, but with nowhere near the gravitas it had just a few years ago. The world, especially adversarial actors, will become increasingly unresponsive and indifferent to Washington’s demands.

America’s demographic fate is largely fixed at this point. By mid-century, it’s very possible Whites will become a minority. What happens then is a matter of speculation; what’s for certain is that between now and then, there will be significant turbulence as America’s culture and social structure adapts. Demographic change happens and there’s an aspect of it which is inevitable. What’s not inevitable is rapid demographic change. There’s no example in history in any society showing rapid demographic change to be a good idea. Those who accuse Whites of being unenthusiastic about being displaced/replaced should remember: none of us are irreplaceable.

Now that our society has been demoralized, it’s now being destabilized. It’s just a question of how much longer destabilization will go on for and when the next stage - crisis - will begin. As I’ve explained, it’s probably coming within the next year, whether it’s election-induced or end-of-the-superpower-induced. We’ll likely see an intensification of current trends, marked by greater disorder, the Regime and its loyalists becoming even more openly contemptuous towards the nation as dissent escalates, an uptick in crime, civil unrest, and the intensification of rhetoric. Whether Biden, Trump, or even Independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wins in November, few of us will enter 2025 feeling better about America’s future.

Whatever comes to pass, by this time next year, indifference will become harder to justify. As with illegal immigration, as with destabilization, either what’s happening to this country is good or bad. We’ll all be picking sides, even self-righteous who claim to be above it all.

More To Come

In the second half of The Next 12 Months series finale, we’ll discuss what to expect in 2024 and beyond. We’ll discuss how the civil war will unfold and what, if anything, we can do to prepare.

For now, let’s talk - do you think we’re headed for civil war? Or does nothing ever happen? Is the situation as destabilized as I’ve described it, or is it more stable than it seems?

Let’s discuss in the comments.

Max Remington writes about armed conflict and prepping. Follow him on Twitter at @AgentMax90.

If you liked this post from We're Not At the End, But You Can See It From Here, why not share? If you’re a first-time visitor, please consider subscribing!