More frequent and extreme episodes of violent civil unrest? Yes. I think it's going to get worse.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2022/03/08/they-are-...
In the civil war you had various clearly defined government apparatuses that chose to withdraw themselves from the union to form a new nation state. This time however it isn't a certain group of geographic area it is divided along urban vs rural lines. If a "civil war" were to come again it is much more likely that we'll see something more along the line of the "The Troubles" that happened in Northern Ireland than anything approximating what happened in the 1860s.
https://www.history.com/topics/early-us/shays-rebellion https://www.history.com/topics/early-us/whiskey-rebellion
Were those civil wars? Or did they fall short? There's no simple, clear line. What we can almost certainly expect is terrorism, civil unrest, and moves toward legal autonomy short of actual secession. It will probably be a decade or so before we can tell whether those things (plus the reactions to them) are leading to an actual civil war.
Americans just don't seem to want to get along and understand on any side of the aisle. I can't talk politics to my family since they're all charged on their views and if I differ we just argue.
Why, I wonder.
/s
That's... quite a bold assertion.
But also, overturn of RoW is long term work of evangelicals.
If for instance you were to look across recent world history you will find many communist ( left ) groups/factions are exceedingly violent toward civilians and account for millions of civilian deaths.[0]
In this country very recently, "...New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio... blamed anarchists and "far-left extremist" groups, including antifa, for inciting and organizing violent riots"[1]
I am not say that violence is not perpetrated by those on the right but your statement is a gross misrepresentation.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_... [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_and_controversies_dur...
Also, I said majority and I stand by that. The terrorism in USA is more likely to go from right wing then from anything else (including muslims). It is right wing media and politicians who promote violence. It is right who is actively talking about violent usurpation of power and builds militias. It is right wing who engineered 6.1. and repeatedly tried to blame left and "antifa" for it. It is right wing who is trying to get control over education by harassing and threatening (actual physical threats) opposition.
There is also no symmetry in who gets promoted and wins elections on either side. The more aggressive and radical side on right wing is having control over the party. As much as they try to make it look like there is symmetry with Democratic leadership, there is none. If anything, democratic leadership is incapable to stand up to them and constantly looking for non-existent bipartisanship. America does not have actual communist party or activism going on to speak of. Communists are not getting votes. It does have fascist politicians getting more and more votes within GOP. And it does have right wing trying to frame any social system they dont like or public education as "communist" to make it look like there is symmetry.
The point is not that it is coming from one side or the other but rather to blame one side is to loose site of what is happening. My post was simply to show there is violence all along the spectrum. The post following my post regarding Anti-Communist mass executions is a good example of bringing balance to the conversation with evidence/sources.
If you are to "stand by" your statement then provide some evidence.
>Communists are not getting votes I feel the Communist Party USA would like to differ. [0]
Furthermore, marxist/communist voters since "1988 to present: Voters urged to support the Democratic Party"[1]
Therefore, your statement about fascist ( not sure your intended meaning ) can be said about marxists/communists. Event the communist party wants you to vote for Democrats.
[1]https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/government/elections/pr...
One side has tried resorting to violence in order to prevent the other side from voting, enshrine one religion as the law of the land, guarantee one "race" its supremacy, and literally overthrow the legitimately elected government.
The other side has tried resorting to violence when the first side asserted control over half of their bodies, murdered them in the streets while under the supposed motto of "serve and protect", and tried to take away their right to vote and literally overthrow the elected government.
Yes, I can see that "both sides" are clearly equally bad. After all, if someone stabs you in the gut, and you punch him in the face, you're just as bad as he is, right?