this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2026
583 points (99.7% liked)

World News

55333 readers
2860 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RustyShackleford@piefed.social 12 points 1 hour ago

You’re not wrong about the conditions that historically lead to unrest, material desperation, fear, and breakdown of basic stability tend to be the tipping points. The U.S. government isn’t there for most citizens, and that’s not accidental.

But what’s worth pointing out is that this “just stable enough” environment didn’t emerge naturally, it’s been actively managed over decades. And a strong case can be made that this is less about general governance and more about a long-term political strategy, particularly on the Republican side.

You’ve had a pattern where social safety nets are publicly criticized, underfunded, or slowly eroded but rarely eliminated outright. Why? Because removing them completely would create exactly the kind of instability you’re describing. Instead, they’re kept barely functional. Enough to prevent collapse, not enough to meaningfully improve mobility or reduce inequality.

At the same time, there’s been consistent resistance to policies that would shift people from “barely stable” to genuinely secure, things like stronger labor protections, universal healthcare, or aggressive wage growth. That keeps a large portion of the population economically stressed, but not desperate enough to unify or revolt. It fragments people using base animal instincts, keeps them focused on short-term survival, and limits collective action.

Add in cultural and political polarization, and it further diffuses pressure. People incorrectly channel frustration horizontally, at each other, instead of vertically at faceless institutions.

So yes, you’re right about the threshold for unrest. The uncomfortable part is recognizing that a lot of political strategy has been about keeping the country just below that threshold, stable enough to barely function, and strained enough to control.