Over half of voters expect violence, disagree on election legitimacy

submitted by EthnocratArcheofuturist from self.debatealtright

The collapse of legitimacy in American "democracy" is astonishing.

Quotes:

The YouGov poll of 1,999 registered voters found that nearly half – 47% – disagree with the idea that the election "is likely to be fair and honest." And that slightly more than half – 51% – won't "generally agree on who is the legitimately elected president of the United States."

This is great. The more people lose faith in the system, the better. It needs to break as soon as possible. I really hope this election will mark the beginning of America's implosion.

In addition, a YouGov poll of 1,505 voters found that 56% said they expect to see "an increase in violence as a result of the election."

This is also a good sign. Nothing is worse than bourgeois "stability".

Those sentiments might help explain the conclusion of a new survey that finds a majority of U.S. adults believe the country is "on the verge" of a second civil war. Of those, four of 10 said they "strongly agree" with that sentiment expressed most sharply by those identifying themselves as very conservative or very liberal.

The center is crumbling before our eyes. This is excellent.

Anyway, the piece is of course mired in liberal propaganda, but the numbers don't lie.

Article:

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/10/07/both-sides-worry-doubts-election-integrity-could-spark-violence/5880965002/

all 5 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]sylla94 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

why do the powers that be push and incentivize such political polarization if it increasingly threatens the entire demographic system and thus a fundamental aspect of their power? can they just not help by doing so

[–]Wrangel 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I honestly don't think you need a conspiracy to explain why the US is divided. Dividing a country is super easy, uniting a country is extremely difficult. Collapse is the natural state of things and not collapsing requires effort. The Roman empire was the only time most of Europe was united and it took 500k soldiers in an empire with 60 million people and for much of the empire there was constant infighting and the empire could very well have collapsed 200 years earlier. Rome was half the land area of the US and nobody has been able to unite that area of land since. Mexico is divided, pretty much every country in the middle east has some form of insurgency and latin America is in a perpetual state of division and turmoil.

If anything the elites just assumed peace and unity was normal and took it for granted even though it is everything but a default state and requires hard work to achieve.

[–]CosmicChicken 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

'' the elites just assumed peace and unity was normal and took it for granted even though it is everything but a default state and requires hard work to achieve."

Yet they assumed right. On the consumerist level at least. While a '"communist'" buys apple products and eat Macdonalds, the propaganda worked. What they mostly took for granted was the trust of the populace in the mainstream media. Since 2016, doubting the MSM became "mainstream", yet a vast amount of people (mostly left is an assumption yet to be challenged) still think that the blued-media establishment is accurate and take it very seriously. Hence: how the Russia-gate took traction within the left. We both know that there will be 2 different results for the next election: Tedmail ballots v/s physical voting polls. "unrest and devides" they say. Have you seen the weapon stock market? (Smith and Wesson as an example) United is the market. The coup attempt that is underway will most likely be profitable for some.

Yet on the sociological level, the US is and will be even more divided. The peaceful protests will surely perpetuate with an heavier dosage of peace. That is the goal here. To devide the entire nation to better control it. Will martial law be instaured to keep the population '"safe'"? It sure would be united then.

[–]FriedrichLudwig 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I suppose they want things just unstable enough to justify authoritarianism, but not to the point where their system collapses.

[–]CosmicChicken 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why not? Chaotic lands are cheap and from what we saw in the previous 6+months, the wealthy has gained unfathomable piles where even a dragon would blush.