https://www.fightforthefuture.org/

You mean like

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362607055_Impact_of_social_media_use_on_critical_thinking_ability_of_university_students

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563216307841

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11528-010-0398-z

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131516302469

Look to history for some answers.

The Denver Post had a opinion piece that talked about how America has seen something like this before.

The Gilded Age, the tumultuous period between roughly 1870 and 1900, was also a time of rapid technological change, of mass immigration, of spectacular wealth and enormous inequality. The era got its name from a Mark Twain novel: gilded, rather than golden, to signify a thin, shiny surface layer. Below it lay the corruption and greed that engulfed the country after the Civil War.

The era survives in the public imagination through still resonant names, including J.P. Morgan, John Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie and Cornelius Vanderbilt; through their mansions, which now greet awestruck tourists; and through TV shows with extravagant interiors and lavish gowns. Less well remembered is the brutality that underlay that wealth — the tens of thousands of workers, by some calculations, who lost their lives to industrial accidents, or the bloody repercussions they met when they tried to organize for better working conditions.

Also less well remembered is the intensity of political violence that erupted. The vast inequities of the era fueled political movements that targeted corporate titans, politicians, judges and others for violence. In 1892, an anarchist tried to assassinate industrialist Henry Clay Frick after a drawn-out conflict between Pinkerton security guards and workers. In 1901, an anarchist sympathizer assassinated President William McKinley. And so on.

As historian Jon Grinspan wrote about the years between 1865 and 1915, “the nation experienced one impeachment, two presidential elections ‘won’ by the loser of the popular vote and three presidential assassinations.” And neither political party, he added, seemed “capable of tackling the systemic issues disrupting Americans’ lives.” No, not an identical situation, but the description does resonate with how a great many people feel about the direction of the country today.

It’s not hard to see how, during the Gilded Age, armed political resistance could find many eager recruits and even more numerous sympathetic observers. And it’s not hard to imagine how the United States could enter another such cycle.

Good fill-in on that. i think I’d add some context to each which is worth discussing.

• Political instability and weak governance are present.

  • No, there are some arguably elements, but when you compare to the issues you see in the countries who’ve had them “No” is good a simple distilled answer.

• There are deep ethnic, religious, or sectarian tensions.

  • Yes, with the caveat that we are seeing low level tensions as compared to the direct violent and organic engage issues you might see in Syria, Haiti, Yugoslavia, etc. There is racism with violence and tension, but not at the widespread near genocidal level which are the signs which is considered. I admit this is arguably, but worth discussing as it’s a framing issue about gun violence, police use of force, structural violence, etc.

• The economy is declining with high inequality.

  • Economy: not declining - Inequality: high, this in particular is going to be a hard sign to trip, given how widespread the middle class is in the US vs other examples. It’s just a much much larger base that needs to get squeezed so much more before you’ll likely see French like protests about the wage disparity, corruption, or other inequality challenges. It’s very relevant, but just unlikely to get a significant population to say it’s not fair enough to act on it… When they can still go out to eat, watch movies, have disposable income, and more.

• Persistent social unrest and widespread protests occur.

  • Might happen if Trump loses or steals the presidency, this I’m just going to avoid given the continuing discussion.

• External powers are interfering or supporting different factions.

  • Yes, big time, substantiated from a foreign power stand point. I’d point out that this should also describe multinational companies as much as foreign powers.

• There is significant resource scarcity and competition.

  • Not yet, but global warming might make this happen, agree. Starting to see some changes due to some globalization, pandemic, and your point of climate change.

• Militarization and proliferation of arms increase.

  • Well, it’s the USA, agreed… But we are not seeing this based on strictly ethic lines in a way.

• Systematic human rights violations and repression take place.

  • Might happen under Trump

• Society experiences strong ideological polarization.

  • Yes, I’d caveat this with the reality that although it’s perceived as half the country that is polling well for Trump, it’s closer to a third or less. Not that the ideology divide isn’t pertinent, but just that there are about 80 million people who don’t vote in the US, so voter participation in presidential election is about 60%. So perception is that we have huge divide, but it’s driven by less and more extreme voices then the masses.

• Demographic pressures such as rapid population growth or urbanization exist.

  • No, I would actually argue this might be yes. The housing crunch is driven by a rural to urban migration, which has exacerbated the housing shortage. This in addition to the US being an outlier that has kept it’s population growth rate higher than other developed countries has continued to increase the US population, which is only recently beginning to slow. This is not at the same level as other collapsed countries, but is what gives people the perception that the US is struggling.

• The rule of law and justice systems are breaking down.

  • No, agreed although the judge choices and decisions of late leave much to be desired.

• Historical grievances and unresolved conflicts resurface.

  • No, agreed with the caveat that racial tension are at play and perceptions focus this to include immigrants.

So I talked to a PhD who’s work covered civil wars across the world, and asked about this. Turns out there are several signs you need to see which makes a civil war more likely. Most of which we haven’t even gotten close to, because many of them are economic related and right now the US is still the single largest economy in the world where peoples standard of living is still very comfortable.

I asked ChatGPT to describe this and these are the highlights, in order of historical priority?

• Political instability and weak governance are present.
• There are deep ethnic, religious, or sectarian tensions.
• The economy is declining with high inequality.
• Persistent social unrest and widespread protests occur.
• External powers are interfering or supporting different factions.
• There is significant resource scarcity and competition.
• Militarization and proliferation of arms increase.
• Systematic human rights violations and repression take place.
• Society experiences strong ideological polarization.
• Demographic pressures such as rapid population growth or urbanization exist.
• The rule of law and justice systems are breaking down.
• Historical grievances and unresolved conflicts resurface.

Note that the US does have some of these, but not to the evident level that you saw in Rwanda, Sudan, Yugoslavia, Syria, Burundi, Eritrea, Somalia, Libya, Myanmar, Haiti, and others. In short, if you look at the indicators, although the US is indeed troubled, it’s not troubled enough for people to hot the streets with more than riotous intent.