Discussion Why isn't "civil war" a more popularly discussed doomsday scenario despite it's likeliness?

[AbleistSL]

I was trying to find info where people discuss civil war as a doomsday scenario and it's very hard to find anything.

What are your thoughts on how this is not as properly discussed despite it's likeliness compared to anything else?

 

[The Conservationist]

What are your thoughts on how this is not as properly discussed despite it's likeliness compared to anything else?

Why do you think it is likely, compared to the other options?

 

[AbleistSL]

The other doomsday scenarios are nuclear war, invasion by a hostile nation, ecological disaster, asteroids, biological outbreak...

 

[The Conservationist]

Ah, I understand now.

When you said doomsday, I thought a communist take over was included.

You mean like literal death of the majority of people, on both sides.

(Which a commie takeover could cause, depending on how you define the 'sides' ... if the sides are elites vs everyone else, then the elites might be spared ... if the sides are 'progressives' + elites vs. the rest, then many of the 'progressives' are in trouble as well).

 

[Redman011]

Because its a taboo subject.

 

[FreedomTruth]

No idea. This is the most peaceful period (least civil/local war) in recorded history. It's an anomaly. It's likely to revert at some point.