TL;DR: I'm trying to work through what the future looks like and my brain has been awash in negativity since last November, so I figure putting something on paper may serve as a form of therapy. The long and short of what I've typed below is I'm trying to piece together USA's current geopolitical situation and rationalize what the likely or possible outcomes are.

I'm posting this through doomscrolling-tinted glasses, so bear with me. But I'll also mention that I've always tried to be empathetic to both sides, understand differing arguments and motives, and generally believe that people act or vote the way they do because it's what they think is best for the country, their communities, and their families.

I'm afraid I have given too much faith to humanity.

Overnight, we've just switched our allegiance from Europe/NATO/Ukraine to Russia -- our arch-nemesis for the last century. This comes on the heels of threatening to make Palestine disappear and "punishing" our brothers and sisters to the north and south (and across the Atlantic for that matter) for no apparent reason. The mutual trust and respect we've worked on for so long with our neighboring countries and Europe are vanishing... just like that. Unless there's something huge that I'm missing, we're not playing smart geopolitics here. We're just giving up hegemony for the sake of what... making it easier for rich men to hoard more money and get away with corruption?

I'm not a single-issue voter, but geopolitical implications have always received the lion's share of my decision-making. We've been able to maintain a relatively* prosperous and safe world order. More importantly, we've been able to keep the M.A.D. lightning in a bottle. Selfishly as an American, I think it's safe to say that our geopolitical situation has afforded us, the citizens, our current luxuries and opportunities. Sure, we have some other MASSIVE issues, but why would you want to take this one away?

• I know, we've done a lot of bad shit in the past. I'm not going to argue or defend that here.

So as the threads of democracy unravel in America, what does our path forward look like?

I believe we are at a crossroads right now. As all of these executive orders are being created – some of which are valid but we don't like them because they're coming from the other side, and others of which are clearly unconstitutional – the judiciary is getting to work making rulings on them, one by one. It is a slow process, but at the end of the day we should have a bunch of directives -- these EO's get to stay, and these other ones are unconstitutional so they must go.

The left branch of the crossroads is the one where the executive branch chooses to play by the rules. As much as Democrats would hate to admit, I see this as democracy playing out (in the worst possible way, but hey, I'm looking for silver linings). "These EO's can stay, and these EO's have to go." Then, in two years' time, the mid-terms will provide another opportunity for voters to swing the pendulum back toward the middle a bit -- or not. And then we can start the long, slow rebuilding process of restoring relations with our allies.

The right branch of the crossroads (where the executive branch becomes more and more powerful) is the one that I think we simply call "fascism," and there's plenty of historical research and precedent as to where things go from there. I don't see a clean exit from this. I see the following possibilities, from least to most horrible.

1. Americans just give in and accept the new government. We turn into a single-party state, corruption grows rampant, basic welfare benefits are taken away, etc. But, because there was no fight or give-a-fuck, we just accept it. And hey, maybe life is still fine for many people. But maybe we watch the indicators slowly tick in the wrong direction -- life expectancy, upward mobility, homelessness, crumbling infrastructure, innovation, general happiness. Given our current state of apathy and lethargy, I believe this is the most likely scenario.

2. Military intervention from within. If things get screwy enough, there comes a point when the military has to decide whether it's time to step in or not. In general, military interventions are a BAD thing. Furthermore, I believe there is major support for the President within the armed forces. Could there be a clean exit here, one where the military removes the current executive and benevolently allows for a new election? Sure, maybe, but if you think MAGAs believe all blame belongs to "the others" right now, this will be a whole 'nother level. More likely, this would lead to an outcome like most other military interventions historically.

3. Some flavor of a fractured republic, civil war, etc. The exact opposite of a clean exit. It would also most likely lead to...

4. Military intervention from outside, a.k.a. war. This is my greatest fear -- that we have now become the "bad guys," and the rest of the world realizes they have to band together to stop the tyranny and restore order. This option almost certainly ends in M.A.D.

I can't believe I'm typing all of this with any semblance of sincerity. I always subscribed to the thinking that "things always work out in the end," and it has done good for me so far. At this point, I could use some reassurance. Please tell me that I'm completely wrong and am simply being dramatic.

I watch CBC pretty regularly and all I have seen for the past month is coverage about Trump's comments about annexing us and I can't tell if I am missing something obvious or am just naive but I can't take the threat seriously and I am starting to hate that CBC is talking about it so much and that we have Canadian politicians actively addressing it rather than just dismissing it (the fact that Doug Ford went on that idiot Jesse Waters show to push back on it made me facepalm).

Cause from my point of view, let's say Trump in his immense stupidity is serious about the threat. He wants to bring back American expansionism and apparently misunderstood his history classes from back in the day and thinks "manifest destiny" is a good thing.

and given that he has installed loyalists as his heads of departments, let's even say they all either agree or are too chicken-shit to oppose it and get cancelled by Trump.

Canada would never agree to being annexed so that means Trump would have to launch a war against us to annex us. You are telling me that if push comes to shove, that the men and women in the armed forces would actually be willing to invade a sovereign nation that they might even have ties to (given Canada and American culture+society are so connected)? and you are telling me that the generals and people in power in the American military industrial complex would be willing to follow an order to invade Canada?

I mean sure, America has been known to invade countries in the Middle East for their natural resources and pretend its for national security but imo there's a big difference in being able to sell the idea to the American people and the viewers of Faux News that invading a brown country far off in the distance and saying its cause of Islamic extremism vs invading a country whose stereotype is literally that we are too apologetic and nice.

Am I missing something obvious?

And just to clarify, I am not saying that Trump isn't serious about it. he probably is and it probably has to do with our natural resources as Trudeau was caught on a hot mic saying as much in a meeting and our politicians need to address it. but for our politicians to act like there is a legit chance of an invasion seems odd to me. and the CBC talking about it so much and giving so much airtime to it is really getting on my nerves.

What I will say is the one thing that bugs me about all this honestly is just Musk and Trump calling Trudeau a "governor". not that I like Trudeau. The day he decided to break his campaign promise of election reform, he was dead to me, but I just don't like it when people dish it out when they can't take it and Musk and Trump are the most thin-skinned c**nts on the planet. If Trudeau responded to either of them on Twitter with something as condescending, they would both cry like little babies and somehow find a way to blame the woke mind virus and trans people for Trudeau being "nasty" to them.

sorry for dumb question but here it goes: I remember during the first administration, Trump launched some tariffs against us and if I recall correctly, it resulted in the signing of the USMCA which replaced NAFTA.

So, where I get lost is, are these agreements non-binding? Like a country can just choose not to follow them and face no consequences before they expire? Cause I'd assume that what the U.S. is doing breaks the conditions of the USMCA?

and if it's non-binding, then that means that even if another agreement is signed yet again, if Trump wants to throw a new tantrum halfway through his presidency and do tariff wars again, there's nothing stopping him and we'd have to come up with and sign a brand new agreement yet again?