Let's say the US balkanizes, becomes decentralized and finally stateless. What to do with the nukes that were left over? Who controls them if there's no central power? Obviously, there should just be no nukes, but let's say other countries that are still states have them, so would it be prudent to denuclearize?

  • AlexandairBabeuf [they/them]
    ·
    3 years ago

    anarchism =/= a lack of collective decision making

    if theres like, a fascist nuke-armed threat somewhere to ward off still, they might keep em, but uhhh that'd be unlikely seeing as the nuke-fash are the US

    • Yanqui_UXO [any]
      hexagon
      ·
      3 years ago

      Very true. But the US has nukes everywhere , and the way they are located is to nuke other countries. Even if the US just balkanized, with state power left in every state, it would be pointless for, say Texas, to threaten Louisiana with the nukes, because both states would suffer. So seems like a completely different dynamics at play.

      • AlexandairBabeuf [they/them]
        ·
        3 years ago

        :brace-cowboy: texas would nuke texas

        if adults (revolutionaries) dont get there first nuclear hellfire will be the dominant theme of the US warlord period

        • Yanqui_UXO [any]
          hexagon
          ·
          3 years ago

          nuclear hellfire will be the dominant theme of the US warlord period

          that's my greatest fear. and honestly, even just nuclear plants. they just melt down and leak toxic shit left unattained.. and since all of that is privately owned, i fear the owners would just fuck off when shit hits the fan

          • AlexandairBabeuf [they/them]
            ·
            3 years ago

            nah nuclear plant workers know how to turn them off lol.

            i have far more confidence in them than nuclear silo stiffs