some models for things getting worse

(I attempted to rank this list and the sub-lists from stronger to weaker models)

1. Some pre-insurgency qualities
   1. More protests
      1. correlate with more conflict^[1]
      2. create more opportunities
         1. for violent-leaning people to find each other and become more radicalized
         2. to evolve more virulent ideology
         3. to become better organized
   2. Already exist plenty of resources & training
      1. Highest guns per capita
      2. Lots of people with military experience - e.g. to source more weapons, to train recruits, and to fight effectively
   3. Shifting overton window
      1. More political polarization
      2. Non-negligible support of political violence^[2]
      3. More and larger protests (involving both far right & left)
      4. Trump
      5. More mass shootings, hate crimes^[3]
   4. Ideologies
      1. Disenfranchised populations^[4]
         1. On the right, the decline of WASP power, e.g. via shifting demographics and culture^[5]
         2. On the left, decline in economic power of the 99%.^[6]
      2. Distributed media makes it harder to control the narrative, and more likely that extremists find each other.
   5. Possibility for local support^[7] i. Some limited coordination with far-right groups among local law enforcement^[8], where it’s possible this could lead to a festering insurgency in rural areas where local law enforcement is unwilling to step in^[9].
   6. Financing maybe easier these days (crowdsourcing, crypto).
2. Appeal to authority
   1. ACLED has the US on its list of 2020 conflicts to worry about^[10]
   2. David Kilcullen is the kind of person who might know and has recently written a couple articles highlighting that characterize the US as in a pre-Mcveigh moment (May article) and an incipient insurgency (June article).
3. Black swan: we don’t have much data on insurgencies / SPV in developed countries, but developed countries haven’t existed for long. We might just not know what it looks like.
   1. I don’t know if I can make a strong case for it being impossible for civil wars to emerge from developed countries.
4. WMDs: maybe it’s easier to kill a lot of people these days, so it might only take a few actors to cross my arbitrary >5k deaths SPV threshold.

some models against things getting worse

1. Negative correlates: Country qualities that negatively correlate with conflict^[1]
   1. Strong democratic institutions. Maybe because it makes lots of trusted non-violent avenues for change^[2]
   2. Wealth^[3]. Maybe you’re less likely to risk dying if you can meet your needs well enough with the current system
   3. Political representation^[4]
   4. Being a developed country^[5]
2. Military: I think the overwhelming majority of groups would not want to fight the military, from PR risk^[6] and dying risk^[7]
3. Ideology: Hard to get people to rally behind a specific extremist cause
   1. The ideology of the extremist right-wing is actually pretty varied and sometimes contradictory.
   2. I think the extremist left-wing is similarly varied: from a strong central government (socialist/communist/environmentalist) to ~anarchists (who thus far have been the only violent ones^[8])
   3. The Voter Study Group actually found that tolerance of violence correlated negatively with (one measure of) partisanship
   4. Less of a stomach for violence (a la Steven Pinker)^[9]
4. Financing: Would be hard. If a group gets labeled as a terrorist organization you really don’t want to be associated with them financially^[10]
5. We’re still missing a lot of insurgency qualities^[11] (this can also be used as a list of red flags if any of these crop up)
   1. High levels of political violence^[12]
   2. Organized, violence-endorsing groups
      1. With significant membership (say >50,000)
      2. Publicly claiming responsibility for specific violence, e.g. assassinations of political leaders
      3. With popular-ish ideology
      4. With charismatic leadership
      5. Attempting to garner popular support
      6. Low rates of defection
   3. Institutions supporting violent groups (e.g. town or state or foreign governments, churches, unions, wealthy individuals/organizations)
   4. Economic gradients towards supporting or joining insurgents
   5. Insurgents attempting to claim & defend territory from the government
   6. Insurgents being supported by foreign groups (governments, terrorist orgs)

It does depend on your reference class. European political systems have two big differences from the US

• mostly parliamentary
• fewer guns

Chile, Argentina, Brazil and Mexico have political structures closely modeled after the US constitution (though each is different). They also have similar guns per person. This reference class increases your base rate. Mexico, per capital, probably crosses the threshold (but has 1/3 America’s income and is a young democracy).

I still don’t see p>1%. But I didn’t do the math out.

Also, one of the shootings at CHOP/CHAZ in Seattle and one shooting in Portland were clear incidents of PV. The Rittenhouse incidents count. Two separate vehicular manslaughter incidents should be included. But they are such rare events and COVID has everyone on edge. No trend yet IMO.

Metaculus 2020 U.S. Election Risks Survey doesn't give >1% for >5000 deaths, but I think it is justified to infer something like that from it:

While large-scale violence and military intervention to quell civil unrest seem unlikely, experts still judged these possibilities to be far from remote. Experts predicted a median of 60 deaths occurring due to election-related violence, with an 80% confidence interval of 0 to 912 fatalities that reflects a high degree of uncertainty. Still, the real possibility of violence is a notable departure from the peaceful transitions that have been the hallmark of past U.S. elections. Results indicate an 8% probability of over 1,000 election-related deaths — suggesting that while widespread sustained clashes are unlikely, this possibility warrants real concern. Experts assigned a 10% median prediction that President Trump will invoke the Insurrection Act to mobilize troops during the transition period.