I'm more curious which way he thinks the revolution will go. Because it's either going to be communists or the alt-right that start, but they won't be the ones to finish it.
You are assuming the military will be on the side of the existing government. There is some little truth to what @guest said. Many pre-revolution indicators exist. The hoarding of wealth by a small elite, the disappearing middle class, all we need is for the poor to not be able to feed themselves and they will turn rabid. What political moment they revolt under will be irrelevant, they won’t truly care. Welfare for the lazy seems objectionable until you realize it’s an way to maintain your own wealth because no one is going to come take it from you.
If the threat of force is the only reason to give something to somebody else, it's a sign that you should consider utilizing force yourself.
And on top of that, you're blowing it way out of proportion. The "small elite" are doing what they always do, the shrinking middle class is attributable to more people breaking into the upper class, and the poor mostly still have smartphones and wifi, so a ways off from mass starvation in the streets. Nevermind that the poor and dissatisfied are outnumbered anyways.
Who knows the future? But if we look at the past, if we look at the present- look at societies where revolution and terrorism occur on any scale- we can see certain common factors. As famousone says- to have a revolution you need to have enough people willing to die for something. When people feel they have a voice, an outlet for their anger, when people have comforts and distractions, when they have something to lose they feel is a greater wager than what they might gain- they are complacent.
General conditions during the American Revolution sucked. Even if you were rich life kinda sucked. What’s more life was slow. You didn’t have the ability to silence your mind save for being drunk. In modern society we have video games and tv shows and all manner of distractions we use to take a vacation from our own existence. We can tune out and turn off our engagement to things and be happy and comfortable in our artificial realities or distractions. We don’t have to live in the real world or face real people.
The wealthy have always had more, likely will for the conceivable future- and they also have the means to get and keep their bubble of privilege. The average person who is unhappy in many ways but largely comfortable and largely secure is complacent. Most are or feel like they are barely holding on to what they have. Their priority in life isn’t to launch a costly crusade that even if successful will see them suffer personal loss when they already feel they barely have enough. It’s to maintain and build on what they have. To get a single person to see beyond immediate self interest and sacrifice that for any greater goal is tough- to get a sizable populace to unite and do so is truly tricky.
When people feel that what they have is worth risking for more, that there are no ways for them to better their circumstances asides violence- then they revolt. But by and large even someone renting a place to live with their family, working hard and owning multiple cars and big TVs and putting full meals on the table and squabbling over who gets to use what bathroom or how many people showed up to a presidential speech and how popular or rich the president are- these people aren’t likely to revolt. They can’t see that far ahead. They are content enough that their discontent isn’t worth endangering what they have.
You know how you can tell I’m right? How many people who talk of such things actually act on them in any tangible way beyond maybe stockpiling some surplus ammo? How many of those people who do take any “revolutionary” action act in a way that amounts to anything more than a violent and small scale tantrum or isolated domestic terror incident? How many people revise themselves from society and go live “off the grid” in a self sustaining compound with like minded individuals?
Waco, the Amish or quakers, the Mormons, maybe those guys in Oregon or for a minute the occupy guys?-they did these things to some degree. They said “fuck your system, we will get our own...” with varying results and outcomes of course. But how many others? Why? Because talk is cheap. Everyone is so fed up and riled up but not enough to do anything. Not enough to risk arrest or siege. Not enough to do without superbowls and chain stores and new cars and comfy mattresses and steady paychecks and all the comforts of society. Not enough to give up what they have or take that risk.
In some ways revolution is always inevitable. If we draw a line to infinity in time there is a significant statistical chance at least one revolution will occurs somewhere on that line. Are we staring down an American Revolution? Doubtful anytime soon. Or at least doubtful it will be a class revolution and not some violent clash of political or social ideology spurned by impatience or a refusal to submit to democratic order. More a coupe perhaps to install a mono thought dictatorship.
Because as much as some people bitch and moan- the people who tend to be most vocal about how bad they have things or how bad things are tend to be the people who are doing just fine. Not complaints the people starve- no “let them eat cake.” The people have cake and are pisses about the flavor or want ice cream to go with it. Very few of the most ignorant or stubborn humans would turn down a dinner with their favorite celebrity simply because their favorite dish isn’t on the menu, and even fewer would go on a revolutionary campaign over it.
And on top of that, you're blowing it way out of proportion. The "small elite" are doing what they always do, the shrinking middle class is attributable to more people breaking into the upper class, and the poor mostly still have smartphones and wifi, so a ways off from mass starvation in the streets. Nevermind that the poor and dissatisfied are outnumbered anyways.