Where would you move to ride out a potential WWIII?

  • Marte@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 days ago

    Everyone saying Latin America has absolutely no clue about what Latin America is, lol. The only place safe from fascism rn is either another planet or being dead.

    • TWB0109@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      As a Costa Rican, I agree. Hell, we even have one of trumps deportation (concentration) camps over here

        • Marte@lemmy.eco.br
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          No. Moving elsewhere is a high emotional and financial cost that I will avoid until it is not possible to avoid anymore (also, where in the world is safe of fascism rn?)

  • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    Vietnam. Decent enough government and standard of living, and they whooped America’s ass so bad that it’d be political suicide to go back there. I mean, what kind of timeline would we have to be on for someone to be stupid enough to… hmm.

    Considering that fucking Greenland is caught up in it now, idk that anywhere is safe.

  • lorty@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    2 days ago

    While Latin America is, overall, a good choice, it’s important to recognize that the mask off fascism we are seeing from the US will only increase the meddling they already do on their “backyard”, so keep that in mind.

    • The@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Was gonna say that.

      It was pretty safe in the last two world wars.

      • lorty@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        If you weren’t living under one of the US sponsored dictatorships, sure.

          • lorty@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            Costa Rica, Panama, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Venezuela, Peru, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay and Brazil and probably more I’ve failed to remember.

              • lorty@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                2 days ago

                I suppose if your only concern is whether a bomb is going to drop on you, you are correct. But maybe you should consider if being kidnapped, tortured and killed without your family ever knowing what actually happened to you is “safe”

  • whelk@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Why should I leave? They’re the ones who suck. I’m not giving any ground

  • Hanrahan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Chatham Islands ?

    I chose Tasmania, am here now… I dont think anywhere is but i am hoping it’s lesser and i am not the literal tip of the spear.

    Albiet the poulation is older, white, conservative, religious so there is that problem.

  • 𒉀TheGuyTM3𒉁@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    Marquesas islands. They are very large, no dangers, lot of hideouts, lot of food resources, innaccessible for wheel vehicles, almost impossible to build large bases and to urbanise (small interest for China), they are isolated from other archipelagos, and the islands have not even 10k inhabitants in total (14 islands) so no one would get interest in nuking here.

  • PopeyesBiscuit@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Think my home country Suriname is pretty safe. Almost no one knows it exists and there’s plenty of places to ride out instability

        • Wanpieserino@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          You cannot be a refugee there, you need a job.

          EU has 10% immigrants. China has 0,1% immigrants.

          1,3 million Syrians took refuge in the EU while barely any could go to china.

          China isn’t poor, they are unwilling.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Europeans have actively worked to destroy Syria and other countries along with the US, that’s why people are fleeing countries like Syria. Seems appropriate that Europe would be taking refugees from countries Europe helped destroy.

            • Wanpieserino@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              2 days ago

              Say something bad about china :)

              Europe lacks independence. There’s far right movements, infiltrated by foreign interest. There’s racism here.

              USA is going totalitarian.

              Now, say something bad about china :) you might get banned though by your homies

                • Wanpieserino@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I’ll do it for you.

                  China censors the shit out of their population. And if you want to be part of the 0,1% immigrants in china, you cannot afford to criticise a government of 1,4 billion people.

                  Because you are nothing compared to the government.

                  Go to china, so that I can’t read your comments anymore because of the great firewall.

  • edel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    If we take its actual definition; far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist, countries like Cuba for sure fits the bill. Now Cuba is authoritarian (and normal since they are in permanent and genuine threat from its neighbor) and probably that is not what is in your mind. Latin America is, as many as you pointed out, no ideal… but most countries there at least lacks of a strong government to enforce things (for better or worse) so, in a turbulent world, it is indeed a better bet. I think, for the time being, Spain has proven to be resilient to authoritarianism and even the voters of “extreme” parties are not that extreme themselves! In Latin America, Mexico is proven to have an amazing leadership (today, I consider it the best worldwide) so unlikely to change overnight. Colombia, Chile and Uruguay seems promising too.

    • Marte@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      See, when we analyze Latin America countries, one cannot think exclusively in terms of US or Europe political science. Our states may seem like weak forces when scrutinized from afar, however this is exactly the problem. Fascism has different ways of spreading through institutions and evangelical militias or drug cartels are literally everywhere. Sometimes, our states do not enforce fascism by law. They are weak on surface and extremely dangerous in their militias and affiliations with drug cartels. The contradiction is the rule around here. Mexico is not the heaven you make it sound. Do not trust a country’s safety based on official governments, it is a starter error when analyzing Latin America politics

      • Marte@lemmy.eco.br
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        A concerning example regarding what I’m saying is the fact that over Rio de Janeiro there are drug cartels which distribute cocaine packed in Israel’s flag. I wish I was kidding.

        Is it because they’re Jewish? They support Palestine’s genocide? No, they’re Christian Neopentecostal Evangelicals who apply their (unofficial but VERY real) rules based on the Bible and make money over cocaine cartels. Israel’s flag is a way of showing they are God’s chosen and the true governors of Rio de Janeiro.

        This is only a superficial example.

        • edel@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Thanks for the article! Yes, South America is not free from this. One thing I have learned in my life is that how similar people we are everywhere… only circumstances make us seem different. Long gone are my admiration for Scandinavians! What most South America seems however (specially if a sizeable country), is distant enough from China, US and Russia to be easily dragged along in a conflict… and also their governments are weak enough to implement a global draft for instance.

      • edel@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I hear you! That is why I wanted to go with the definition of Fascism, but you are right. Let me rephrase it; If the world continues the path it is going, countries like Mexico seems to be a great bet to move in if you come with some good financial resources since you can compliment’s government security with private methods ones (like a gated community). Mexico will likely be neutral in a global conflict. Likewise, Spain seems good because I don’t see Spaniards been dragged by Brussels into any global conflict and if their American bases there get attacked, I see most people just ask to withdraw from NATO before entering in conflict themselves. Morocco, in spite I despise what they do to West Sahara’s (in tents for 40 years) and its coziness with Israel, it is quite stable too… If Morocco leadership (and Spanish!) could only see how greatly they could benefit from the current situation if they both acted like Mexico… being neutral and be a beacon for skilled/affluent migrants and investment!

  • TheFudd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    I’m one of the lucky ones! Because of my service to our great country fighting against those dirty communists, when the bombs fall my family and I will be safe and sound, underground, in one of the local vaults in our area: Vault 108!

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Where would you move to ride out a potential WWIII?

    Australia. There really is no better place in the event of nuclear war. It’s a continent-island, meaning easy to defend, it grows and can build just about anything, and being in the southern hemisphere it should be safe from nuclear winter.

    Specifically, a rural property somewhere agricultural. Maybe Queensland or Tasmania.

    If you could move anywhere to minimize the impact on you of the worldwide rise of fascism…

    That’s almost a different question, though. Whichever European country is the most securely democratic. There’s lots of non-war ways fascism can suck aggressively.

    • Dalek Thal@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      Australian here, we’re in the shit. A good chunk of our rural voters support the LNP (who are doing everything they can to copy Trump). Universal healthcare has been slashed down to an inch of its life, and employment prospects are terrible for most everyone under 50.

      If you’re looking to escape the rise of facism, don’t. Come. Here. We’re lockstepping with the US and unless our upcoming election goes beautifully, we’ll get even worse.

    • cute_noker@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      Peter Thiel has new Zealand citizenship, so you should be safe there. He would never allow his bunker to get jeopardized

    • Anna@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yeah it might be safe from nuclear winter but it is Australia it already has 10billion other things that can easily kill you.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        That feeling when you survive the apocalypse only to get stung by a platypus and regret that you survived.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            That show would have been way darker if Perry had ever employed the fact he’s a venomous mammal.

            Actually, it was a missed opportunity not to go with a female Perry and have an egg-hatching subplot. Their version of the platypus really didn’t do much.

    • Person264@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      South America is a better place to go in a nuclear war, Australia is in NATO along with NZ, so it’s a target. Can’t really think of any particular targets in South America.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        They are not in NATO, actually. That requires proximity to the Atlantic. They’re Western though, that’s true. Being in a city could be a bit of a risk.

        In South America or southern Africa you’re going to deal with waves of people trying to expand in from the north. No way of life escapes that unscathed. Not to mention, the projections for food scarcity on other continents aren’t nearly as rosy, if there’s soot in the upper atmosphere, maybe because of the higher population to start with.

        And then there’s poverty as a whole separate dimension of things. Here or in Australia I’m pretty sure the capacity to build things like generators will continue. In the third world there’s absolutely no guarantee.

    • lorty@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I would expect Australia to be important in a conflict with China, so unless you expect it not to happen, it really isn’t that great.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’d expect them to stay out of it at this point, actually. They want to expand into the pacific, and the US and East Asian democracies want to stop them. Meanwhile, Australia also has affinities with now-distinct Europe, isn’t directly in the way of any of that, and depends heavily on China for trade.

        And, even if it did become involved, dealing with a Chinese occupation isn’t going to be as hard as a nuclear winter or the total breakdown of modern civilisation.

  • boydster@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    4 days ago

    My crazy mom says she’s looking to move to Uruguay because when the nukes start falling they will most likely not have a ton of fallout to deal with.

    I’m gonna run toward the light in that kind of scenario, personally. Nature will rebuild. In a WWIII scenario, the winner is evolution. Life will, uh, find its way.

    • lemmy689@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      It’s five and I’m driving home again

      It’s hard to believe that it’s my last time

      The man on the wireless cries again

      “It’s over, it’s over”

      It’s late and I’m with my love alone

      We drink to forget the coming storm

      We love to the sound of our favorite song

      Over and over

      Dancing, with tears in my eyes

      Weeping for the memory of a life gone by

      Dancing, with tears in my eyes

      Living out a memory of a love that died

    • kibiz0r@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 days ago

      Behind the Bastards had a Christmas special non-bastard episode on the Tupamaros of Uruguay and Pepe Mujica. It does seem like they have some decent politics there.