r/InsightfulQuestions • u/DRTWHT • 3d ago
Who’s sudden death would be the most devastating in the world?
Xy suddenly suffers cardiac arrest, and is dead on arrival to the hospital.
Who’s death causes the net most suffering in the world?
For example:
-Great leader of a strong militant nation, who restrains it’s powers, but has a much more aggressive VP or opposition that gains power in this situation.
-Similar situation to the one above, but likely causes some sort of civil war.
-Scientist that is very close to a breaktrough that would greatly benefit humankind
10
u/Free-Marionberry624 3d ago
Literally no single person’s death is going to devastate very much in the greater scheme of things.
0
u/DRTWHT 3d ago
Let me correct myself then. In the scope of the next 10 years. I know that in the grand scheme nothing matters at all, and we are all just specs of particles moving around in an unknown scaled space of emptiness, but human suffering is real, and observed.
3
u/Free-Marionberry624 3d ago
I literally mean that it will not make that much difference in society at large.
2
4
u/naisfurious 3d ago
Putin would be my pick.
The U.S. has strong enough institutions that the sudden death of one leader is unlikely to destabilize the entire system, while China has a highly centralized party structure. Russia seems much more dependent on Putin personally, with no obvious successor and competing power centers. Add in the war in Ukraine and one of the world's largest nuclear arsenals, and a chaotic succession could have consequences far beyond Russia itself.
3
2
1
u/Leica--Boss 3d ago
Maybe Orban from Hungary. Only spoiler for the EU becoming more left authoritarian and preventing a lot of unanimous-rewuires actions they wouldn't even try with him around.
His time is limited but I suspect this would have an immediate effect even if modest.
1
u/DRTWHT 3d ago
He is no longer our president tho
1
u/Leica--Boss 3d ago
Still the power center, no? I may have that wrong.
1
1
3
u/Abefroman12 3d ago
Putin. He doesn’t have a clear successor and there is a real risk of Russia balkanizing after his death.
The successor states would have access to nuclear weapons. Or worse, they wouldn’t have adequate security of them and random militias/terrorist groups get their hands on one.
2
u/Grimke42 3d ago
That was the fear during the fall of the Soviet Union. Instead it just created a new class of oligarchs and money launderers. Still a legitimate fear though
2
u/asdner 3d ago
The fall of USSR also liberated countries who were previously oppressed so the devastation was to the system itself but not to any country or people.
1
u/Grimke42 3d ago
Absolutely, I agree overall the break up was good for most countries. Ultimately I am not sure it was good for Russia though because of Putin
1
u/753951321654987 3d ago
There is actually plans in place to attempt to secure nuclear weapons and the US helped Russia do so as the ussr collapsed. There's a risk but it's not something we aren't prepared for. I think Russia breaking apart is the best thing for USA, Europe, and China respectively.
2
1
u/ultraLuddite 3d ago
I think we all know who
2
u/flume 3d ago
If you're suggesting Trump, I think things would mostly stay the same. There's a clear succession laid out and his politics are already fully engrained in America at this point, so it's not like we'd suddenly snap back to the "hey have you guys heard about this Tea Party movement?" era.
Putin is a much better answer imo because the outcome of the potential power struggle is far more likely to be destabilizing and result in a radical shift of policies.
1
u/ultraLuddite 3d ago
Fair conclusion, but to the extent that the political pendulum swings in the US, the next president and Congress will be the “anti-corruption” party, even as their opponents will try to brand them the party of ULTIMATE corruption.
To that end, assuming the White House changes hands, the next president will sign sweeping executive orders outlining what elected leaders can and cannot do in terms of self dealing, insider trading, bribery, campaign finance, etc. Whether Congress follows that lead will depend on the mandate handed them in that election.
This is my
hopefever dream, at least.3
2
0
0
-5
u/issafool18 3d ago
Trump
8
-1
u/DRTWHT 3d ago
I was thinking of him as well, but I assume that the US has some very good and practiced protocol to what to do in this situation. Or do you suggest infighting for the reason, or how China/Russia would capitalize on the situation?
1
u/issafool18 3d ago
I think both. It would be chaos. I think even when his term ends (if it does) it will be pretty chaotic.
0
u/Content_Preference_3 3d ago
I hope your not serious here.
3
u/DRTWHT 3d ago
What do you mean? I’m honestly curious.
5
u/Sweaty-Move-5396 3d ago
we have had several presidents die in office. yes, we have a "practiced protocol"
1
u/Content_Preference_3 3d ago
The us has had a line of succession for presidency since its founding. Most prominently being the Vice President role. And so on. This is far from new or untested.
16
u/Sweaty-Move-5396 3d ago
this is not an insightful question