Gambling on War
An insider made hundreds of thousands betting just before Maduro was kidnapped. This kind of behavior is becoming normalized.
As I write this, one of the topmost bets on Polymarket’s home page is the question: “US forces invade Iran by…?” and the options of March 14 and March 31. Scroll down a bit and another popular bet is ongoing: “Will the US acquire part of Greenland in 2026?” (odds are down to 16%). Others on the page include “Russia x Ukraine ceasefire by end of 2026?”, “US anti-cartel ground operation in Mexico by March 31?” and, simply, “Next country US strikes—Somalia or Syria?”
Alongside the outcomes of sports games, the Academy Awards, and how well Bitcoin is doing, betting platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi routinely feature bets on how world conflicts will resolve, or whether new ones will emerge, often within a certain timeframe. As these gambling platforms have exploded in popularity in recent years, the apparent hunger for things to bet on appears to be so insatiable that there now exists a thriving cottage industry of influencers tracking foreign policy, distant wars, and other horrific aspects of geopolitics to help people place their bets smartly. On Kalshi, you could bet on whether the mass starvation in Gaza would be characterized as a famine. According to Polymarket, Cuba is due for a US strike sooner than later, and many thousands are waiting for the blood to be spilled so they can collect.
Beyond the feeling that all this is macabre and even immoral, though, there are even deeper concerns regarding what all this means for how foreign policy actually operates today, and how any citizenry, but particularly that of the United States, is able to conceptualize what is happening when they financialize everything, even the tides of war. …
Continue reading this article by Jake Pitre, “Gambling on War,” here: https://www.liberalcurrents.com/gambling-on-war/