I would argue the problem isn't even jobs even if that's a symptom. The problem is power. If you for example get a Ph.D. in poli-sci, IR, or economics you will expect to be compensated for your position in accordance with your degree.
The thing is, since we still nominally live in democratic countries, there aren't enough people with those qualifications to matter all that much politically. PhDs are still a very small minority in the population as a whole, they're just more common than they used to be and aren't all going to find employment in academia or research.
However, a lot of people, especially in the humanities and social sciences, aren't necessarily getting PhDs because they expect to be rewarded with wealth or power. They're doing it because they have the luxury of being able to do so, because they enjoy and value the experience of higher education and/or because they have some topic they're passionate about and want to research. The "power" associated with having a PhD was always mostly tied up in the ability to participate in the knowledge economy, not to get a job in government.
Any meaningful revolution requires a mass movement. It's not going to happen because a few very overeducated people end up in jobs they're a bit overqualified for. Revolutions happen when the great mass of undereducated and politically disengaged people on the bottom of society find themselves suffering, and start looking for explanations as to why. The problem is that those people can't always accurately diagnose what the problem is, and are easily duped or mislead by bad actors.
A lot of elite and educated people ended up buying into fascism and still do today, but mostly because they
are bad actors who see themselves as the beneficiaries of the deception. For most of them, it won't turn out to be true, but by then it will be too late.
The left isn't winning any civil war unless the military is on our side, and yet they have analogized the military with defense cuts.
The idea of a civil war is, to put it bluntly, extremely silly.
The country isn't going to neatly divide itself down the middle, line up in firing lines like a 19th century battle and shoot each other, and if they do it will probably be because the far right has siezed control of a bunch of state legislatures and tries to secede so they can create some weird theocratic ethnostate, in which case most of the army probably won't side with them.
What you are far more likely to end up with is mass activism and civil unrest, riots, street fighting and, above all, populist political candidates. This is already happening in the US. Bernie Sanders is the fourth the most popular politician in the country by approval rating despite being a self-described democratic socialist. We had massive nationwide protests around police brutality. Conversely, the far right has become the mainstream in the Republican party. Donald Trump was president despite being affiliated with a bunch of fascists and far right crazies who previously wouldn't have had a chance in politics. Even Obama, despite being a mediocre war criminal, was elected on a populist campaign that emphasized the need for change. The democratic party may be a bunch of neoliberal dweebs, but they can see where the wind is blowing and they will be pulled to the left if they see the political merit in it.
An age of mass politics is not a bad thing. It has enormous dangers, but considering the existing "moderate" course of action will lead to the effective enslavement of most of humanity and catastrophic, permanent damage to the biosphere of the planet, we need mass politics more than ever, and the fact that more people than ever are educated to a high standard means that we have a unique opportunity to build an educated mass movement without the need for mediation by political elites.
