The possibility - some might say near-certainty - of a 40-50% drop at some point is why few people have the stomach for a 100% equity portfolio.
Can you meet current cash obligations? Can you do so for the forseable future? You have little to worry about.
If you cannot, then look to reduce expenses, increase income, take on debt, or liquidate securities as a last measure to do so.
Investing is like navigating an oil tanker. Responses to inputs are slow, the planning horizon is distant, but mistakes can still be exceedingly catastrophic. Usually you don't want to make sudden movements. Occasionally your hand is forced. You goal first and foremost is to avoid those circumstances.
Look at your asset distribution. Most people should not be 100% in on equities, though the number who are is ... surprisingly high. Many are stubbornly resistant to suggestions to change this distribution, even at points in their investment career where they really should be reducing risks.
One of the classic problems in investing generally is that a sufficiently large market drop can take out otherwise solid investments, as those who'd either leveraged positions elsewhere or rely on balance sheets for other investments find that they are short on cash. If what you need is cash, then what you sell is everything, no matter how low the price. John Kenneth Galbraith's The Great Crash: 1929 covers this and numerous other elements of financial crises in clear and piercing detail. The book is a short and excellent read.
Another element of investing is that the well-capitalised, reasonably-hedged invstor tends to have a greater capacity to weather volatile markets than smaller investors. This tends to result in a transfer of wealth from less to more wealthy, which can ultimately be problematic.
And, especially if you're early in your career, though I'd argue this applies at all ages, look to pensions reform. The notion that individuals presuming market knowledge and absorbing both independent and long-term secular risk is the most sensible way to provide for old-age support is proving to be desperately false, and will be among the largest crises many developed countries face in the next 50 years, with many seeing serious strains now. Corporate pensions made sense in an era of lifetime employment. That world no longer exists. But a new set of institutions which takes on and manages that risk is necessary. This will be a major political battle, and many will suffer tremendously.
If yes then no reason to sell. Timing the market, selling now, hoping to buy at the bottom is never something that works. That huge profit margin in hindsight is such a lottery in practice. Though buying during the dip can be quite beneficial.
If no to the above question, you expect your country to be a shitshow. What are you doing staying? Stock market isnt the question, why would you stay if you expect problems? Go find a better place to live. Your stocks aren't a primary concern.