A year after the January 6th insurrection, the specter of catastrophic political violence looms over the United States. Headlines foretell a second civil war, conjuring images of the 1860s, while experts and commentators warn of a country on the brink. “The unimaginable has become reality,” one alarmist argument declared, “[T]he United States might be on the verge of [a civil] war today.”
This growing fixation on the potential for civil war is troubling. It risks framing an urgent issue in a sensationalist and ultimately counterproductive way. Instead of asking whether America faces a new civil war, we should be asking: What are the real risks of political violence? What forms might that violence take? Who will perpetrate it, and who will be most affected? Shifting the focus from hypothetical civil war to the realities of political violence helps clarify the challenges ahead, allowing us to work more effectively with communities already fighting illiberal violence and protecting its likely victims.
Defining Civil War and Its Limits
Civil wars, as defined by scholars, are distinct from other forms of political violence. They involve large-scale, organized conflicts within a country between the ruling government and politically motivated armed groups, with sustained violence and significant casualties. Civil wars are not unilateral campaigns of repression, targeted terrorism, or hate-fueled violence against specific communities. Instead, they represent contests for control over a nation’s government or territory.
Barbara Walter, a prominent civil war scholar, has warned that if civil war comes to the United States, it would not resemble the country’s bloody 19th-century conflict but might look more like Northern Ireland’s Troubles or Italy’s Years of Lead—decentralized, marked by guerrilla warfare and terrorism, rather than pitched battles. Walter’s aim is not to sow fear but to caution against complacency, emphasizing the dangers of political destabilization and violence in the absence of a traditional civil war.
The Current Reality: Political Violence in America
Focusing on the binary question of whether a civil war is imminent obscures a more pressing reality: political violence in the U.S. is already rising. Unlike the dramatic shifts implied by civil war rhetoric, this violence is often subtler, normalized over years, and unevenly distributed across society.
America has a long history of political violence, from the 1898 Wilmington Coup and the Tulsa Massacre to the Oklahoma City Bombing and lynchings of the civil rights era. Today, these patterns persist in new forms. Over the past six years, mosques, synagogues, Black churches, abortion clinics, and government buildings have been bombed, burned, or threatened. Hate crimes against Black and Asian Americans are at their highest levels in more than a decade. The number of domestic terrorist attacks and plots reached a record high in 2020, with far-right extremists responsible for most incidents.
White supremacist militias, right-wing extremists, and other violent actors are identified as the most significant domestic terrorism threats by researchers and U.S. officials alike. These trends suggest that political violence is increasing and, more importantly, that it is already targeting marginalized communities. This violence can remain pervasive for decades without meeting the technical definition of civil war—yet it remains a critical challenge that demands urgent attention.
The Dangers of Civil War Rhetoric
Fixating on the idea of civil war risks oversimplifying the broader problem of political violence. By framing the debate around an “all or nothing” scenario, commentators overlook the incremental but deeply damaging forms of violence that often precede larger conflicts. Worse, civil war rhetoric can create self-fulfilling prophecies. Research shows that exaggerated fears of violence can increase support for violent strategies. If people believe their political opponents are actively seeking civil war, they may justify or embrace violence themselves.
This fear-driven narrative not only misdirects public focus but also obscures pathways for addressing political violence. America has faced similar crises in the past and has often found ways to de-escalate tensions. Transitioning out of these moments required deliberate choices by individuals and institutions to resist violence and foster stability.
A Precise and Proactive Approach
The United States is at its most precarious democratic moment in a century, but addressing political violence requires clarity and precision, not sensationalism. The real question is not whether America is on the brink of civil war but rather: Who is at risk of violence, what forms might it take, and who will perpetrate it?
Recognizing the connections between today’s violence and America’s historical patterns is crucial. These echoes from the past remind us that, just as violence is not inevitable, neither is its escalation. Scholars, policymakers, and citizens must focus on preventing the normalization of violence, protecting vulnerable communities, and fostering democratic resilience.
Ultimately, the stakes are too high to reduce this urgent issue to speculative headlines. Instead, we must confront the challenges of political violence head-on—with clear-eyed determination and a commitment to preserving democracy for all.
