Is Britain on the Brink of Civil War? By Richard Miller (Londonistan)

By any conventional measure, Britain in 2025 is still a functioning liberal democracy, just. The lights are on, the courts are in session, and elections, however uninspiring, are still held. But beneath this veneer of normalcy, a dangerous undercurrent has taken root, one that threatens to tear the nation apart. According to Professor David Betz of King's College London, many of the classic preconditions for civil war already exist in Britain. He is not a populist firebrand or a conspiracy theorist, but a sober academic with expertise in modern warfare and insurgency. And his warning is stark: the United Kingdom is sleepwalking toward domestic conflict.

While the word "civil war" may sound extreme, Betz's argument is grounded in empirical research and historical precedent. The same toxic ingredients that once produced the breakdowns of Yugoslavia, Lebanon, and Ireland are now being mixed in Britain: elite overreach, collapsing trust, factional polarisation, deep economic inequality, and the perception that the native majority is being systematically disenfranchised in its own homeland. These are not the fringe complaints of a paranoid minority, they are measurable, visible, and increasingly explosive realities.

Britain's ruling class, spanning both Left and Right, has spent the past two decades redefining democracy as a process that happens to the public, not for it. The Brexit referendum was a watershed moment not simply because of the vote itself, but because of what followed: a relentless campaign by the political and media elite to frustrate, delay, or outright overturn a democratic decision. The eventual ratification of Brexit did not heal the wound, it deepened it, as the so-called "people's victory" was quickly hollowed out by continued mass immigration and the globalist policies of successive governments, including Boris Johnson's.

Public trust has collapsed as a result. According to the 41st British Social Attitudes Survey, levels of trust in government are now among the lowest ever recorded in 50 years. A record 45% say they "almost never" trust the government, while 79% believe the system of government needs significant improvement. As Professor Betz points out, trust is the social glue of any diverse society. Once it's gone, the only remaining force capable of holding society together is coercion.

A multicultural society with mutual respect and a shared sense of national identity can muddle through for a time before inevitable disintegration. But Britain today is not such a society. Instead, it is one riven by factionalism, mutual resentment, and competing claims on the national narrative. Professor Betz identifies a dangerous escalation: radical Islamist elements, increasingly emboldened, are entering what Maoist insurgency theory describes as phase two, organised violence and the development of a military infrastructure. Conversely, an increasingly aggrieved white nativist population is in phase one, disseminating propaganda, organising online, and forming a shared group consciousness based on exclusion from power and protection of heritage.

These groups are not fringe anymore. Muslim bloc voting, seen in the recent election of four independent MPs on a Palestine-first agenda, signals the rise of identity-based politics. Simultaneously, events like the Southport riots reveal that white working-class communities feel utterly abandoned, even antagonised, by a state that seems eager to bend over backwards for minority groups while treating the native population with suspicion and contempt.

The British state's two-tiered approach to policing has only deepened these divisions. Whether it's the contrast in the handling of BLM riots versus Cenotaph protectors, or the police's retreat in the face of Romani unrest compared to their aggressive stance against white protesters, the perception that law enforcement no longer applies its standards equally is now widespread and justified.

There is no polite way to say this: Britain's native, white population increasingly believes that it is being deliberately downgraded in its own country. And they are not imagining things. Affirmative action in the public sector, discriminatory hiring practices, and public declarations by institutions that "equality" does not mean treating people the same have made it abundantly clear: in pursuit of "racial equity," the native majority is being sacrificed on the altar of ideology.

Reports of the Royal Air Force and NHS discriminating against white applicants, and guidance from police leadership stating that "equality of outcomes" must trump equal treatment, are seen not as accidents or administrative errors, but as evidence of a systemic war on Britain's historic identity.

The cumulative message to the native population is this: your history is shameful, your traditions are exclusionary, your presence is problematic. That such a message could provoke a backlash should surprise no one.

Economic factors only compound this crisis. Britain is in the grip of long-term stagnation. Wages are flat, housing is scarce, and public services are overwhelmed, partly due to unchecked migration. Debt, both public and private, has soared. The young see no future, the old feel betrayed, and the middle is being squeezed until it snaps.

Add to this mix intercommunal street violence, Hindus vs Muslims in Leicester, Eritreans vs Ethiopians in London, and the state's inability or unwillingness to respond effectively, and the warning signs of systemic breakdown are all there. Betz's analogy to the Maoist insurgency model is not speculative, it is diagnostic.

Is civil war inevitable? Not necessarily. But Britain is now well within the zone of possibility. Civil wars in modern states do not begin with declarations or uniforms. They begin with sporadic violence, ethnic tension, and the fragmentation of trust in national institutions. That is precisely what we are seeing today.

And unlike historical civil wars, a modern British civil war will not be fought across geographic lines. It will be sporadic, asymmetric, ideological, and communal. It will look like Birmingham burning one week, and Southport erupting the next. It will be the slow bleed of order into chaos, culminating in martial law or societal collapse. By the time anyone dares call it a civil war, it will have long since begun.

Professor Betz's warning is not alarmist, it is urgent. A nation cannot survive indefinitely when its people are this divided, its elites this detached, and its institutions this compromised. If Britain is to avoid the final stage of this grim insurgency arc, it must radically reorient its priorities: end elite overreach, restore trust through transparency and equal justice, and reassert a national identity that unifies rather than divides.

The hour is late, but not beyond redemption. Civil war is not inevitable, but neither is peace. Britain's future, and the very survival of its liberal democracy, depends on what its leaders choose to do next. If they continue to ignore the gathering storm, history will record their dereliction not as negligence but as treason!

https://dailysceptic.org/2025/05/12/is-britain-on-the-brink-of-civil-war/

"According to David Betz, Professor of War in the Modern World at King's College London, many of the preconditions for civil war exist in Britain today. Using academic studies on social cohesion, civil war causation theory and social attitudes surveys, he argues that the following preconditions are in place: elite overreach, factional polarisation, a collapse in trust, economic pressures, and the perceived downgrading of the majority population in a previously homogeneous society, are all present in contemporary Britain.

The current dynamics, he continues, point to an emerging conflict between radicalised factions within the Muslim community and an incipient nativist white nationalism. Professor Betz goes on to claim – using the Maoist model that divides insurgencies into three phases – that the nativists are in phase one, the so-called defensive phase in which the group begins to organise, disseminate propaganda and build a conscious community of followers.

Islamists, on the other hand, are in phase two – when violent attacks occur on a semi-regular basis, a military structure is being developed, but they are not yet strong enough to challenge the state's monopoly on violence. (Professor Betz believes that, due to the absence of clear geographic divisions between the antagonists, Britain is unlikely to reach phase three – the offensive phase. This is when the insurgent groups are strong enough to challenge government forces.)

It is an arresting and troubling thesis. It is also convincing. The preconditions outlined above undeniably exist in modern Britain.

There has been a collapse of public trust in the state, for example. The 41st British Social Attitudes Survey (BSA) report, published on June 12th 2024, concluded "that people's trust in governments and politicians, and confidence in their systems of government, is as low now as it has ever been over the last 50 years, if not lower". Indeed, a record high of 45% "almost never" trust governments of any hue (22 points above the figure recorded in 2020); 58% (another record high) "almost never" trust politicians to tell the truth when they are in a tight corner, up 19 points on 2020; and a striking 79% of respondents said that the system of governing Britain could be improved "quite a lot" or a "great deal", matching a record high recorded during the parliamentary stalemate over Brexit in 2019 and up 18 points on 2020.

Professor John Curtice, the Senior Research Fellow at the National Centre for Social Research, the organisation that carried out the BSA survey, says: "The Government… will… need to address the concerns of a public that is as doubtful as it has ever been about the trustworthiness and efficacy of the country's system of government." As Professors Curtice and Betz warn, public trust in governments of all stripes has collapsed and, with it, trust in the system of government that we have traditionally sacralised and encouraged others to adopt. That this trend, if left unchecked, could potentially shatter an already fragile social contract is a statement of the obvious. Trust in the state unites the disparate groups of a multicultural society, acting as what Professor Betz calls a kind of "superglue". Without it, the groups fracture and retreat into silos characterised by mutual suspicion and animosity.

Although the BSA report does provide a chink of light, offering the possibility of a resurgence in trust – like the one seen in 2020 after the parliamentary shenanigans over Brexit were finally put to bed by Boris Johnson's election victory – the signs are inauspicious. The post-Johnson resurgence was short-lived, eroded by more 'elite overreach' as he turbocharged immigration against the wishes of the electorate. What became known as the 'Boris-wave' was the final act of betrayal for a downtrodden populus reeling from a decade of broken promises.

Indeed, public trust has been eroded by elite arrogance – and such arrogance shows little sign of abating. Political elites are not only forcing mass immigration on a reluctant population; they are now actively discriminating against the white majority. The recruitment practices of our public services are a case in point. In the summer of 2023, a report found that the Royal Air Force was unlawfully discriminating against white men in a campaign aimed at boosting diversity; West Yorkshire Police recently placed a temporary block on hiring white British candidates for the same reason. In addition, a recent article in the Telegraph revealed that NHS trusts discriminate against white applicants by manipulating interview shortlists to favour ethnic minorities. Our irreproachable health service encourages what is known as the 'Rooney Rule' – a policy originating in American football that makes it mandatory for ethnic minorities to be shortlisted for interviews if they apply.

Furthermore, the toxic spectacle of two-tier policing is obvious to all but the most dyed-in-the-wool progressives. The contrast between the police's uncompromising response to the white Southport rioters – in which they rightly used batons and shields against the aggressors – and their pusillanimous reaction to the Harehills Romani rioters – in which they ran away despite a bus being set on fire – was starkly demonstrative of a system that no longer treats its citizens as equal in the eyes of the law. Sir Keir Starmer took the knee in the wake of the violent Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests; he pressured judges to hand down custodial sentences to mothers who posted injudicious tweets during the Southport disturbances.

Guidance issued by the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) and the College of Policing shamelessly highlights the current two-tier approach. It says there should be "equality of policing outcomes", meaning to ensure "racial equity" not everyone should be treated the same. Apparently, policing should not be "colour blind". The justification for anti-white racism is therefore spelt out in black and white – excuse the pun. No wonder the police attack white football fans trying to protect the Cenotaph whilst appeasing the Islamo-fascists who wish to deface it. No wonder they tolerate marauding Muslim gangs in Birmingham while deploying armoured battalions to deal with their white counterparts.

The white, native population is in the midst of an elite driven programme to downgrade their status in the United Kingdom – a phenomenon that Professor Betz cites as a precondition for civil war. That it could lead to a backlash by those being downgraded is self-evident.

Britain is already facing factional polarisation within some of its communities. Last year, four independent MPs were elected because of a religiously-inspired preoccupation with the Israel-Hamas war. Moreover, according to government figures, the UK has approximately 40,000 Islamists on the terror watchlist. Inter-communal violence has also been playing out on the streets of Birmingham between Hindus and Muslims, as well as on the streets of London between Eritreans and Ethiopians. If you add economic pressures into the mix – economic stagnation since 2008, an acute housing shortage, historically high taxation, private and public indebtedness and broken public services – and a resentful white majority (Southport witnessed the incipient convulsions of a native population that clearly feels besieged), a heady, explosive cocktail threatens to ignite the country.

Professor Betz is right. The preconditions for civil war do exist. Years of elite overreach have led to resentment and an alarming collapse of trust in our politicians, institutions, and political system, in addition to the increased polarisation of our ever-growing migrant communities – communities that find themselves, along with the native majority, in the eye of an approaching storm. Our elites must wake up before it's too late!