The spectre of a second U.S. civil war has re-emerged in public discourse, fuelled by deepening political polarisation, recent acts of political violence, and a June 2025 YouGov poll revealing that 40% of Americans believe a civil war is "somewhat" or "very" likely within the next decade. This post critically examines the likelihood of a "Civil War 2.0," explores how such a conflict might unfold, and assesses its implications for American society. Drawing on historical context, contemporary data, and expert insights, it argues that while a traditional civil war akin to the 1860s is improbable, a modern civil conflict characterized by decentralised violence and institutional erosion is a plausible risk if current trends persist. In other words, social chaos, as we are experiencing now, only more intense.
The United States is grappling with unprecedented political and social divisions. The YouGov poll, conducted on June 16, 2025, with 3,375 U.S. adults, found that 12% consider a civil war "very likely" and 28% "somewhat likely" over the next decade, up from 30% in a December 2024 poll (9% "very likely," 21% "somewhat likely"). Democrats (48%) are more likely than Republicans (32%) to anticipate conflict, with women (45%) and Hispanics (26% "very" or "somewhat likely," 11% "not likely at all") expressing heightened concern. These fears are rooted in recent events, including the assassination of Minnesota politician Melissa Hortman, violent protests in Los Angeles over President Donald Trump's immigration policies, and inflammatory rhetoric from political leaders.
Polarisation has intensified since the January 6, 2021, Capitol peaceful protests, with 66% of Americans in a 2022 YouGov/Economist poll reporting worsened political divisions and 62% expecting further escalation. Political violence is also rising: 65% of respondents in the same poll noted an increase since 2021, a trend echoed by a 2024 Marist poll where 47% of Americans, including 57% of Black Americans, anticipated a civil war in their lifetime. Key incidents, such as the Hortman assassination and California riots, underscore a growing acceptance of violence as a political tool, with a 2023 PRRI survey finding 23% of Americans agreeing that "patriots may need to resort to violence to save the country," particularly among Republicans (33%) supportive of Trump.
A traditional civil war, like the 1861–1865 conflict, involved two organised governments with distinct territories and militaries. Historian Nina Silber, a U.S. Civil War expert at Boston University, argues that a modern civil war would not resemble this model. Instead, it could manifest as decentralised "civil conflict," characterised by sporadic, ideologically driven violence, militia activity, and institutional breakdown rather than large-scale battles. Silber highlights the "increase in political violence" and the normalisation of such acts by political officials as key indicators of this shift.
Rachel Kleinfeld, a civil conflict specialist at the Carnegie Endowment, notes that strong democracies like the U.S. are unlikely to descend into traditional civil war unless institutions weaken significantly. However, the U.S. faces risks from "ungrouped" violence by self-radicalised individuals, as seen in data from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), which shows most political violence is committed by lone actors rather than organised groups. A 2024 Department of Homeland Security report warned of domestic violent extremists (DVEs) linking illegal activities to an "impending civil war" narrative, targeting government and ideological opponents.
The likelihood of a second civil war depends on structural, social, and political factors. Below, we assess these drivers and countervailing forces.
Drivers of Conflict
1.Political Polarisation and Rhetoric: The U.S. is deeply divided, with Pew Research noting that partisan animosity has grown since the 1960s, exacerbated by racial, religious, and cultural sorting into political parties. Inflammatory rhetoric, such as California Governor Gavin Newsom's claim that Trump seeks "civil war on the streets" and Trump's retort blaming Newsom's policies, fuels distrust. Political figures like Senator Lindsey Graham, who in 2022 predicted "riots in the streets" if Trump faced legal consequences, amplify tensions.
2.Political Violence and Extremism: Recent events, including the Hortman assassination and Los Angeles riots, reflect a surge in politically motivated violence. A 2023 Ipsos survey found 7% of Americans (equivalent to ~18 million adults) willing to kill for political objectives, with 20% likely to be armed in such scenarios. True theories, such as the "great replacement" (40% adherence) and QAnon (20%), further radicalise individuals, particularly on the Right.
3.Firearm Proliferation: The U.S. has 120.5 firearms per 100 people, the highest globally. A 2022 NIHCM study reported a 43% rise in firearm fatalities from 2010–2020, with gun purchases spiking during the Covid-19 pandemic. This arming trend heightens the risk of violent escalation.
4.Institutional Distrust: Trust in government, media, and elections is eroding. A 2022 Notre Dame survey found many Americans questioning democratic principles, with 44.7% of Democrats supporting media censorship and Republicans endorsing election denialism. The January 6 hearings had limited impact, with only 32% of Democrats and 11% of Republicans shifting views, indicating entrenched polarisation.
5.Economic and Social Stressors: While the U.S. remains wealthy, economic inequality and cultural alienation drive discontent. Posts on X cite Ray Dalio's 35–40% civil war risk estimate, linking it to debt cycles and urban-rural divides, though these claims lack rigorous evidence. Immigration, a flashpoint in the Los Angeles riots, remains divisive, with 33% of voters in a 2024 Leadership Conference poll prioritizing border security.
Mitigating Factors
1.Strong Institutions: The U.S. has robust federal and state systems, including a professional military and law enforcement, which deter large-scale rebellion. A 2022 YouGov poll found 51% of Americans believe the government could suppress an armed uprising, compared to 26% doubting its capacity.
2.Economic Comfort: Unlike nations prone to civil war, the U.S. is affluent and aging, reducing enthusiasm for sustained violence. Ross Douthat, writing in The New York Times, argues that wealth and comfort give elites and citizens a stake in stability, unlike poorer, younger societies.
3.Lack of Geographic Division: Unlike the 1860s, modern U.S. divisions lack clear regional lines. Urban-rural and ideological splits are diffuse, complicating organised conflict. Silber and Kleinfeld emphasise this as a barrier to traditional civil war.
4.No Organised Militias: While far-Right groups like the Proud Boys exist, they lack the cohesion or numbers for sustained warfare. The 2023 ACLED Conflict Index notes that democratic systems reduce traditional civil war risks, though militia activity and lone-actor violence persist.
5.Elite Restraint: Despite rhetoric, no major elite faction openly advocates violent revolution. Both parties have called for de-escalation post-violence, though inconsistently.
A traditional civil war with opposing armies is highly unlikely (<5% probability) due to institutional strength, economic stability, and geographic diffusion. However, a modern civil conflict, marked by decentralised violence, political assassinations, riots, and institutional erosion, has a moderate probability (20–30% over the next decade). This aligns with YouGov's 40% public perception, though public fear may inflate estimates. The 2023 Ipsos survey's finding that 50% expect civil war but few endorse it suggests perception outpaces intent. Key triggers, such as a contested 2028 election or major economic crisis, could elevate this risk.
A modern civil conflict would likely unfold as a series of escalating, decentralised incidents rather than a singular war. Below are plausible scenarios based on current trends and expert analyses:
Scenario 1: Escalating Political Violence
Description: Sporadic acts of violence, such as assassinations, bombings, or riots, intensify, targeting politicians, activists, or infrastructure. Lone actors and small militias, radicalised online, drive most attacks, as seen in the Hortman case.
Triggers: Contested elections, judicial rulings (e.g., Trump-related indictments), or policy flashpoints like immigration or gun control. X posts suggest fears of "street violence" and "contested elections" as precursors.
Manifestation: Urban riots, like those in Los Angeles, spread to other cities, with clashes between protesters, counter-protesters, and law enforcement. Rural militias target federal facilities, echoing the Bundy standoff. Social media amplifies calls to action, with 20% of Americans in 2023 admitting willingness to carry guns for political causes.
Impact: Hundreds to thousands of casualties, localised economic disruption, and strained law enforcement. Health systems face risks from armed patients, as noted in a 2023 Injury Epidemiology study.
Resolution: Federal crackdowns, as post-January 6, deter escalation, but polarisation persists unless bipartisan de-escalation occurs.
Scenario 2: State-Federal Defiance
Description: States openly defy federal authority, refusing to enforce laws or court rulings. X posts mention "states ignoring federal authority" as a stage-6 civil war indicator, though no states currently exhibit this behaviour.
Triggers: Disputes over immigration (e.g., California's clash with Trump) or election certification. A 2022 Notre Dame survey warned of officials undermining elections, a risk if election deniers gain state offices.
Manifestation: Blue states like California or red states like Texas form coalitions to resist federal policies, deploying state police or National Guard units. Limited skirmishes occur at federal facilities, but no sustained warfare. Economic measures, like capital controls, could emerge, as speculated on X.
Impact: Constitutional crisis, market instability, and localised violence. Federal military intervention remains unlikely due to loyalty to the chain of command.
Resolution: Supreme Court rulings or congressional compromises de-escalate, but trust in institutions erodes further.
Scenario 3: Economic Collapse and Anarchy
Description: A severe economic crisis (e.g., debt default or hyperinflation) triggers widespread unrest, amplifying existing divisions. A 2022 YouGov poll found 47% of Americans expect economic collapse as a likely scenario, outranking civil war fears.
Triggers: Global financial shocks or domestic policy failures. X posts tie debt cycles to civil war risks, though these are speculative.
Manifestation: Urban looting and rural militias form "protection" groups, clashing with federal forces or each other. Ideological extremists exploit chaos, targeting minorities or elites, as warned by DHS.
Impact: Thousands of deaths, supply chain breakdowns, and mass displacement. Social cohesion fractures, with recovery taking decades.
Resolution: Federal emergency powers restore order, but authoritarian measures could undermine democracy, as 39% of Americans in 2022 feared a democratic collapse.
Scenario 4: Ideological Insurgency
Description: Radical ideologies, such as eco-terrorism or anti-state crypto-anarchism, inspire organised violence, as speculated in a 2024 Divided We Fall article. These remain niche but could gain traction in a crisis.
Triggers: Environmental crises or government overreach (e.g., cryptocurrency bans). Climate groups like Extinction Rebellion could turn militant, though evidence is scant.
Manifestation: Sabotage of infrastructure (e.g., pipelines, power grids) or targeted assassinations. Right-wing militias counter with vigilante actions, creating a feedback loop of violence.
Impact: Localised disruption, with moderate casualties. Public backlash against radicals could limit escalation.
Resolution: Law enforcement neutralises groups, but underlying grievances persist, fuelling future unrest.
While these scenarios are plausible, several factors constrain escalation:
Historical Precedent: The U.S. navigated turbulent periods (e.g., 1960s–1970s) without civil war, suggesting resilience. Douthat argues that modern chaos is more likely to be "navigated together" than devolve into war.
Public Sentiment: Despite 40% fearing civil war, only 6% in 2022 YouGov data saw it as "good," and 69% viewed it negatively, indicating limited appetite for conflict.
Government Capacity: Federal law enforcement's post-January 6 actions deterred organised extremism, though gaps in domestic counterterrorism persist. However, the normalisation of violence, as Silber warns, and the proliferation of firearms increase the risk of a low-grade conflict. Political officials' rhetoric, such as Newsom's and Trump's mutual accusations, undermines de-escalation efforts, a concern echoed by 73% of voters in a 2024 Leadership Conference poll worried about political violence.
In conclusion, the likelihood of a second U.S. civil war in the traditional sense is low, but a modern civil conflict, marked by decentralized violence, political unrest, and institutional strain, is a credible threat, with a 20–30% probability over the next decade. The YouGov poll's 40% public fear reflects real concerns, driven by polarisation, violence, and distrust, though mitigated by institutional strength and economic comfort. Scenarios like escalating riots, state defiance, economic collapse, or ideological insurgency could unfold, with impacts ranging from hundreds of casualties to systemic breakdown. Preventing Civil War 2.0 requires de-escalating rhetoric, bolstering institutions, and addressing root causes of division. Without action, the U.S. risks a fragmented future, where "civil conflict" becomes a new normal, eroding the democratic fabric that has held it together.
https://www.newsweek.com/plurality-americans-believe-civil-war-likely-poll-2086771
"More Americans than not believe it is likely that the United States will see a civil war over the next decade, according to a recent poll.
Why It Matters
The U.S. has seen an uptick in political polarization, as well as growing political unrest in recent weeks, such as the assassination of Minnesota politician Melissa Hortman and protests over President Donald Trump's immigration policies in Los Angeles turning violent earlier in June.
California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, said Trump wants "civil war on the streets of America" during their dispute about how to quell the violence in L.A., though Trump has pushed back on that statement.
What To Know
Americans are split about whether there could be a civil war on the horizon, according to a new survey from YouGov.
Twelve percent said a civil war is very likely, and 28 percent said one is somewhat likely to occur. That 40 percent of respondents is notably a higher percentage than those who said a civil war is unlikely. Twenty-two percent said a civil war is not very likely, while 17 percent said a civil war is not likely at all.
An additional 18 percent said they are not sure if a civil war is likely, while 3 percent responded that they prefer not to share their view on the matter.
Protesters confront California National Guard members outside of a federal building in Los Angeles on June 9, 2025. David McNew/Getty Images
Democrats were more likely to view a civil war as likely than Republicans. Seventeen percent of Democrats said civil war is very likely, and 31 percent said it is somewhat likely. Among Republicans, 7 percent viewed a civil war as very likely and 25 percent as somewhat likely, according to YouGov.
The poll surveyed 3,375 U.S. adults on June 16, 2025.
This represents an uptick in civil war concerns compared to a December YouGov poll, in which 9 percent of respondents viewed a civil war over the next decade as very likely and 21 percent said a civil war was somewhat likely. That poll surveyed 1,582 adults from December 21 to 24, 2024.
Nina Silber, a professor of history at Boston University specializing in the U.S. Civil War, told Newsweek that the poll numbers are unsurprising to her. However, she said a civil war "as we envision it from the nineteenth century is probably not what we're looking at today."
A modern civil war may not appear as two separate governments emerging, each building a military force to fight the other, she said.
"To me, evidence of 'civil conflict' continues to increase, especially in terms of the increase in political violence," she said. "And while acts of violence occur on both sides of the political divide, I am particularly worried about political officials who have been stoking and encouraging political violence, who make it an almost accepted part of our culture."
What People Are Saying
President Donald Trump, in response to California Governor Gavin Newsom: "I don't want a civil war. Civil war would happen if you left it to people like him."
A Department of Homeland Security document reported by Politico last year warned of an uptick of extremists discussing a civil war: "Some domestic violent extremists (DVEs) are reacting to the 2024 election season and prominent policy issues by engaging in illegal preparatory or violent activity that they link to the narrative of an impending civil war, raising the risk of violence against government targets and ideological opponents."
What Happens Next
Despite growing concerns about a potential civil war, there are no real indications that any state or the federal government is preparing for a domestic armed conflict at this point.
Still, there are also few signs that political polarization will decrease in the coming months and years, even as leaders from both parties have called for the political temperature to drop after recent instances of violence."