Is America at Risk of a Civil War?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 окт 2022
- In a 21st-century civil war, guerrilla or terrorist attacks are directed at civilians. Jan. 6 response was key to whether the United States would move closer or further from civil war, Barbara F. Walter says.
by Hope Kahn, National Press Foundation
“After Mar-a-Lago Search, Talk of ‘Civil War’ Is Flaring Online,” a New York Times headline stated last week amid other news outlets’ columns and articles on the subject. But could that talk become a reality? Barbara Walter, international affairs professor at the University of California, San Diego, took on that question in her book “How Civil Wars Start: And How to Stop Them.” Two days before the New York Times piece, she told Paul Miller fellows what factors to watch.
Look at failing democracies and factionalism. Walter was invited to join the Political Instability Task Force, a group of experts and analysts that determine a state’s risk of civil war. Out of 38 factors that contribute to a country’s risk, data analysts identified two that are most important, Walter said. Anocracy, or partial democracy, was one. If the democracy is weak, failing or new vs. a full democracy or full autocracy, a country is more likely to face civil war, she said. The second factor was whether the citizens of these partial democracies had organized themselves politically around identity, “so rather than having political parties that were based on particular ideas, so conservative principles versus liberal principles, they had political parties that were formed pretty much exclusively around race, ethnicity, or religion,” Walter said. A country with these two factors of anocracy and factionalism are at a 4% chance of civil war each year, she said. “That seems low, but it’s actually not low. It means that every year that those features continue to exist in a particular country, it goes up by 4%.” Though the task force did not study the United States, she observed these two factors emerging in the U.S. in 2016 at “a surprisingly rapid rate.”
What “stage” is the U.S. in now? The CIA has a manual on insurgency that lays out the three different phases of insurgency: the pre-insurgency phase, the incipient insurgency phase and the active insurgency phase. This manual is not in regard to the United States, but Walter has looked to it for warning signs. The incipient phase is when a group that has grievances against the government has started to articulate those grievances. The incipient violent phase is when there are isolated attacks. And the open insurgency phase begins when there is a series of consistent attacks against the government and other targets. When Jan. 6 occurred, author David Kilcullen said that the attack could have been the start of the open insurgency phase. “And now we know 10 months later, that was not the case,” Walter said. “What was really critical to whether we were going to go closer to stage three or move back towards stage one was how the U.S. government reacted to January 6th. So would the FBI be willing and able to go after the individuals who participated in January 6th? … The head of the Oath Keepers is likely going to go to prison … so I would say we’re towards stage one. We’re probably going to stay in the incipient insurgency phase. We’re not moving closer to civil war at this point.”
Pay attention to law enforcement. Evidence shows that some members of law enforcement have been sympathetic to far-right groups, raising questions about “how local law enforcement would respond” if violence broke out, Walter said. “We actually know who tends to start civil wars, and it’s not the weakest groups, it’s … the groups that had once been politically and socially dominant and are in decline,” Walter said. In the U.S., that’s white Christian men. Their dominance shifting has “left them angry and resentful and feeling threatened, and do have the capacity to organize oftentimes with law enforcement and the law turning a blind eye to them.”
Regulate social media, Walter said. When people ask the easiest way to tamp down the hatred, her answer is always to regulate social media. She said the research shows that there’s a connection between online extremist propaganda and the radicalization of individuals online. However, figuring out how this works is difficult. “What we really should be doing is regulating recommendation engines that are pushing the most violent and extreme material into people’s hands and in that way serving to radicalize them.” But as Big Tech companies like Facebook refuse to release their data, Walter said scholars can’t do the analysis that could find out exactly how this is happening.
Speaker: Barbara F. Walter, Author & Rohr Professor of International Affairs, School of Global Policy & Strategy, University of California, San Diego
Takeaways, transcript and resources: nationalpress.org/topic/barba...
NPF is solely responsible for the content.
We are in a cold civil war now in my opinion. A black swan event could be the trigger for it to go hot.
I think you may have called it. Looks like one is triggered now with the Israeli-Gaza war. Droves of people seem rather surprised and outraged that Biden/US backing Israel. No matter where you sit on the issue, it really makes you think. I guess all we can do now is wait and see what happens next.
I'm worried about the next election
@@nickcage3703 This next election will determine which of the paths will unfold.
Ready for it. Been ready.
Thanks so much for this work. It is vital for the USA to understand this.
I really hope the people prevail. Government is terrible.
Respectfully, competent government may have some merit, such as ensuring the availability of roadways, policing, education, utilities without extortionary billing, stability for those unable to work to feed & house themselves without criminality/troublemaking (ex.: IQ below 85), et al., etc. Down with incompetent & abusive government *agents*, of course, but thank you to government representatives who serve with moderation & integrity 🤝🏼
@@StankFernatra the government is your enemy never your friend. the police is also not your friend its their goal to lock up as many people as possible
The current 2 partt system is really a destructive system for America 😢
You sure sound like what she is talking about.
No. The same degeneracy that has led to this national "crisis," assures us that Americans are to sorry to fight. The rot is universal.
yes
Such an important discussion.
The CIA isn't allowed to "focus" on the US, but private companies certainly make a profit off of doing just this.
Yes, the US government interfered in election as Twitter, the FBI banning people off of social media so they couldn’t talk like the former President of the United States. The Democrats are pushing Civil War.
Isn't allowed?
gtfo
It's the law, which is why there is a distinction between the CIA and the NSA. Read.@@notreally2406
Audio was not good.
Does election integrity affect the confidence in the Democratic System? Does using the criminal justice system against your political opponent affect the confidence in the Democratic System? Does strange or unusual vote totals affect confidence in the Democratic System? In the United States, there was 129.3 million votes in 2008, 126.8 million votes in 2012, 128.7 million votes in 2016 and 155.4 million votes in 2020, so where did these extra 27.6 million votes in 2020 come from?
The additional votes came from more people voting in 2020 than they did in 2016, for both Biden and Trump. 11.2 million more people voted for Trump and 15.4 million more for Biden than Clinton in 2016.
@@johnking5433 yes, there were over 25 million more votes counted in 2020 than 2016. Are you aware that Donald Trump received more votes as an incumbent than he received in 2016 as a Presidential candidate? Are you aware that no incumbent President who gets more votes for his second term has ever lost except Donald Trump? Is it equally strange that no one ever talks about these strange vote totals or getting more votes in Trump’s second term and losing? I assure you if this happened to a Democrat President this is all we would be talking about. The political hypocrisy and double standard that always favors the Democrats are extremely troubling and draws us closer to chaos.
More people voted, highest turn out in a long time. People were so sick and tired of Trump and Maga they came out in droves.
Keep up the speculation and conspiracy. Guess a decade or 2 of faux news will rot your brain, throw in a dictator wanna be with 30k+ lies and here you are.
Hard to imagine the country I wore a uniform for has so many fascists and traitors willing to destroy this nation in allegiance to a conman and grifter.
The 2020 vote was stolen. January 6 was not an insurrection. People were not armed only the so-called CIA and LEFTIST military forces who shot innocent protesters.
"Played around with the factors..."? Hmmm.
As Clemenza once said, it helps to get rid of the bad blood
Excellent talk
What about Accelerationism? I think this is being sorely overlooked 😔
The onerous toll of conflict is the only thing that sets accelerationism apart from more gradualist progressive praxes.
Follow up reading: Federalist Paper #10 (Madison, 1787). Old but still very relevant.
Wasn’t expecting to watch this entire video.
really terrifying. every time i listen to one of the 'civil war' academics i just cant help wondering why more political violence hasnt happened already, and why jan 6 was such a circus. i cant tell if these groups training in the woods are a joke or very serious.
They are serious, they are just old and stupid
But hasn't there been a significant amount of political violence though?
Yes, by the thugs of antifa and BLM...
@@davidcarothers3311 i see the historically illiterate white supremacist has joined the chat.
@@Rhythmicons So says the Murdring Mrxist..
UC San Diego's PoliSci dept is awesome. Almost went there for my grad school, but chose my alma mater UC Davis where I had strong connections. Great topic, and so contemporary to our political climate.
I don’t know about today, but in my day, UCSD was called ”Berzerkeley South”
(remember Herbert Marcuse?)
It would not be a civil war but USA and south border movements
Thank you for the video. Been a huge fan of Barb.
Just nit picking here. The probability of an event happening is NOT the probability of the event for each trial times the number of trials. She said that a 4% probability give a 40% chance of civil war after 10 years, and an 80% chance after 20 years. By her logic, after 40 years the probability of a civil war would be 160%. Probabilities cannot go higher than 100%. It has been a long, long time since my last prob/stats course, but if I am doing it right, after 10 years the probability is 34%, after 20 years it is 56%, and after 40 years it is only 80%. Someone check my numbers please.
Barb: "I suspect men will start turning on women, but I hope that doesn't happen."
Me: Gives strong side eye to all the southern states now banning abortions and prosecuting people who help women get abortions.
The real question is how women will respond generally.
Yes, God bless those men in those southern states for not turning on those female babies.
If you want this to reach more Americans through RUclips you need to compress this down to about 10 to 15 minutes
America.own.if.we.have.to.suffer.all.this.miser.the.rich.will.have.to.suffer.along.side.good.for.one.good.for.all.no.hideing.place.for.high.and.mighty. makeing.over.a.better.sociiety..
Very smart lady!
Chris Hedges was right.
Excellent talk. Such important information for the American public.
I would think more of a revolutionary war!!!
revolutionary, civil, and world - all at the same time
I think she is making a mistake by not distinguishing between civil wars and wars of independence. In a true civil war both sides are contending for permanent control of the central government, such as in the English and Russian Civil Wars. The Confederacy never had the goal of taking control of the entire American government and so, by this standard, was a war of independence, not a civil war. For example, the Algerian war of independence has never been called a civil war even though Algeria was actually a département of France, not a colony. The reason is that the Algerian independence movement never aimed to take over the government of France.
I assume that designating the Secession as a civil war was Orwellian-speak from the Union government at the time for whom it was essential to avoid characterizing the conflict as a war of independence, since after all the American foundational document, the Declaration of Independence, is in its entirety a justification for wars of independence. Lincoln did this, for example, in his Gettysburg Address when he warns that "that government of the people... shall not perish from this earth," thereby distorting the war aims of the Confederacy for propaganda purposes.
The Confederacy attacked first. Also, George Orwell was a cool socialist - 1984 adverted the dangers of red fascism like the USSR.
The Confederacy was in fact looking to knock out Washington and take over the entirety of the USA and as much of North America as they could get their hands on. So it was a Civil War. If the South just wanted to be independent, they wouldn't have tried to capture Washington and march into Pennsylvania. They needed their teeth kicked in and that's what they got. Seems like they might be wanting to go 0-2 in the near future. We're all full of find-out over here.
You think if the confederacy won they wouldnt have taken control of everything? They would've 100% taken over everything. So instead of thinking of it as their independence thats like a dog whistle for pro confederacy. I think the key thing about that is not what one side says. Look at the whole picture we are riding between two choices one is an extreme the other is not.
Personally I think the best way to get rid of radicalism and reduce the chances of violence is to have better public education. With better education people are more able to decide for themselves that radical organizations are not healthy for society or for democracy. People often forget that quality public education is a very important component to democracy. It isn't just about having elections.
Yes, I agree. With a population with less than 50 percent college attendance we lack critical thinking skills.
Sadly it's never talked about enough.
Democracy IS authoritarianism.
It’s a totalitarian dictatorship there are no democrats anymore they have splintered into 3. Factions communist,Marxist and socialist and radical islamics will be next these people are not Americans!
Civil wars start when you disable comments on nearly all your videos and nobody can question you.
I bet she's still upset Hillary Clinton lost.
LMAO Hillary beat your "strong man" by 3 million votes! I bet ur still upset Donald Dump lost to sleepy Joe! =)
Exactly
Bogus paranoia.
You need to wake up toto
It will not happen in your life time 😉
Civil War is one thing, what about the United States turning toward authoritarianism? I think that is more of a threat than a civil war, especially because of Donald Trump who has stated on many occasions his love of dictator. Also we have to be very concerned especially about Project 2025. They are prepared for stripping the administrative state for authoritarianism.
Liberal.
And the people you're talking about pulling these idiotic slimy Church killings are killings of anyone even if they don't know those are individuals I believe I don't believe it all that they would be part of a group's motivation. I don't think one of those groups which I would never belong to wouldn't do that probably do killing the neighborhood surely get wrong people who are not what they think they are but I don't see them doing what you said.
Interesting syntax.
Wow, what a disappointing period of one-sided person who is trying to talk about being in the middle and being realistic. Isn't this always the case? You have the East and the West right now Vine for war and they both are saying they have reason when us really doesn't have one and started it but anyone who is wrong is going to tell you they are not partial.
@13:05 look ! A covidian cultist.
I'm sure her writing is outstanding, but she says "um" about every four seconds. Very annoying! DA
Nonsense, you’re a fascist troll masquerading as somebody acting in good faith.
Da da.
... To be fair, I hope you've gotten more from her talk than her using, "Um," to either keep her talk from being interrupted unnecessarily (whereas pause might invite the moderator to 'rescue' her), or buy a moment to collect & deliver her next thought, which shows--to me--brilliance, dedication, skill, empathy, and leadership.
don't be so sure
Obama did the same thing!
The end of Roe vs Wade was awesome. We still have work to do, though.
Women's rights trampled on by you religious nut jobs😢. No way!
Well said, woman hater, anytime we can set the country back 50 years is awesome huh.
Oh, it won't just be America. Nation rising against nation and kingdom rising against kingdom (civil war - Just look at all of these coups happening) Matthew 24:7. And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword. Revelation 6:4
You don't have to believe it now (it'd be better if you did) but you will when it gets here.
If the United States slips into civil war it will definitely become a black hole that sucks in the other nations of the world.
Is America at Risk of a Civil War?
A. No.
I would like this woman, but she’s a professor, so I know she’s been brainwashed. That’s very unfortunate.
What? So education equals brainwashing?
J Miller : where did you get your education from?
Shes full of it CIA camp
Even if she were a frog or rabbit, suggesting the idea that:
1. Partial democratic systems, and
2. Citizens dividing into identity based political groups,
^ are both ingredients for civil war - this still makes reasonable sense.
In fact, I think #2 can just go without saying and doesn't need anyone with a book deal or some shady clandestine professional history to verify.
Citizens dividing + democratic system not working = civil war
It even seems common sense. How she's made a whole career - a ton of money and now some wide personal publicity - just by saying it in a book and in speaking groups - this is a bit whacky. Although I wouldn't blame anyone for doing the same things in the same position if they needed the money
I think the mannerisms in the way she speaks perhaps due to whichever field and environment she goes through just makes the idea sound lackadaisical and windy
I mean, Shrek can say those two things making civil war, and people will still connect the dots out there of what they see and generally agree
@@praytopesci2794Yes
While we're on the subject of white people she needs to give her land back to the indigenous people😮
No. We won. Get over it.
@@NightmareSWGOH the only thing you won is a bozo button
@@NightmareSWGOH that's what the Israelis are saying to the Palestinians