Another American Civil War? Take Heed or Take Cover

Another American Civil War? Take Heed or Take Cover

By analyzing the run-up to the Civil War of 1861–1865 and today’s upheaval, one can find both some important similarities and differences.

Lack of trust in government and a willingness to support state secession are increasingly worrisome signals. Even prior to the election of Trump, only 19 percent of Americans said they trust the government “always or most of the time.” Some 64 percent said their side loses more than it wins. The feeling of defeat was strongest among conservatives (81 percent). Recent polls also indicate that nearly 40 percent of Americans would support state secession should their candidate lose. The highest support for secession is among Republicans in the South, with some 66 percent saying they would support their home state seceding from the United States. To underline this sentiment, the recent Texas Republican Convention in June declared that a state referendum should be held on whether voters favored Texas independence. Yet at the same time, some 41 percent of Joe Biden supporters were also at least in some agreement with the idea that “it’s time to split the country.”

The 2016 election of reality television personality Donald Trump over several establishment Republicans and a divided Democratic Party deeply split the nation. Trump’s campaign against elite/minority rule, open borders, pro-China trade, and Washington corruption resonated well. Promises that mines and mills would be reopened, though implausible, were accepted by voters who were glad their economic grievances were at last being recognized. Revelations and credible rumors of sexual misconduct, shady business practices, and racist tendencies glanced off the candidate when it came to his “core” followers—especially when the accusations came from media outlets perceived to be (rightly or wrongly) out to get him. A sizable fraction of the public disbelieved any information its leader denied. The election of 2016 not only robbed the Democrats of some voters belonging to the Bernie Sanders wing of their party but also validated the political weight of the “Trump core,” and gave anti-elite, anti-minority, anti-immigrant, anti-trade elements on both sides of the political spectrum hope. Popular media outlets and voices peddled the view that opposition to the president was unpatriotic, while simultaneously some Democrats called Trump’s 2016 election illegitimate due to Russian interference.

Within the core of Trump voters is a growing belief that the coalition of elites and minorities that determine national policies represents an existential threat to a basic creed that undergirds positions on gun rights, abortion prohibitions, immigration constrictions, and voting restrictions. Simply stated, important Red state elements see themselves and their values on the defensive against an encroaching federal/Blue political order. As we know from the American Civil War and other episodes, a segment on the defensive may turn increasingly militant.

In this regard, a worrisome reflection of the 1850s is the willingness and ability to use violence for political gain. One in three Americans now say violence against the government can be justified. Some 30 percent of Trump voters agree with the statement, “true patriots may have to resort to violence to save the USA.” A report by the COVID States Project found that almost 25 percent of respondents indicated that violence was either “definitely” or “probably” justifiable against the government and that a similar percentage of both conservatives and liberals agreed on this. Such political violence or threat of violence has already been used by both sides, for example in Charlottesville, in Lafayette Square, in Wisconsin, and against the national Capitol. This tendency is amplified when candidates pose with weapons and threaten members of their own party who are insufficiently radical.

Americans have the means and some are organizing to follow through on these beliefs. In 2021, about 42 percent of American households had at least one gun. U.S. civilians own nearly 400 million firearms. The greatest density of firearms ownership is in the deep South and Midwest. About 58 percent of conservative Republican families own at least one weapon while 29 percent of liberal Democrats own one.

And militant groups on both sides—like the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, and 3 Percenters on the Right, and Antifa on the Left—rally supporters around the potential for violence. In 2020, the Intelligence Project identified some 566 “extreme antigovernment or anti-New World Order” groups in the United States, of which 169 were militias. 

An ominous development is the militancy surrounding the “replacement theory,” the adherents of which are convinced that the elite-minority coalition intends to shrink the relative size and electoral importance of white Americans. This is a consequence of changing demographics and unaddressed socio-economic conditions. It is stoked by certain media voices. The fear is that the elites of the Democratic Party will use lax immigration controls, unregulated voting access, and fiscal policies to support and grow non-white America to the point that they, the elites, will have perpetual control. Replacement theory targets Blacks, Hispanics, Asian Americans, Muslims, and Jews. This mindset of defensive desperation has contributed directly to mass shootings of “non-whites.”

These accelerating national divisions in Stage 2 were exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. President Trump’s pronouncements making light of the dangers found resonance among his followers and others. Many grew tired of lockdowns and mandates and opted to put personal freedom above the health of their family and neighbors. President Biden’s masks and vaccine mandates were denounced by many of Trump’s followers as totalitarian and have been modified since the vaccines have had a positive impact.

Despite these growing divisions in today’s Stage 2, Trump’s election did provide political comfort for his core supporters, much as the presidencies of Zachary Taylor, Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, and James Buchanan provided a sense of security within the Union for Southerners during the 1850s.

Political victories have extended beyond Trump’s tenure for many in the Red states because the Supreme Court’s conservative 6-3 majority has ruled recently in multiple cases which support their positions. This includes the dramatic reversal of abortion rights, restrictions on gun control, state financial support for religious schools, and federal enforcement of environmental policy. In the process, the Supreme Court has also strengthened states’ rights within the federal system. Some have drawn an analogy to the divisive impact that the 1857 Dred Scott decision had on the nation. These recent decisions have, in effect, extended Stage 2 beyond Trump’s tenure.

Stage 3 is pending today. In 1860, Stage 3 was the tipping point when the Southern states felt that due to a national election, their secure position in the Union was suddenly and irrevocably reversed. Events then tumbled out of control in 1861.

In November 2020, America looked out over the precipice of Stage 3. Members of the Trump core felt that their secure position of the past four years had been reversed, just as Southerners in 1860 felt that they had lost their political advantage. Had Trump conceded, Biden might have had the opportunity to heal some of the national divisions as he had pledged during his campaign. By contesting the election results not only in the courts (as was legitimate) but also with threats to officials in the swing states and in the streets, Trump further divided the nation.

The election of Joe Biden had a traumatic effect on the Trump core which nearly tipped the country into Stage 3. The period between the 2020 election and inauguration seethed with disbelief, denial, and defiance. Conclusive evidence that no fraud existed was summarily dismissed. Claims by Trump’s political allies that the election was stolen produced a strong belief among many of his voters that the results were fraudulent.

The House January 6 Committee demonstrated that Trump used this strong belief among his core to orchestrate an effort by various armed groups to invade the Capitol and disrupt the official counting of electoral votes. As Jason Van Tatenhove, former spokesman of the Oath Keepers, stated before the Committee, “it was going to be an armed revolution.”

Some Trump supporters still celebrate the insurrection of January 6, 2021, as just the beginning of armed resistance to the federal state. Their psychology has turned defensive: like knights defending the castle of their freedoms and communities. The ex-president’s pledge to pardon the January 6 insurrectionists if he was reelected sent a dangerous signal that violent insurrection is acceptable. As Van Totenhove told the House January 6 committee, “I do fear for the next election cycle because who knows what that might bring.”

In this context, the Republican National Committee’s pronouncement that the January 6 attack on the capitol was simply “legitimate political discourse” is particularly worrisome. The Right responded by referencing post-2016 election protests, including many Democrats insisting that Trump was an illegitimate president, and pulling up a now-infamous picture of a CNN correspondent in front of a burning building—a result of Black Lives Matter protests—with the chyron reading “Fiery But Mostly Peaceful Protests After Police Shooting.”

The January 6 event could have been a Fort Sumter moment. The United States pulled back from the abyss because the courts, Republican state officials, and the vice president did their constitutional duty. The Capitol Police did their best to restore order and protect elected officials on January 6. And there were other national safeguards. The U.S. military and other federal security agencies remained calm, united, and devoted to the Constitution.