Fact check: Is there gonna be another civil war?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, the likelihood of another civil war in the United States presents a complex picture with mixed expert opinions and public sentiment.

Expert assessments suggest civil war is unlikely in the near term, despite concerning indicators. Political experts indicate that while there are signs of political violence and willingness to engage in it, a full-blown civil war remains improbable without mass participation in violence against political enemies, which is not currently observed ^[1]. Similarly, experts note that while the US exists in a "dangerous partial democracy zone" with risk factors like anocracy and identity-based political parties, a civil war could not break out in the near future ^[2].

However, public perception tells a different story. A YouGov survey revealed that 40% of Americans believe a civil war is very or somewhat likely in the next decade, citing growing political polarization and unrest as contributing factors ^[3]. This disconnect between expert analysis and public sentiment is significant.

Current risk factors are substantial. The analyses identify several concerning trends:

• Over 80,000 civil unrest incidents occurred in the top 20 countries in 2024, with increasing frequency of plots and attacks from religious and political extremists ^[4]
• The US has a "historic propensity for large-scale unrest events" with risk factors including income inequality and higher risk of extrajudicial killings ^[5]
• Political experts warn that the possibility of political polarization reaching a violent breaking point is "substantially greater than zero" ^[6]

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks several crucial contextual elements that the analyses reveal:

Economic and institutional factors play a significant role that wasn't addressed in the original question. The analyses show that climate and development factors, income inequality, and institutional weaknesses contribute to unrest risk ^[5]. Companies and security firms like Allianz Commercial benefit financially from heightened concerns about civil unrest, as it drives demand for their risk assessment and insurance services ^[4].

International parallels and triggers are missing from the discussion. The analyses mention how external conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian situation impact American society and contribute to domestic divisions ^[7]. This suggests that civil unrest may be more likely to stem from international events rather than purely domestic political divisions.

Different definitions of "civil war" create confusion. Some analyses discuss hypothetical scenarios involving state secession (like California declaring independence), which would constitute a different type of conflict than grassroots political violence ^[6]. The analyses also distinguish between civil unrest, political violence, and full-scale civil war.

Election-related violence emerges as a more immediate concern than traditional civil war. The risk of unrest is particularly high "if election outcomes are tightly contested" ^[5], suggesting that electoral disputes may be more likely triggers than ideological divisions alone.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question, while straightforward, contains implicit assumptions that could lead to misinformation:

The binary framing of "will there be a civil war or not" oversimplifies a complex spectrum of political violence. The analyses show that experts are more concerned with civil unrest, political violence, and institutional breakdown rather than traditional civil war scenarios ^{[1] [4]}.

Temporal assumptions in the question lack specificity. While public polling suggests 40% believe civil war is likely "in the next decade" ^[3], expert analysis focuses on more immediate risks around election periods and specific triggering events ^[5].

The question ignores gradual institutional erosion in favor of dramatic conflict scenarios. The analyses indicate that the US is already in a "dangerous partial democracy zone" ^[2], suggesting that democratic breakdown may be occurring through institutional means rather than armed conflict.

Media and commercial interests may amplify civil war fears for profit. Security companies, news organizations, and political actors benefit from heightened anxiety about civil conflict, as evidenced by the proliferation of survival guides and risk assessment services targeting civil unrest concerns ^{[7] [4]}.