Subscribe
The latest psychology and neuroscience discoveries.
My Account
  • Mental Health
  • Social Psychology
  • Cognitive Science
  • Psychopharmacology
  • Neuroscience
  • About
No Result
View All Result
PsyPost
PsyPost
No Result
View All Result
Home Exclusive Social Psychology Political Psychology

Despite political tensions, belief in an impending U.S. civil war remains low

by Eric W. Dolan
July 4, 2025
in Political Psychology
[Adobe Stock]

[Adobe Stock]

Share on TwitterShare on Facebook
Stay on top of the latest psychology findings: Subscribe now!

A new study has found that most Americans do not expect a civil war to occur in the near future, and even fewer believe such a conflict is necessary. Among those who do foresee participating in such violence, many say they could be persuaded not to take part if encouraged by family, friends, or trusted leaders. These findings come from a large, nationally representative survey conducted in mid-2024 and published in the journal Injury Epidemiology.

The study is part of an ongoing project led by Garen J. Wintemute at the University of California, Davis, which has tracked public attitudes about political violence in the United States since 2022. Previous waves of the survey showed that belief in the likelihood or need for civil war had declined between 2022 and 2023. With political polarization increasing and the 2024 elections approaching, researchers expected to see a rise in these beliefs. But the latest data suggest that public sentiment on this issue has remained relatively stable.

To explore these trends, researchers collected responses from over 8,000 U.S. adults who had completed earlier waves of the survey in 2022 and 2023. Participants were members of the Ipsos KnowledgePanel, a widely used online survey panel recruited through address-based sampling to reflect the U.S. population. The 2024 survey was conducted between May 23 and June 14, shortly before and after the announcement of Donald Trump’s felony convictions, allowing researchers to examine whether this high-profile legal development influenced public views.

Participants were asked whether they agreed with statements such as “In the next few years, there will be civil war in the United States” and “The United States needs a civil war to set things right.” Only 6.5% of respondents strongly or very strongly agreed that civil war was likely in the near future, and just 3.6% agreed that such a conflict was needed. These percentages were almost identical to those recorded in the 2023 survey.

The survey also asked respondents how they would behave if a large-scale conflict did occur. Nearly half said they would remain in the U.S. but not participate, and 12.4% said they would be likely to leave the country. A large majority—84.2%—said it was unlikely they would take part in combat. Only 3.7% considered it very or extremely likely that they would do so, and a similar share said they would be likely to kill a combatant.

Among this small group of people who expected to engage in violence, researchers found a notable willingness to reconsider. Nearly 45% said they would no longer view combat as likely if urged by family members. Between 23% and 31% said they might change their minds if encouraged by friends, religious leaders, elected officials, or the media. These findings point to possible opportunities for preventing political violence by influencing those at risk through personal relationships and trusted voices.

To better understand who held these beliefs, the researchers examined several demographic and ideological factors. Individuals who identified as “strong Republicans,” those who identified as “MAGA Republicans,” and those who described their political views as “extreme conservative” consistently showed higher levels of these beliefs compared to their counterparts.

For these groups, the prevalence of expecting a civil war, believing a war was necessary, and predicting they would serve as a combatant was notably higher than the national average. For instance, among Republicans who identify with the MAGA movement, 10.2% strongly or very strongly agreed that a civil war is coming, and 7.8% believed a war is needed—rates that are roughly double and triple, respectively, the figures for non-MAGA, non-Republicans (5.5% and 2.4%).

The researchers also explored how these views were associated with more fundamental belief systems, specifically authoritarianism and racist beliefs. Participants were asked to respond to statements designed to measure support for authoritarian principles, such as the idea that the country needs a strong leader who can break the rules. They were also asked about their agreement with a series of racist statements.

The analysis showed a strong association: respondents who expressed strong agreement with either authoritarian or racist beliefs were also significantly more likely to expect a civil war, to believe a civil war was needed, and to see themselves as likely combatants in such a conflict.

However, the most pronounced and dramatic differences were found among the small sliver of respondents who expressed strong approval of specific extremist right-wing organizations and social movements. The survey explicitly asked participants about their approval of groups like the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and Three Percenters, as well as movements such as QAnon.

Among the individuals who strongly approved of these groups and movements, the belief in an impending and necessary civil war was not a fringe opinion but a majority view. The study reported that more than half of these respondents (55.7%) expected a civil war in the next few years. This stands in stark contrast to the 6.5% found in the general population. Similarly, a majority of this group (50.8%) believed that the United States needs a civil war to set things right, a belief held by only 3.6% of the overall sample.

Most strikingly, the willingness to personally engage in violence was exceptionally high in this subgroup. A staggering 39% of those who approved of these extremist movements thought it was very or extremely likely that they would participate as a combatant in a civil war. This figure is more than ten times higher than the 3.7% likelihood reported by the average respondent. These findings illustrate that while belief in and willingness to fight in a civil war are rare across the nation as a whole, these attitudes are highly concentrated within specific, ideologically-defined subsets of the population.

Firearm ownership was also associated with greater support for political violence, particularly among those who owned assault-style rifles, had purchased firearms recently, or carried them in public frequently. However, differences between firearm owners and non-owners were generally modest.

People who said they were willing to damage property, threaten others, or commit acts of violence for political purposes were more likely to believe civil war was coming and to expect to participate. The same was true for those who thought it likely they would use a firearm in politically motivated violence.

Despite these risk factors, the overall picture painted by the study was one of limited support for large-scale political conflict. Most Americans did not see civil war as likely or necessary, and very few expected to take part. Even among those who did, a significant portion showed openness to change, especially if their loved ones or trusted figures spoke out against violence.

These results suggest that prevention strategies could focus on encouraging people to express their opposition to political violence, especially within families and communities. Public messages from elected officials, religious leaders, and respected media sources might also have an impact. The researchers argue that such efforts could help weaken the link between political polarization and violent behavior, even if it is difficult to change the underlying beliefs that contribute to division.

There are a few caveats to consider. The study captures views from only one point in time and is based on self-reported attitudes, which may not always predict real-world behavior. While the sample was designed to represent the general population, differences between those who responded and those who did not could affect the results.

The study, “Public opinion on civil war in the USA as of mid-2024: findings from a nationally representative survey,” was authored by Garen J. Wintemute, Yueju Li, Mona A. Wright, Andrew Crawford, and Elizabeth A. Tomsich.

TweetSendScanShareSendPin1ShareShareShareShareShare

RELATED

Scientists discover weak Dems have highest testosterone — but there’s an intriguing twist
Political Psychology

Scientists discover weak Dems have highest testosterone — but there’s an intriguing twist

July 10, 2025

What if the key to swaying a swing voter lies in their biology? New research found giving testosterone to weakly affiliated Democratic men made them less loyal to their party and more open to Republicans, revealing a potential hormonal link to political persuasion.

Read moreDetails
People with psychopathic traits fail to learn from painful outcomes
Narcissism

National narcissism linked to emotional impairments and dehumanization, new study finds

July 7, 2025

A new study suggests that people who see their nation as uniquely important often struggle with recognizing emotions and experience more anger and contempt—factors that may help explain why they’re more likely to dehumanize both outsiders and fellow citizens.

Read moreDetails
Fascinating study reveals how Trump’s moral rhetoric diverges from common Republican language
Donald Trump

Viral AI-images highlight how Trump engages in “victimcould,” scholar argues

July 6, 2025

How can one of the world's most powerful men also be its biggest victim? A new paper argues it’s a political strategy based on hypothetical, not actual, harm—a concept the author calls “victimcould” used to justify present-day aggression.

Read moreDetails
New study suggests Donald Trump’s “fake news” attacks are backfiring
Political Psychology

Scientists are uncovering more and more unsettling facts about our politics

July 5, 2025

Why has politics become so personal? The answers may lie in our minds. These 13 studies from the new science of political behavior reveal the hidden psychological forces—from personality to primal fear—that are driving us further apart.

Read moreDetails
Racial and religious differences help explain why unmarried voters lean Democrat
Political Psychology

Student loan debt doesn’t deter civic engagement — it may actually drive it, new research suggests

July 3, 2025

Americans with student loan debt are more likely to vote and engage in political activities than those without debt, likely because they see government as responsible and capable of addressing their financial burden through policy change.

Read moreDetails
Scientists just uncovered a surprising illusion in how we remember time
Mental Health

New research suggests the conservative mental health advantage is a myth

July 3, 2025

Do conservatives really have better mental well-being than liberals? A new study suggests the answer depends entirely on how you ask. The well-known ideological gap disappears when "mental health" is replaced with the less-stigmatized phrase "overall mood."

Read moreDetails
New psychology study sheds light on mysterious “feelings of presence” during isolation
Political Psychology

People who think “everyone agrees with me” are more likely to support populism

July 1, 2025

People who wrongly believe that most others share their political views are more likely to support populist ideas, according to a new study. These false beliefs can erode trust in democratic institutions and fuel resentment toward political elites.

Read moreDetails
Radical leaders inspire stronger devotion because they make followers feel significant, study finds
Political Psychology

Radical leaders inspire stronger devotion because they make followers feel significant, study finds

June 28, 2025

A new study finds that voters are more motivated by radical political leaders than moderates, because supporting bold causes makes them feel personally significant—driving greater activism, sacrifice, and long-term engagement across elections in the United States and Poland.

Read moreDetails

SUBSCRIBE

Go Ad-Free! Click here to subscribe to PsyPost and support independent science journalism!

STAY CONNECTED

LATEST

Is humor inherited? Twin study suggests the ability to be funny may not run in the family

Scientists discover weak Dems have highest testosterone — but there’s an intriguing twist

Can sunshine make you happier? A massive study offers a surprising answer

New study links why people use pornography to day-to-day couple behavior

Virtual reality meditation eases caregiver anxiety during pediatric hospital stays, with stronger benefits for Spanish speakers

Fascinating new advances in psychedelic science reveal how they may heal the mind

Dysfunction within the sensory processing cortex of the brain is associated with insomnia, study finds

Prenatal exposure to “forever chemicals” linked to autistic traits in children, study finds

         
       
  • Contact us
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms and Conditions
[Do not sell my information]

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In

Add New Playlist

Subscribe
  • My Account
  • Cognitive Science Research
  • Mental Health Research
  • Social Psychology Research
  • Drug Research
  • Relationship Research
  • About PsyPost
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy