Is the US headed for another civil war?

Update: Now They're In Charge

Per Right Wing Watch↱:

Religious-right figure Rick Joyner warned in a Facebook post Tuesday that judges who "interfere" with President Donald Trump's executive orders may be pushing the U.S. toward "another civil war." It's just the latest of many examples of right-wing Christian leaders and media amplifying Trump's complaints about courts that are stepping in to slow and stop Trump administration actions that violate the Constitution or federal law.

In his Facebook post, Joyner gave lip service to the importance of an independent judiciary but then suggested that judges' actions to pause Trump's orders are "an encroachment on the Legislative Branch" and "an end run around the democratic will of the people."

"SCOTUS can begin to reduce this and avoid a major Constitutional Crisis, or even another civil war, by how they decide some of the cases before them," Joyner wrote. "They can begin to bring a desperately needed restraint on the Judicial Branch that has gotten very far outside of its lane."

Joyner has a habit of talking about civil war. During Trump's first months in office in 2017, Joyner warned that if the Supreme Court struck down Trump's efforts to ban immigrants and refugees from several predominantly Muslim nations, it could lead to civil war and martial law. In 2019, he said Christians should be establishing militias to prepare for civil war. A month before the 2020 election, he told viewers that they shouldn't worry too much about the coming civil war because the violence and bloodshed would be mostly confined to the "inner cities."​

I mean, really. His ministry is literally called MorningStar. And if he has a "habit of defending and "restoring" to ministry men who have been disgraced by engaging in spiritual and sexual abuse", it's significant enough that even fellow conservative Christians are unsettled.

And if his circle of peers includes FRC Executive Vice President Jerry Boykin, yes, really, it's that Jerry↗ Boykin↗.

And if it's easy enough to count↗ back↗ ten or even fifteen years of conservative itch for civil war, the current circumstance suggests↗, Now they're in charge, and they still want a shooting war at home.
____________________

Notes:

Montgomery, Peter. "Rick Joyner Claims Judges Ruling Against Trump May Provoke Civil War". Right Wing Watch. 22 April 2025. RightWingWatch.org. 22 April 2025. https://www.peoplefor.org/rightwing...es-ruling-against-trump-may-provoke-civil-war
 
It already has a Civil Cold War. The left thinks the right are all fascists, while the right thinks the left are all communists. The rift has been growing since the end of WW2
 
Last edited:
Alright, so I’m just gonna think this through while I write.

If someone asks me whether the U.S. is heading toward another civil war, my gut reaction is: probably not. See, back in the 1860s, states had actual military forces they could call their own. Nowadays, not so much. Since 1916, the National Guard’s been tied pretty tightly to the federal government. The President gives an order, and they follow it, plain and simple. History’s shown that once they’re federally activated, the Guard doesn’t go rogue. They follow command.

Now sure, some states have their own little backup teams, like the California State Guard (1,300 volunteers who do great work in emergencies). But let’s be real: they’re not an army. They’re not equipped to stand up to federal forces, and honestly, that’s not their mission. If a state wanted to push back hard, they'd be leaning on law enforcement agencies (highway patrol, sheriffs, local police), but those groups tend to lean pretty far right politically. And even if one state got them all on the same page? They're still no match for the size, tech, and power of the U.S. military. That’s not a fight they’d win.

So then the question becomes: what about the people? Could there be a grassroots uprising? Maybe in theory, but in practice? That’s a long shot. Americans are incredibly divided ideologically, socially, and culturally. Owning a lot of guns doesn’t magically make folks organized or ready for sustained conflict. Rebellion isn’t just about firepower, it takes unity, strategy, and stamina. And we’re not there. Not even close.

So what’s the outcome, if not war or rebellion?

Well... my best guess is something more like slow decay. Think Russia, but with more streaming services. Sham elections. Fewer liberties. More corruption. A government that answers to billionaires before it answers to citizens. A long, hard road for regular folks just trying to live with some dignity.

And yet, even with all that, I still believe the story’s not over. I don’t know what comes next, or when, but I know the American people are a stubborn, resilient bunch. And if enough of us stay alert, stay kind, and refuse to give in to fear or apathy, then maybe, just maybe, we can steer this thing toward something better. It won’t be easy, but hey… the best stories never are.
 
Thoreau said:
So what’s the outcome, if not war or rebellion?
Click to expand...

While it's unlikely that we will suit up like the Blue and the Gray, and have it out in a reprise of last time, there is a thesis by which hindsight will tell us it has already started. Escalating incidents such as the California car bomb, Minnesota assassinations, and Idaho ambush are, by that outlook, the sorts of events that, in retrospect, we might describe as the start of it. It won't be a Sumter or 9/11 big bang to open the show, but one day we will wake up and realize the war's been on for a while.

And the outcome, as such, depends for the most part on those who would rebel. They've really, really wanted it for a while, now, and it's the same question we've always faced: How to convince them to change according to the goodness of their hearts? After all, facts don't really matter, and in these United States, when it's certain traditional supremacism, waiting for the bigots to change is both the only course available and also tremendously unfair for calling those people over there bigots.

If not war or rebellion, the outcome is cleansing and complicity For a hundred sixty years, that's all anyone ever had to do. We can have peace if we stop pretending women and nonwhites have any rights under the Constitution. That's why this is always the liberal's fault, and the burden of the middle-roader who has no choice but to support what they won't call supremacism and most assuredly do not support except that the fact of disagreement requires they must oppose that disagreement.

And, sure, we might prefer to think that's just a small number of whack-jobs out in the fringes, but seventy-seven million Americans just voted for concentration camps, and we can still find cultural icons like Bill Maher complaining that comparing the admirer of Mein Kampf who is building concentration camps to Hitler improperly tarnishes the value of Hitler's name. This stuff clearly has traction and sympathy in the marketplace.

Remember, the way to avoid war is to not fight back. That is to say, that's actual imperialist advice on record; all wars are started by the defenders, per Von Clausewitz.

It's the irony of how the people fuming about being frogmarched empower frogmarching authority. And what do we call it when the war and rebellion is brought by the institutions of power? For instance, one or another cable news pundit suggested, in the wake of the no-arrest MacArthur Park show of force, imagine that on Election Day.

The outcome, if not war or rebellion, is to cooperate in order to not be frogmarched. And, having watched the American people walk into this as if they just couldn't not, it might just be that enough people just needed an excuse to stop pretending to give a damn about liberty and justice for all. It's like Wiz's↑ false symmetry: It's one thing if "the left" thinks the right are fascists, and, sure, it is its own thing to consider how conservatives and rightists behave, but observe that within that juxtaposition, Chuck Schumer counts as a leftist, as do the ten members of the Blue Dog Caucus. What happens, going forward, is going to depend largely on the people who never really wanted to believe it was possible things would go this way.

There is a viable, nonzero chance the outcome will be the surrender of the Republic.
 
There is a non-zero chance that anything can happen. That's not much of a prediction though.
 
Civil war in the whole US?

Ha ha ha ha.

Maybe an intellectual civil war.

Look, the 2nd Amendment is not about carry arms to defend yourself against criminals or for killing wild animals surrounding your home. The 2nd Amendment is the right of The People to bearing arms and to form guerrillas against a dictator. The purpose is defending democracy. I can tell this because I'm a master's in politics.

Any other interpretation is foolishness to the square.

Now, for a civil war against any current administration you are going to need arms, and or support of part of the current army. Yes, at this moment you will need a partial or total support of the US army in order to successfully win in battle against a dictator.

The number of people who carry arms like pistols and rifles is very low in cities, but is very common in rural areas. However, if the dictator enjoys the support of the army, what can a rifle do against an army tank? Since days of Independence up to today, the arms permitted to regular people are toys when compared to army equipment. And even if you manage to take an army tank, you will need training to drive it, shoot and more. Isn't like driving your Primus, so forget about it.

Perhaps the most that can be made is rebellion, something that has worked in other countries.

Let's say Egypt. Thousands and thousands of people without arms blocked the whole areas government buildings were located. They were so many and for so many days that finally a change of leader was accomplished.

The success of civil wars in current times in other countries is more successful because those people have nothing to lose and risk the little they have and are conscious that sacrifices will happen by thousands. Now check with your neighbors if they are ready to risk everything, including losing their lives in order to change a current administration.

Let's be real about this.
 
… and Oriented Toward the Top Right

flcl-05-kamoncosplay.png

Luchito said:
Look, the 2nd Amendment is not about carry arms to defend yourself against criminals or for killing wild animals surrounding your home. The 2nd Amendment is the right of The People to bearing arms and to form guerrillas against a dictator. The purpose is defending democracy. I can tell this because I'm a master's in politics.

Any other interpretation is foolishness to the square.

Now, for a civil war against any current administration you are going to need arms, and or support of part of the current army. Yes, at this moment you will need a partial or total support of the US army in order to successfully win in battle against a dictator.
Click to expand...

You're running behind; as noted in June↑:

And if it's easy enough to count↑ back↗ ten or even fifteen years of conservative itch for civil war, the current circumstance suggests↗, Now they're in charge, and they still want a shooting war at home.​

When war comes, you go to war as you are, not as you wish to be. We're Americans; part of the point of even having this nation is that we shouldn't need to spend every day stockpiling for war.

Your mastery of politics is a degree shy of a right angle.

However, you do raise a good point about Army support. Once upon a time, it was offensive to suggest our troops would follow such orders. These days, it seems pretty much everybody expects they will.

And think of the bothsides, there: Only one side wants them to.

「Here they come, here come the bastards. I heard it from a confidant, who heard it from a confidant. They're definitely on their way. There's one with this idea, something about a hammer head shark, nose hairs and flatus; best keep your distance because here they come. Here come the bastards. Bury your head deep in the sand; anonymity is a virtue in this day and age. Amazing hand dexterity, flagrant misuse of security, better run, run, run, run, run, run, run run run, run: Here they come.」​
 
How Stupid Can You Get? Rightist Poseurs Caught Cosplaying Antifa

Mike Nellis↱ reports:

MAGA influencers in Chicago are posing as Antifa, trying to bait peacful protesters into clashing with ICE agents. One of them, Joey Gibson, just got caught red-handed.

If you're out there, be careful and make smart decisions.​

Imagine that. See "Are Republicans Preparing to Militarize?" #134 (June, 2017)↗:

An "anonymously emailed threat of disruption"? If that was the American standard you could shut down our society every day:

The anonymous message claimed "Trump supporters and 3% militia" were encouraging people to "bring hateful rhetoric" to East Portland. "Two hundred or more people", the email said, would "rush into the middle and drag and push those people out".

When the parade was called off, Buchal issued a statement in which he bemoaned a "criminal conspiracy to commit crimes of riot" and a letter to Mayor Wheeler in which he lamented "rising lawlessness" in Portland.

In response to the cancellation, a local far-right organizer, Joey Gibson, organized a "free speech rally"—the event at which [Jeremy] Christian, the suspect in Friday's double murder, was filmed throwing fascist salutes and yelling racial epithets, and where he approached antifascist counter-protesters armed with a baseball bat.
​

(Wilson↱)​

In the end, Mr. Buchal, the county GOP chair, makes his point, claiming that "there has been a closing of the mind" by which "people feel justified" trying to silence each other by force. He also blames anti-fascists, and would have everyone believe Republicans are old and frail people and thus need known anti-American insurgents for a private security force.​

So, yeah, that Joey Gibson.

(Punch line: The "anonymous email" was such a bust that the GOP's copy appears to have never been archived: See Pein, 2017↱, "The email, available here", but the article link to the GOP's posted copy of the threat is extraordinarily 404; by October, 2017, when Wayback sought to archive the page, the link was 404. That's how confident Republicans were in their claims.)​

Correction Note: The video is from Portland, not Chicago.
____________________

Notes:

Pein, Corey. "82nd Avenue of Roses Parade Cancelled Amid Threats of Street Brawling". Willamette Week. 25 April 2017. WWeek.com. 6 October 2025. https://www.wweek.com/news/2017/04/25/street-fight-fears-lead-to-parade-cancelation/

Wilson, Jason. "Portland Republican says party should use militia groups after racial attack". The Guardian. 29 May 2017. TheGuardian.com. 6 October 2025. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...attack-republican-james-buchal-militia-groups

https://twitter.com/x/status/1975198460069761206
 
Last edited:
Not sure a lot of people in my region realize how dangerous the provocateur tactic can be, or how often it's tried by maga shit-stirrers. I hope more media can spotlight this. The problem is, as Winnie C said, a lie has marched halfway around the world while the truth is still tying its bootlaces.
 
What They Want What They Really Really Want

oregon_gop-20251005-x-withdrawn-imagesfromecuadorbrazil.png

¡Whoopsie!: A withdrawn X dot com post from the Oregon Republican Party.​

The short form, from KPTV↱ in Portland, Oregon:

The Oregon Republican Party on Sunday published posts on its social media accounts welcoming the planned deployment of California’s National Guard to Portland. The posts included an image that appeared to show a chaotic protest scene, but the photo was not from Portland.

According to a report by The Guardian↱, the image was a composite of two unrelated photos taken in South America. One showed riot police with shields labeled “Policia,” the Spanish and Portuguese word for police, and originated from a 2008 Getty Images photo believed to be from Ecuador. The other image, showing red smoke and a crowd, was taken by a Brazilian photographer in 2017 and published on the free image site Pexels.​

Or maybe we should have just gone with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR)↱:

Portland is so peaceful Republicans had to go all the way to South America to find photos from years ago for their bad memes. Even Fox is reporting it.​

For its part, the Oregon GOP blamed a nameless volunteer along the way to declaring, "No assertion that the images were taken in Portland was made nor intended."
____________________

Notes:

Fox 12 Staff. "Oregon Republican Party shares misleading images from South America in posts about Portland". KPTV. 7 October 2025. KPTV.com. 8 October 2025. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/06/oregon-republicans-protest-photo-south-america

Mackey, Robert. "Republicans post fake image of Oregon protest – using photos of South America". The Guardian. 6 October 2025. TheGuardian.com. 8 October 2025. https://www.kptv.com/2025/10/07/ore...es-south-america-post-about-portland-protest/

https://twitter.com/x/status/1975678991886430361
 
Imagine That

In what way is this surprising?

On a recent episode of his self-titled program, religious-right broadcaster and full-blown Trump cultist Eric Metaxas interviewed right-wing author James Howard Kunstler, who suggested that President Donald Trump might have to declare a national emergency to outlaw the Democrat Party in order to prevent them from winning the midterm elections.

Angry that the GOP-controlled Congress has been unable to pass the SAVE Act, Kunstler warned that "at some point, I think Mr. Trump is going to have to go Abe Lincoln on the Democratic Party."

"He's going to have to declare some kind of a national emergency," Kunstler said. "He may have to declare the Democratic Party as a seditious outlaw organization and do something about it" ....

.... "It seems to me that circumstances may require—may require—Mr. Trump to go to a place where he has to declare certain emergency executive powers to deal with an organization that wants to destroy the country … And that means probably taking some people off the game board in a very demonstrative way" ....

.... "Those of us who care about the country realize that others have done this," Metaxas said. "Lincoln did it. But what would that look like? ... Can he do that before the midterms? What's that going to look like? If ever the No Kings people would be losing their minds—he does nothing and they lose their minds—when he does something, you have to wonder what that would look like."

"I think it would probably look something like a civil war," Kunstler answered. "We've been there before and somebody had to rescue the republic, and it looks like we may be entering a period where the republic needs to be rescued again. It's going to be pretty unappetizing to see that happen, but necessity may call."

(Right Wing Watch↱)​

So, one more time↑, for those who missed it↑:

And if it's easy enough to count↑ back↗ ten or even fifteen years of conservative itch for civil war, the current circumstance suggests↗, Now they're in charge, and they still want a shooting war at home.​
____________________

Notes:

Mantyla, Kyle. "Eric Metaxas And James Kunstler Suggest Trump Needs To Outlaw The Democratic Party". Right Wing Watch. 31 March 2026. PeopleFor.org. 31 March 2026. https://www.peoplefor.org/rightwing...and-james-kunstler-suggest-trump-needs-outlaw
 
Just checking in with this thread from 2022, to see if we are heading into a Civil War yet...
 
James R said:
I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Who said a civil war will start?
Click to expand...
I know who said "Is the US heading for another civil war?"

You just asked a question but so did I. "Is the US heading for another civil war" vs "Is that when the civil war starts"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top