America chose violence. Now what?
Summary
Sean Illing speaks with political scientist Barbara Walter about the recent surge in political violence in the United States, including the assassination of Charlie Kirk and other attacks. Walter outlines three key reasons this moment feels more dangerous than past episodes of violence: first, political leaders are reacting with division and blame rather than calls for unity; second, violence is no longer one-sided, with a recent rise in attacks from the far left; and third, key law enforcement institutions are led by inexperienced, politicized individuals who may be unwilling or unable to address the real threats.
They discuss the data on domestic terrorism, noting that historically the far right has been responsible for the majority of lethal attacks, often targeting minority groups, while far-left violence has been rarer and more targeted at individuals. The conversation explores how isolated, often incoherent acts by ‘lone wolves’ radicalized online are being exploited by political ‘violence entrepreneurs’ to deepen societal divisions and justify emergency measures.
Walter assesses the U.S. as being in a ‘high risk zone’ for political violence, citing the country’s status as a declining partial democracy with political parties increasingly divided along racial lines. She explains the annual risk model and warns that if underlying conditions don’t change, the risk compounds over time. The discussion also covers the role of social media as an accelerant, the potential for a leader to manufacture a crisis to consolidate power, and the sobering reality that solutions are unlikely to come from a dysfunctional Congress, placing the onus on the American public to demand democratic reforms through massive voter turnout and sustained peaceful protest.
Recommendations
Concepts
- Horseshoe Theory — Mentioned by Illing, the idea that the far left and far right, if you go far enough out on the political spectrum, come back together and share similarities on certain issues like anti-government sentiment.
People
- Dan Byman — A Georgetown scholar cited by Walter as a co-author of an Atlantic article analyzing the recent rise in domestic terror attacks from the far left.
Publications
- Here Be Dragons (Substack) — Barbara Walter’s Substack newsletter, described as ‘warning signs from the edges of democracy,’ where she writes further on these topics.
- How Civil Wars Start — Barbara Walter’s book, referenced as the foundation of her expertise on how democracies fracture and the warning signs of political violence.
Topic Timeline
- 00:03:15 — Introduction to the wave of political violence and Barbara Walter — Sean Illing introduces the episode’s focus on recent acts of political violence like the Charlie Kirk assassination. He welcomes guest Barbara Walter, a political scientist and expert on how democracies fracture. Illing frames the conversation around understanding how close the U.S. is to a breaking point and if change is still possible.
- 00:04:07 — First reason: Leaders reacting with division, not unity — Walter explains the first concerning difference in this moment: political leaders, especially on the right, responded to Charlie Kirk’s killing with blame and political weaponization instead of calls for national unity. She contrasts this with past responses to tragedies like 9/11. Illing and Walter critique the dangerous rhetoric from figures like Elon Musk and Meghan McCain that blames monolithic groups.
- 00:07:32 — Examining the data on domestic terrorism perpetrators — Walter presents data showing the vast majority of domestic terror attacks since 2001 have been perpetrated by the far right, primarily white supremacist groups, and are the most lethal. Attacks from the far left have been far fewer and typically target individuals. They discuss the danger of assigning blame to broad labels like ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ for the actions of isolated individuals.
- 00:13:17 — Second reason: Violence is no longer one-sided — Walter discusses the second danger sign: a recent rise in violence from the far left, creating a two-sided threat. She notes the far left dominated domestic terrorism in the 60s and 70s but had been ‘moribund.’ This shift makes the problem harder to address because groups on each side use the other’s violence to recruit and justify their actions, creating a dangerous spiral.
- 00:19:40 — Third reason: Incompetent and politicized law enforcement leadership — Walter identifies the third problem: the leaders of institutions like the FBI and Homeland Security lack experience, character, and are highly politicized. She argues they are neither competent to address rising violent extremism nor willing to act against threats from their own political side, creating a critical weakness in America’s security apparatus.
- 00:27:46 — Assessing the U.S. risk level for civil war or insurgency — Illing asks Walter to assess where the U.S. is on a spectrum from peace to chaos. Walter states the country is in a ‘high risk zone for political violence.’ She clarifies modern civil wars in wealthy nations look more like persistent insurgency and terror (e.g., Israel and Hamas) rather than set-piece battles. The underlying conditions are a declining democracy and identity-based political parties.
- 00:32:38 — Rising public acceptance of political violence — The conversation turns to survey data showing an increase in the percentage of Americans who believe political violence can be justified, particularly for self-defense, with figures potentially as high as 40%. Walter explains the risk model: with weak democracy and tribal politics, the annual risk starts at 4% but compounds each year those conditions persist, reaching high levels over a decade or two.
- 00:36:08 — The threat of a leader manufacturing a crisis — Walter introduces an additional worry: leaders can start wars to consolidate power, citing Putin’s actions. She expresses fear that Donald Trump, facing term limits, might fabricate an emergency involving organized violence to justify staying in power, using it to declare emergency rule and dismantle democratic constraints.
- 00:39:55 — Social media as an accelerant and the nature of modern violence — They discuss how social media amplifies divisive rhetoric and isolates individuals in radicalizing online spaces. They analyze the incoherent, ‘nihilistic’ and meme-driven ideology of some perpetrators like Charlie Kirk’s assassin, questioning if it represents a new category of violence. Walter concludes that even incoherent violence can be exploited by political entrepreneurs to further divide society.
- 00:56:39 — Conclusion: Worry, hope, and the path forward from the bottom up — Illing seeks a balanced view on how to feel about the current moment. Walter states she is ‘genuinely worried’ but believes change must come from the bottom up, as Congress has abdicated its role. She points to massive voter turnout and sustained peaceful protest involving 3.5% of the population as the proven methods for citizens to reclaim power and halt the slide toward authoritarianism.
Episode Info
- Podcast: The Gray Area with Sean Illing
- Author: Vox
- Category: Society & Culture Philosophy News Politics News Commentary
- Published: 2025-10-13T08:00:00Z
- Duration: 00:58:23
References
- URL PocketCasts: https://pocketcasts.com/podcast/1d3ce9a0-ae3d-0133-2e33-6dc413d6d41d/episode/bb516828-cee3-4085-bf18-90f54b82f143
- Episode UUID: bb516828-cee3-4085-bf18-90f54b82f143
Podcast Info
- Name: The Gray Area with Sean Illing
- Type: episodic
- Site: https://www.vox.com/vox-conversations-podcast
- UUID: 1d3ce9a0-ae3d-0133-2e33-6dc413d6d41d
Transcript
[00:00:00] Support for this show comes from the Working Forest Initiative.
[00:00:04] The working forest industry is committed to planting more trees than they harvest.
[00:00:08] More than 1 billion seedlings are planted in U.S. working forests every year.
[00:00:13] From biologists to GIS analysts, hiring managers, accountants, and more,
[00:00:18] working forest professionals have dedicated their focus towards sustainability,
[00:00:22] using their expertise to help ensure a healthy future for America’s forests.
[00:00:27] They say they don’t just plan for the future, they plan it.
[00:00:31] You can learn more at workingforestinitiative.com.
[00:00:57] If you sign up now, you’ll save $20 on an annual membership.
[00:01:01] That’s more than 30% off.
[00:01:03] Go to vox.com slash members to join.
[00:01:06] Now here’s the show.
[00:01:10] A shooting at a Dallas ice facility.
[00:01:14] The assassination of Charlie Kirk.
[00:01:19] The assassination of a Minnesota house speaker and her husband.
[00:01:25] The arson and murder of a woman.
[00:01:27] An attack on the Pennsylvania governor’s mansion.
[00:01:30] Two attempted assassinations of President Trump.
[00:01:35] The assassination of a health insurance CEO.
[00:01:40] The storming of the Capitol.
[00:01:45] Something is cracking open in American life,
[00:01:48] and it’s not clear whether these are isolated eruptions of political violence
[00:01:54] or something much worse.
[00:01:57] But it is clear that as a country, we are teetering.
[00:02:04] And if we don’t step back from the precipice soon,
[00:02:06] I’m worried about what comes next.
[00:02:11] I’m Sean Elling, and this is The Gray Area.
[00:02:17] My guest today is Barbara Walter.
[00:02:20] She’s a political scientist at UC San Diego
[00:02:23] and the author of How Civil Wars Start.
[00:02:27] Barbara is an expert on political violence,
[00:02:30] and she spent her career studying how democracies fracture
[00:02:35] and what the warning signs look like.
[00:02:39] I invited her on the show to help me think through
[00:02:43] this wave of political violence
[00:02:46] and to talk about how close we are or might be to a breaking point
[00:02:51] and if we can still change course before it’s too late.
[00:02:57] Barbara Walter, welcome to the show.
[00:03:03] It’s really a pleasure to be here. Thank you.
[00:03:05] We have had several weeks now to digest, process the killing of Charlie Kirk.
[00:03:15] The Kirk shooting is just one of several acts of political violence in recent years.
[00:03:21] There is obviously nothing new about violence.
[00:03:27] There is nothing new about what’s going on here or anywhere else, for that matter.
[00:03:29] But I know you have given three reasons why this moment does feel different.
[00:03:35] Yeah.
[00:03:36] And potentially more dangerous than other moments.
[00:03:40] And if you don’t mind, I just want to go through those one by one.
[00:03:45] Is that okay?
[00:03:45] Yeah, absolutely.
[00:03:47] Okay, let’s do that.
[00:03:49] The first reason is, and I’m reading from a really nice piece that you wrote.
[00:03:54] Nice.
[00:03:56] Not a nice piece.
[00:03:57] It’s a good piece, it’s a smart piece about a really shitty situation.
[00:04:03] But the first reason is that you say that our leaders, our political leaders,
[00:04:07] are reacting differently now than maybe they have in the past.
[00:04:13] Tell me what you mean by that.
[00:04:16] So one of the amazing things about America up until really today
[00:04:22] is that when bad things happened to us as a country
[00:04:26] and to our citizens, we came together,
[00:04:30] which is absolutely essential for a country as heterogeneous and multiethnic
[00:04:35] and multireligious and racial as ours is.
[00:04:38] And that was the case when assassinations and domestic terror happened in the past.
[00:04:43] It certainly was the case after 9-11, which was international terrorism,
[00:04:48] that no matter who perpetrated the crime and no matter who the target was,
[00:04:54] our politicians, our leaders,
[00:04:56] on both the left and the right,
[00:04:58] immediately would condemn it and they would immediately call for unity.
[00:05:02] So the message was always peace, stability, let’s come together,
[00:05:07] we can work through this together.
[00:05:09] And what was different about Charlie Kirk,
[00:05:11] and I think why it’s put so many people on edge
[00:05:13] and why they feel that something is different,
[00:05:17] is that almost immediately leaders, especially on the right, didn’t do that.
[00:05:23] They used this as kind of a tool,
[00:05:26] for their own political purposes.
[00:05:29] You know, Laura Loomer came out,
[00:05:31] you know, the spokespeople on the far right came out and eviscerated the left.
[00:05:37] You know, even Donald Trump, the president of the United States,
[00:05:40] came out and basically said, we’re going to go after them.
[00:05:44] We’re going to make sure that justice is done to, you know, the group that did this.
[00:05:49] And the reality is that this was done by a single individual,
[00:05:52] as are the vast majority of domestic terror attacks.
[00:05:56] Here in the country, they’re done by what we call lone actors or lone wolves.
[00:06:00] And they’re usually young men who’ve been radicalized online.
[00:06:05] The Charlie Kirk murder was exactly the same.
[00:06:08] This was a single individual.
[00:06:09] He had no really cohesive ideology.
[00:06:12] He was not part of a larger group.
[00:06:14] He certainly was radicalized online.
[00:06:16] And yet you heard many of our leaders coming down and saying,
[00:06:21] see, this is evidence that the left is evil, that the left is out to get us.
[00:06:26] And we need to take all measures to destroy them.
[00:06:31] And that’s very different.
[00:06:32] Instead of a message of hope and unity and peace, it was a battle cry.
[00:06:38] And people felt that.
[00:06:40] Yeah, I’ve got a couple more quotes here that stuck out to me.
[00:06:45] The first is from our dear friend Elon Musk.
[00:06:47] Oh, my gosh, yes.
[00:06:48] Who said, quote, the left is the party of murder, end quote.
[00:06:54] Here’s another one.
[00:06:55] Here’s another one.
[00:06:56] Here’s another doozy from Meghan McCain.
[00:07:00] She tweeted, quote, I think the fundamental difference between the right and the left
[00:07:05] in this country is that the left glorifies death, end quote.
[00:07:10] I mean, that’s just making stuff up, right?
[00:07:12] If you actually look at the data, we have fantastic data on domestic terror attacks
[00:07:18] in this country.
[00:07:19] And it’s collected by the FBI.
[00:07:21] And it’s collected by various nonprofits, like the Anti-Defamation League.
[00:07:26] There’s multiple data sets that track who perpetrates these types of crimes in this country.
[00:07:32] And it goes back decades and decades.
[00:07:34] And the thing that’s so astounding is that the vast majority of attacks going back to 2001
[00:07:43] have been perpetrated by the far right.
[00:07:45] And most of those groups have been white supremacist groups.
[00:07:48] The attack there are also by far the most lethal attacks.
[00:07:52] Now, there have been attacks by the far left.
[00:07:54] But what’s interesting about this is that the most lethal attacks have been by the far left.
[00:07:55] But what’s interesting about this is that the attack on the far right has been perpetrated by the far left.
[00:07:56] about those attacks coming from what we think is the far left is that they’re almost always
[00:08:02] targeted at a single individual, not a group. The far right will target Latino marketplaces.
[00:08:09] They’ll target synagogues. They will target places on campuses where lots of women are.
[00:08:16] So they’re specifically targeted at usually minority groups, whereas the far left is
[00:08:22] targeted at individuals. And they’re just, the incidence has been much, much fewer than the far
[00:08:29] right. So when you talk about America has a domestic terror problem, it is, until recently,
[00:08:35] it has been almost exclusively a far right problem. And that’s fine. And that’s fair. I mean,
[00:08:42] I have said this on other platforms, and I’m going to say it here. I strongly believe using
[00:08:50] phrases like the left,
[00:08:52] or the right, to describe general intellectual or political trends is fine, necessary,
[00:09:01] probably unavoidable in some way. But using phrases like the left or the right to assign
[00:09:06] blame, to assign blame to millions of people as though they are some kind of monolith acting in
[00:09:13] concert, that is dangerous, that is unserious, and that people are still doing it, even though
[00:09:19] clearly the stakes keep going.
[00:09:22] And people are getting killed. Makes me insane with rage. And it just, it seems like there’s
[00:09:29] nothing, no matter what happens, the violent entrepreneurs, as you call them, will not stop.
[00:09:36] It doesn’t, I mean, I don’t know what has to happen for people to just, you know what,
[00:09:40] let me step back and take a beat.
[00:09:43] Yes. I love that you brought that up. And it, you know, it’s something that we’re,
[00:09:47] we think about a lot when we talk about different states, right? So
[00:09:52] people talk about what Germany did, or what the United States does, or what China does.
[00:09:57] It treats China and the United States and Germany today as if everybody’s in complete agreement
[00:10:03] about everything that the United States does. And of course, we know living here that there are
[00:10:09] many, many different groups with hundreds of millions of people, all of whom have a different
[00:10:16] way of looking things and different preferences. And to assign them the,
[00:10:21] the title of, you know, the United, you know, you’re, you’re behaving like the United States
[00:10:27] is missing all that nuance. So yeah, thank you for that correction. And moving forward, we’ll,
[00:10:31] we’ll talk about the fact that the vast majority of these attacks are done by individuals,
[00:10:39] individuals. And oftentimes they don’t really have a coherent ideology. It’s hard to determine
[00:10:48] what motivated them to do something.
[00:10:51] They do have some things in common. You know, the basic profile, as I mentioned earlier,
[00:10:56] was they tend to be young and they tend to be male and they, and they tend to have spent an
[00:11:01] enormous amount of time online. And that seems to be where they became sort of hyper-passionate
[00:11:09] about whatever it is that that’s motivating them to turn to violence.
[00:11:14] Yeah. And I just want to be clear. It’s, it’s not as though I would claim that there’s no
[00:11:18] relationship between ideas and actions. That’s not the case.
[00:11:21] There are, there are far right elements. There are far left elements. There are extreme
[00:11:27] ideologies. It’s just to blot out any differences and just lump the left or the right. And when
[00:11:37] people use phrases like that in general, they’re basically just referring to half the country
[00:11:41] as though, you know, Timothy McVeigh and like your Republican neighbor across the street are
[00:11:47] like functionally, you know, indistinguishable politically.
[00:11:50] It’s just not.
[00:11:51] Yeah. And let me actually take that a step further. We know the types of people,
[00:11:57] when I say the far right, the types of people who have perpetrated violence have overwhelmingly
[00:12:02] come from two ideologies on the right. White supremacists is the most. And then the second
[00:12:08] is anti-federal government individuals, people who, for whatever reason, feel that the federal
[00:12:14] government is either too big or too intrusive or who knows what. But if you look at the
[00:12:21] some of the individuals on the far left and the justifications that they’ve given,
[00:12:26] some of them are also anti-federal government. They come from that, that ideology, the anti-federal
[00:12:32] government ideology. So in some ways, thinking about this as a spectrum, like a linear spectrum
[00:12:37] between far left and far right doesn’t actually capture what it looks like in the real world.
[00:12:43] It’s more of a circle where the, the far left and the far right, in some ways, you know, come
[00:12:50] together quite closely. And so I think that’s, I think that’s, I think that’s, I think that’s a
[00:12:51] very important thing to think about. And I think that’s, I think that’s, I think that’s a very important
[00:12:51] thing to think about. And I think that’s, I think that’s, I think that’s a very important
[00:12:51] thing to think about. And I think that’s, I think that’s a very important thing to think about.
[00:12:51] on certain issues. And, and hatred to the federal government is one of those issues.
[00:12:56] Yeah. I mean, they, they call that the horseshoe theory.
[00:12:58] Yeah.
[00:12:59] That if you go far enough out in each direction.
[00:13:02] It comes back together. Yeah.
[00:13:03] They come back together. You’ve touched on this, but, but I want to dig into it a little bit
[00:13:08] because the second reason you point out that this is concerning is that violence is no longer
[00:13:14] one-sided. Tell me why that is so dangerous.
[00:13:17] Well, let me give you the data first. There was just an article that came out.
[00:13:21] I just read it this morning by Dan Byman from Georgetown and a co-author in the Atlantic,
[00:13:28] where they looked at the domestic terror attacks here in the United States.
[00:13:34] What they found was the, and they called it the far left, had more attacks than they have in the
[00:13:44] previous 30 years. So we are absolutely seeing a rise in violence from the
[00:13:51] other end of the political spectrum. And for those of us who study it, the far, and I’m sorry,
[00:13:57] I like, this is how the data divides it. The far right has so dominated the domestic terror
[00:14:05] landscape for the last, you know, 20 years. And the far left has in some ways been moribund.
[00:14:14] That was not always the case. And I’ll get back to that in a second. That the fact that we’re now
[00:14:20] seeing this,
[00:14:21] um, increase, and I suspect it’s going to continue to increase, signifies that we’re
[00:14:27] entering a new world where violence is not just coming from one camp or, or a series of groups
[00:14:32] on one side of the political spectrum, but the, the, the, the other side of the political spectrum
[00:14:38] is starting to react. The left used to dominate, the far left used to dominate domestic terrorism
[00:14:44] in the, in this country in the 1960s and the 1970s. You know, many of your listeners probably
[00:14:49] don’t remember. Um,
[00:14:51] but, but when we used to talk about, uh, domestic terror, we were talking about anarchist groups.
[00:14:57] We were talking about radical environmentalist groups, uh, symphonies, liberation army,
[00:15:02] which who kidnapped, um, Patty Hearst. These were all far left groups. Um, but that is now
[00:15:09] shifting and, and that makes people nervous. The reason it makes us nervous is from a law
[00:15:15] enforcement, uh, standpoint or a standpoint of how do you address this problem? And, and, and, and,
[00:15:21] and, and, and, and, and, and, and eliminate it, or at least reduce it, it is much, much easier to
[00:15:25] address, uh, domestic terrorism if it’s only coming from one side. So, and let me give you an example.
[00:15:33] Um, we had a, we had a rise in militias here in the United States in the 1990s. And, um, that sort
[00:15:42] of burst onto the scene in, in 1995 with the Oklahoma, uh, the federal building attack. Timothy
[00:15:48] Bayes attack that killed, I don’t know, 170 something people. Americans didn’t realize at
[00:15:55] the time that militias were growing around the country. And Americans suddenly were like,
[00:16:00] where did this come from? What does this mean? And they were horrified by it. What happened was
[00:16:06] two things. Individuals stopped joining militias and recruitment into these groups around the
[00:16:12] country sort of plummeted. And then the FBI started to take these groups very seriously
[00:16:18] rather than sort of ignoring them. They infiltrated them. They identified who the
[00:16:22] leaders were. They prosecuted the leaders. And we saw literally a reversal in the growth of
[00:16:29] violent militias around the country. That started to turn around in the early 2000s
[00:16:36] and accelerated in 2008. And we suspect that’s because of the election of America’s first Black
[00:16:42] president. But again, we saw after 1995,
[00:16:48] that if law enforcement actually wants to reduce their numbers, wants to neutralize them,
[00:16:56] we have the capacity to do that. It’s much harder if you’re seeing growth on both sides because they
[00:17:02] feed off themselves. And the story that they tell to recruit additional people and to make their
[00:17:07] members scared and to convince them that they have to prepare for potential war is they point to
[00:17:15] the threat on the other side. And
[00:17:18] one of the things we know from lots of research in psychology is that people love their rights
[00:17:24] and freedoms, but they love security and feeling safe more than that. And if you can convince them
[00:17:30] that they and their families are threatened, they will be willing to give up their rights
[00:17:35] and freedoms if they think you’re going to protect them. And having militias or having
[00:17:41] violence on the other side just serves as really effective evidence
[00:17:48] for them to recruit. And it creates a much, much more heightened threat environment.
[00:17:53] That is the scary part, right? I mean, I don’t care. Across time, across regions,
[00:17:58] it’s almost always, it’s a very small percentage of the society that feels like political violence
[00:18:05] is a justifiable tool, like believes in political violence as an offensive political weapon. But
[00:18:14] once you get caught up in this spiral and people start to think, no, no,
[00:18:17] this isn’t going to work, this isn’t going to work, this isn’t going to work, this isn’t going to work, this isn’t going to work,
[00:18:18] this is now an act of self-defense, many more people are willing to use violence to defend
[00:18:23] themselves if they see an existential threat before them. And I feel like that feels like
[00:18:32] the danger here, right? Exactly. And it’s not based on an ideology, really. Because as you said,
[00:18:40] every country, every society has its small group of radicals, right? That’s just the distribution
[00:18:46] of people.
[00:18:48] And they usually aren’t able to cause trouble because their ideas, by definition, are radical,
[00:18:54] and most people are not. And so if they have some radical goal that they are seeking, and let’s say
[00:19:02] a radical goal here in the United States is to turn America into a dictatorship or something
[00:19:09] less than a democracy, which most Americans do not want and do not believe in, then you have to
[00:19:15] get their support some other way. And so I think that’s a big part of the problem.
[00:19:17] You have to get their support some other way. And you have to convince them that the moment that
[00:19:21] we’re living in is desperately unsafe for them, and that big changes need to be made to make them
[00:19:27] secure. So radicals use violence as a tool for their own agendas.
[00:19:34] The third reason is that America’s law enforcement leaders aren’t what they used to be.
[00:19:40] That was a nice title. I changed that title from something much worse than that.
[00:19:44] Well, let’s see, but that actually could be interpreted in a few,
[00:19:47] different ways. So when you say that America’s law enforcement leaders are not what they used
[00:19:52] to be, and that this is one of the things that makes this moment a little more dangerous,
[00:19:57] what do you mean? Do you mean that the law enforcement institutions themselves aren’t as
[00:20:01] good or are not as reliable? Or do you mean the nature of the threat itself is just intimately
[00:20:06] more difficult to counter? It’s the actual individuals,
[00:20:09] individuals leading organizations like the FBI and Homeland Security. And we could throw DOD in
[00:20:16] there as well.
[00:20:17] That, you know, never in my lifetime have we had leaders of these three
[00:20:27] unbelievably important institutions have as little experience, have as little character,
[00:20:34] and have, let’s just leave it at that, to run these institutions.
[00:20:40] We don’t have to.
[00:20:40] Yeah. Well, I get a lot of hate mail, or I get more, I get more really positive love mail,
[00:20:47] but I get a lot of hate mail, and I don’t want to increase that.
[00:20:50] No, it’s a clown show right now.
[00:20:52] It’s a clown show. Imagine if Kash Patel had been head of the FBI after the Oklahoma City bombing,
[00:20:59] he would have had no idea how to proceed to try to eradicate the far right,
[00:21:05] the far right groups that were growing. And he’s so partisan, and his boss is so partisan
[00:21:13] that he would be told not to go after them.
[00:21:17] Here you have violent extremism rising in the country, and you have, you know,
[00:21:25] leaders of our main institutions designed to ensure safety, security, law, and order in this
[00:21:34] country who are not competent to do that and are politicized so that even if they were competent
[00:21:42] and they were given all the data to show where the threat,
[00:21:47] really, is emanating from, they would choose to turn a blind eye to it.
[00:21:52] So when I say, you know, our leaders are not what they used to be,
[00:21:56] it’s really pointing a finger at the people who are in decision-making roles right now
[00:22:01] who do not have the background, the experience, the talent to actually effectively keep America safe.
[00:22:10] I just want to echo that, and the operative word there is leadership, because I did not mean to
[00:22:15] besmirch everybody.
[00:22:17] FBI agent, I’m sure there are plenty of smart, capable, well-meaning people at that institution.
[00:22:23] The problem is the leadership, which is political.
[00:22:26] That’s the weakness at the moment.
[00:22:47] The problem is the leadership, which is political.
[00:23:17] Because I had to just set it up once, and it’s continued to work for me and keep me protected
[00:23:23] and keep me private as a person online.
[00:23:26] Delete.me makes it easy, quick, and safe to remove your personal data online at a time
[00:23:31] when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone vulnerable.
[00:23:36] With Delete.me, you can protect your personal privacy or the privacy of your business from
[00:23:40] doxing attacks.
[00:23:41] Take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Delete.me.
[00:23:46] Now at a special discount for…
[00:23:47] Get 20% off your Delete.me plan when you go to joindeleteme.com slash vox and use promo code vox at checkout.
[00:23:57] The only way to get 20% off is to go to joindeleteme.com slash vox and enter code vox at checkout.
[00:24:04] That’s joindeleteme.com slash vox code vox.
[00:24:10] Support for the show comes from Mint Mobile.
[00:24:13] We all have that stubborn friend who insists on doing things the hard way.
[00:24:17] Like your friend whose car only starts 60% of the time.
[00:24:21] Or your other friend who never drinks water and for some reason always has a headache.
[00:24:26] Well, let’s make sure you’re not the friend who’s overpaying for wireless in 2026.
[00:24:32] Go with Mint Mobile instead.
[00:24:34] Same coverage, same speed, just without the inflated price tag.
[00:24:38] The premium wireless you expect, unlimited talk, text, and data, but at a fraction of what others charge.
[00:24:45] Ready to stop paying for more than you have to?
[00:24:47] New Mint Mobile.
[00:24:47] New customers can make the switch today and for a limited time.
[00:24:50] Get unlimited premium wireless for just $15 per month.
[00:24:54] Switch now at mintmobile.com slash grayarea.
[00:24:57] That’s mintmobile.com slash grayarea.
[00:25:00] Upfront payment of 90 for six months, or $180 for a 12-month plan required.
[00:25:07] Or $15 a month equivalent.
[00:25:09] Taxes and fees extra.
[00:25:11] Initial plan term only.
[00:25:13] Over 50 gigabytes may slow when network is busy.
[00:25:16] Capable device required.
[00:25:17] Availability, speed, and coverage varies.
[00:25:20] Additional terms apply.
[00:25:21] See mintmobile.com.
[00:25:28] Support for the show comes from Bombas.
[00:25:31] It’s the new year, so you probably have a long list of resolutions to make your life happier and more productive.
[00:25:38] Everyone has their own system.
[00:25:40] Here’s mine.
[00:25:41] I take last year’s resolutions and change I resolve to I resolve not to.
[00:25:47] This year, I resolve not to.
[00:25:47] This year, I’ve resolved not to drink less wine, not to do more exercise, not to be a more patient, attentive, and gracious husband and father, and not to make smoother segs and ads for Bombas.
[00:26:00] If you’re trying to hit the gym or get more active, the all-new Bombas sports socks are engineered with sport-specific comfort for running, golf, hiking, skiing, snowboarding, and all sport.
[00:26:12] For those every day around the house resolutions, Bombas also has you covered with the super-lightweight.
[00:26:17] Luxurious Sherpa Sunday slippers and new squishy Saturday suede slip-ons for comfort on the go.
[00:26:24] You may know I’ve tried out Bombas myself.
[00:26:26] I’ve been rocking the sports socks for over a year now.
[00:26:30] They are my favorite.
[00:26:31] I work out in them.
[00:26:32] I run in them.
[00:26:33] I use them basically every day.
[00:26:35] You can head over to bombas.com slash gray area and use code gray area for 20% off your first purchase.
[00:26:43] That’s B-O-M-B-A-S dot com slash gray area.
[00:26:47] Code gray area at checkout.
[00:27:06] I do not think we are in a cold civil war.
[00:27:09] I do not think we are on the precipice of a hot civil war.
[00:27:12] I agree.
[00:27:13] But I also believe that political order can collapse very quickly.
[00:27:17] And we have to take the warning signs seriously.
[00:27:22] And it is in that spirit that I ask you what I’m about to ask you.
[00:27:29] You are an expert in civil wars.
[00:27:32] You study how they start and how they end.
[00:27:35] You wrote a book about this.
[00:27:37] Given everything we’ve just discussed, given everything that is happening in the world as you see it,
[00:27:42] how do you currently assess where we are right now as a country?
[00:27:46] Okay.
[00:27:47] So if we are in some kind of violence continuum where one pole is perfect peace and harmony and the other pole is Mad Max Fury Road, where are we?
[00:27:57] We are in a high risk zone for political violence.
[00:28:01] Let me also be clear.
[00:28:03] When we talk about civil war today, when experts talk about civil wars, they’re not talking about the type of civil wars that most Americans envision.
[00:28:10] You know, they know the first American civil war.
[00:28:13] So they think about civil wars as these two big armies.
[00:28:17] Meeting on the battlefield.
[00:28:19] And that back then was unusual.
[00:28:22] It doesn’t happen these days.
[00:28:24] What we see, especially in wealthy, powerful countries, is really more a form of insurgency and a form of sort of persistent high-grade terror.
[00:28:39] So what Israel lived with for, you know, for decades with Hamas, having, you know, bus bombs.
[00:28:47] And, you know, never actually having, you know, feeling fully secure, where the enemy is much, much weaker than you and is really, it’s not, for the most part, directing violence at soldiers.
[00:29:02] It’s directing violence at civilians or infrastructure or particularly targeted groups.
[00:29:09] That’s what we would see here in the United States.
[00:29:12] And we’re already starting to see it.
[00:29:14] You know, when the El Paso shooting happened.
[00:29:17] Or when the Buffalo shooting happened.
[00:29:19] Or when the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting happened.
[00:29:24] You know, the media tends to portray this as idiosyncratic events.
[00:29:31] Sort of isolated, one-up events.
[00:29:33] And so it makes it hard for Americans to connect the dots.
[00:29:36] But we have been experiencing, you know, pretty consistent levels of domestic terror.
[00:29:42] And we’re not even acknowledging it anymore.
[00:29:45] I mean, it’s like it’s happening.
[00:29:47] To the point where it’s becoming normalized.
[00:29:49] So that’s the type of violence we’re likely to see.
[00:29:52] And you often see that when one group feels hopeless.
[00:29:57] That they feel like the system isn’t working for them anymore.
[00:30:01] When they feel like their particular group is under siege.
[00:30:06] And they lose hope that working within the traditional, you know, political avenues will get them nowhere.
[00:30:13] If you look at the research, the underlying conditions.
[00:30:17] That lead to a high risk of political violence are a rapidly declining and weak democracy.
[00:30:26] To the point where it’s now in what we call a middle zone of partial democracy but partial autocracy.
[00:30:34] These weak regimes or these hybrid illiberal regimes are where almost all the violence happens.
[00:30:42] The U.S. is in that zone today.
[00:30:45] If those countries have…
[00:30:47] Political parties that divide along racial, religious, or ethnic lines, that tends to be where the violence happens.
[00:30:56] America’s parties, they’re not entirely based on race, but the Republican Party is almost 80% white.
[00:31:04] You know, in a country that’s multi-ethnic and multi-religious, that starts to look like, you know, an identity-based party.
[00:31:13] And then the group that tends to initiate violence.
[00:31:16] Is the group that…
[00:31:17] The group that had once been politically and economically dominant and is in decline.
[00:31:22] So one of the ironies of the violence that we’re seeing now, especially from the far right, is that, you know, their man is in power.
[00:31:33] And MAGA controls essentially all three branches of government.
[00:31:37] They have the keys to the Cadillac.
[00:31:39] So they should be feeling like they’re not losing out.
[00:31:43] But I think that a subset of them still feels like they’re losing out.
[00:31:47] They feel like they’re under attack.
[00:31:48] This, of course, is repeated and encouraged by Trump and other MAGA leaders telling them that, you know, that life is getting worse for them.
[00:31:57] And so that’s motivating them.
[00:31:59] But on the other side, the far left actually sees that.
[00:32:04] Or, you know, let’s just call it, you know, people who didn’t support Donald Trump and his agenda are starting to see that they could be locked out of power.
[00:32:15] Maybe temporarily.
[00:32:16] Maybe temporarily.
[00:32:16] Maybe temporarily.
[00:32:17] Maybe temporarily.
[00:32:17] But perhaps even permanently.
[00:32:19] And if they feel like they’re going to permanently lose power, that’s going to have them lose hope.
[00:32:25] And that’s going to motivate them to start to turn to violent forms of trying to get their agenda done.
[00:32:32] How much have attitudes about the acceptance of political violence shifted in recent years?
[00:32:38] I am sure most Americans still reject political violence.
[00:32:42] But is it true that the percentage of people that accept it?
[00:32:47] Is that going up?
[00:32:48] And if it is, how much?
[00:32:50] It’s absolutely going up.
[00:32:51] Now, there have been many surveys done asking people under what conditions is violence justified?
[00:32:57] And their answer really depends on the conditions.
[00:33:02] High percentages on both sides of the political spectrum believe, as you said earlier, that it’s justified for self-defense or, you know, wording surrounding self-defense.
[00:33:13] And I don’t know the exact number, but it could be as high as 40%.
[00:33:17] That seems like a lot, Barbara.
[00:33:20] That seems like a lot.
[00:33:21] Yes, it is a lot.
[00:33:23] How high for someone like you who studies this, how high would that number have to get in terms of, and I understand a lot of things hinge on how the question is worded in terms of trying to tease out of people how acceptable they find political violence.
[00:33:39] But is there a certain threshold that’s common in the literature, right?
[00:33:42] Where if you have this percentage of the population that is sympathetic to or open to…
[00:33:47] …using political violence to advance your political goals, that once you go past this number, you’re in the danger zone?
[00:33:55] No, but we talk in terms of annual risk.
[00:33:59] So if a country has those two features, it’s a partial democracy with identity-based political parties.
[00:34:08] The model that many people have used says that that country has about a 4% annual risk.
[00:34:17] Of either political instability and or significant political violence.
[00:34:23] 4% sounds very low, but if those two features of your country don’t change, so you’ve remained sort of this weak, declining democracy, moving towards authoritarianism.
[00:34:34] And in fact, the faster you move there, the higher the risk is.
[00:34:37] But let’s say you remain there and your parties don’t do anything to reach across racial or religious lines, then that 4% annual risk…
[00:34:47] …goes up every year, so that by year 10 it’s at 40% annually, by 20 years it’s at 80% annually.
[00:34:54] So it doesn’t happen immediately.
[00:34:57] That’s why I think you’re right to say we’re not on the precipice right now.
[00:35:01] Because we really just went into this middle zone, probably in the last few months, and solidly in the middle zone.
[00:35:10] But if we stay here, and we don’t reform our political system…
[00:35:16] …and strengthen our democracy, and if the Republicans and Democrats still appeal to their same bases, then every year that risk is going to go up.
[00:35:28] Let me add what makes me nervous these days.
[00:35:32] We’ve always known that, that those are the underlying conditions.
[00:35:37] But there’s a second thing we know that I haven’t written about yet, but Americans should know about.
[00:35:43] That those wars…
[00:35:46] …that come from having weak democracies and tribal politics…
[00:35:53] …are started usually by specific groups in society.
[00:36:02] There’s a second type of war that’s started by the leader of a country.
[00:36:08] And that is where war is actually manufactured to help keep a leader in power.
[00:36:14] And, in effect…
[00:36:16] …it’s a kick the door finally shut on democracy.
[00:36:19] So if you look at how Putin really consolidated power in Russia after he was democratically elected in the 1990s…
[00:36:27] …he started a war with Chechnya.
[00:36:29] And then he was engaged in a war in Syria.
[00:36:35] And then he went into Crimea, and then he started the war in Ukraine.
[00:36:38] And we know that what this helps a leader do…
[00:36:43] …one, it tends to…
[00:36:45] …generate lots of nationalism.
[00:36:47] So sort of a raw, raw spirit behind the leader.
[00:36:51] And then we also know it allows the leader to declare emergency rule.
[00:36:56] And basically, you know, do away with any sort of democratic constraints as long as the war is going on.
[00:37:04] And I actually, when I wake up in the middle of the night and I worry about America…
[00:37:09] …one of the things that I worry about is that Donald Trump, before the 2028 election…
[00:37:14] …after the 2028 elections, in which he should be term limited out…
[00:37:20] …that he is going to fabricate some sort of emergency.
[00:37:24] And I think that emergency will include organized violence.
[00:37:29] And he’s going to use that as a way to stay in the White House.
[00:37:33] I would say that the Trump factor, and I really don’t mean this in like a partisan sense.
[00:37:38] I’m not a Republican. I’m not a Democrat either, really.
[00:37:42] Having someone in charge of the country who very clearly is not interested in bringing people together…
[00:37:52] …who is very clearly interested in using every opportunity he can to drive the wedge…
[00:37:58] …more and more deeper between what divides us.
[00:38:03] That scares me as much as anything.
[00:38:07] And I don’t know how much influence political elites really have anymore.
[00:38:12] In this increasingly sort of fractured society where we’re not all watching the same movie…
[00:38:16] …and we’re getting our information online.
[00:38:18] It’s not like everyone’s watching the nightly news anymore.
[00:38:21] But when it’s the President of the United States…
[00:38:25] …who lies with a versatility and a velocity that is staggering…
[00:38:35] …and is clearly willing to break anything he can in order to consolidate his own…
[00:38:41] …political power, it’s very, very concerning.
[00:38:46] I’m not trying to rank order all the things that concern me the most, but that’s a big one.
[00:38:52] And it seems like there’s a lot of research suggesting that that matters a great deal.
[00:38:57] So we absolutely have lots of studies that show that violent rhetoric…
[00:39:02] …especially if it’s put out into the public sphere by our leaders, has effects.
[00:39:08] It increases the use of violence.
[00:39:10] And people debate what the mechanisms are.
[00:39:14] But if you begin to normalize violence, if you justify violence…
[00:39:19] …if you actually encourage it, and when you forgive violence…
[00:39:24] …that’s sending a complete message that violence is okay.
[00:39:28] And so it’s not a surprise that when you have leaders behaving that way…
[00:39:33] …and saying violent things and saying that violence…
[00:39:36] …like, we should go out and, you know, take…
[00:39:39] …you know, take revenge and retribution…
[00:39:42] …that there will be a small subset of the population that will take that to heart…
[00:39:47] …and to follow what they perceive to be, maybe not orders, but encouragement.
[00:39:53] And then about accelerants.
[00:39:55] So, you know, we cannot have this discussion without talking about social media, right?
[00:40:01] So imagine a world, imagine a world where everything was the same…
[00:40:06] …except social media didn’t exist.
[00:40:08] So this is the world you and I grew up in.
[00:40:10] Trump was still in the White House.
[00:40:12] And Trump was saying all these things.
[00:40:14] And occasionally the nightly news would cover it.
[00:40:18] But mostly they wouldn’t because they wouldn’t understand.
[00:40:22] Nightly news becomes really boring if you’re repeating the same thing over and over again.
[00:40:26] But also because they understand how divisive and potentially damaging this could be for society.
[00:40:31] So imagine that world where that message doesn’t get out.
[00:40:36] It doesn’t go anywhere.
[00:40:38] It really doesn’t have the same effect as it does in a world today…
[00:40:43] …where people are not talking to each other as much.
[00:40:48] You know, they’re spending an enormous amount of time by themselves online or in chat rooms…
[00:40:55] …repeating the same thing over and over again with material that’s designed to heighten all of their worst emotions.
[00:41:06] And they’re not going outside and talking to their neighbors.
[00:41:09] Or they’re not engaging in various different groups that might have different opinions.
[00:41:16] So it’s just a world where in some ways the basest elements of humanity are simply being emphasized…
[00:41:30] …to the exclusion of everything else.
[00:41:32] And then people are living in isolation of each other.
[00:41:36] Like completely isolated from them.
[00:41:39] And that’s why I talk about the
[00:41:50] help.
[00:41:52] Support for the gray area comes from HEMS.
[00:41:54] ED is more common than you think.
[00:41:57] But it can also be simpler to treat than you think, too.
[00:42:00] Through HEMS you can connect online with a licensed provider to access personalized treatment options…
[00:42:04] for ed if prescribed and if prescribed they say their options range from personalized products
[00:42:09] to trusted generics that cost 95 less than brand names hymns say they bring expert care straight
[00:42:15] to you with 100 online access to personalized treatments that put your goals first you can
[00:42:21] think of hymns as your digital front door you can step through to get back to your old self it’s not
[00:42:25] a one-size-fits-all approach they say they put your health and goals first with real medical
[00:42:30] providers making sure you get what you need to get results you can get simple online access to
[00:42:35] personalized affordable care for ed hair loss weight loss and more by visiting hymns.com slash
[00:42:41] gray area that’s hymns.com slash gray area for your free online visit hymns.com slash gray area
[00:42:49] support for the show comes from shopify starting a new business has never been easy but without
[00:42:59] the right tools it can
[00:43:00] feel almost impossible shopify says they can help set you up for lasting success
[00:43:05] shopify is the commerce platform used by millions of businesses around the world they say they can
[00:43:11] help you tackle all those important tasks in one place from inventory to payments to analytics and
[00:43:17] more no need to save multiple websites or try to figure out what platform is hosting the tool that
[00:43:23] you need everything is all in one place making your life easier and your business operations
[00:43:28] smoother let shopify
[00:43:30] be your commerce expert with world-class expertise in everything from managing inventory to
[00:43:35] international shipping to processing returns and beyond you can get started with your own design
[00:43:41] studio with hundreds of ready-to-use templates shopify helps you build a beautiful online store
[00:43:46] that matches your brand style it’s time to turn those what-ifs into with shopify today you can
[00:43:53] sign up for your one dollar per month trial period and start selling today at shopify.com
[00:43:59] box go to shopify
[00:44:00] dot com slash box. That’s Shopify dot com slash box.
[00:44:10] Support for the show comes from Shopify. Starting a new business has never been easy,
[00:44:15] but without the right tools, it can feel almost impossible. Shopify says they can help set you up
[00:44:20] for lasting success. Shopify is the commerce platform used by millions of businesses around
[00:44:26] the world. They say they can help you tackle all those important tasks in one place from inventory
[00:44:32] to payments to analytics and more. No need to save multiple websites or try to figure out what
[00:44:37] platform is hosting the tool that you need. Everything is all in one place, making your
[00:44:42] life easier and your business operations smoother. Let Shopify be your commerce expert with world
[00:44:48] class expertise in everything from managing inventory to international shipping to processing
[00:44:53] returns and beyond. You can get started with your business.
[00:44:56] own design studio with hundreds of ready to use templates. Shopify helps you build a beautiful
[00:45:01] online store that matches your brand style. It’s time to turn those what ifs into with Shopify
[00:45:08] today. You can sign up for your one dollar per month trial period and start selling today at
[00:45:13] Shopify dot com slash box. Go to Shopify dot com slash box. That’s Shopify dot com slash box.
[00:45:26] A lot of what we’re seeing now really does feel post-ideological in the sense that, I mean,
[00:45:48] you know this better than I do, right? In the past, a lot of America’s political violence,
[00:45:53] it felt more organized, right? Whether it’s the,
[00:45:56] Yes.
[00:45:56] the weather underground from the 60s or the Klan or militias.
[00:46:00] Yes.
[00:46:00] There were clear ideological projects behind it. And this, I’m sure there are exceptions to this,
[00:46:08] but there’s quite a bit of violence, including the individual who shot and killed Charlie Kirk,
[00:46:15] where if there is some ideological component to it, it feels so muddled and incoherent that I
[00:46:21] don’t even, I don’t know what to make of it. It’s not legible to me. Is that, are you seeing that?
[00:46:26] Well, it’s so interesting. You know, when people were first, you know, when Tyler Robinson was
[00:46:30] first identified, the guy who killed Charlie Kirk and people were, you know, desperate to see,
[00:46:36] is he from the right or from the left? And, and, and that he’d left some clues and there was,
[00:46:42] you know, engravings on the casings of the, of, of the bullets. And, you know, they looked at the
[00:46:49] social media that he was, he was on and it was actually not easy to determine. And I’m not sure
[00:46:55] they still have determined exactly what his ideology was. It was a mixture of memes and,
[00:47:00] and, and it was actually kind of funny because, you know, the people reporting on it weren’t
[00:47:07] familiar with this whole world, this online world. And you could tell that they didn’t,
[00:47:12] they didn’t quite understand it. And, and, and I would be in that category. I’m like,
[00:47:16] I’m like, this is not the ideology that we had in the past. And it has a mixture of all sorts
[00:47:22] of things. And, and in the end, it really, what it comes,
[00:47:25] it just seems almost like entertainment, not, not, not like the real world. This is,
[00:47:31] this is just almost kind of like teenage boy, ha ha, you know, stuff. I’m cool. Look,
[00:47:39] I got this meme. I can say this. It’s hard to determine like what underlies it, except this
[00:47:44] insider’s world of, of jokes. It feels nihilistic. It feels like violence in search of an ideology,
[00:47:55] rather than ideology, um, in search of violence, um, or ideology leading to violence. But I,
[00:48:02] I don’t know. I mean, I’ve seen some of the reporting. I, he, he, he does, he did seem to
[00:48:06] have some, some, you know, leftist politics, but this is not someone who was reading Karl Marx and
[00:48:13] decided to, you know, start the revolution. Right. I mean, it’s just, it’s just, it’s just,
[00:48:19] I don’t know. It’s, I guess this is what it, what it is in, in the, the internet era.
[00:48:25] I like the digital revolution has just scrambled our politics in ways that you wonder, you know,
[00:48:31] if the internet didn’t exist with this, with Robinson, with Tyler Robinson being college now
[00:48:36] on a scholarship, I think he would, I think he would too. I think he would, you know, I, I think
[00:48:42] he’d be, you know, maybe he’d be hanging out at the seven 11 on a Friday night and, and drinking
[00:48:47] too much beer, but, um, but you know, he wouldn’t be spending hours and hours and hours, uh, on
[00:48:54] these sites that are just.
[00:48:55] Feeding him crap, you know?
[00:49:00] I, you know, I wonder when you have isolated people like this who, who are radicalized online,
[00:49:08] the way you’re talking about, um, people who I’m sure in many cases have serious mental health
[00:49:14] issues, is it even useful to think of this still as political violence in the traditional sense,
[00:49:22] or is it something new? Not worse, not better.
[00:49:25] It’s just a different category of violence.
[00:49:28] Oh, that’s a great, a great question.
[00:49:29] I can’t even, I don’t have an answer to it. I’m just throwing it out there.
[00:49:33] I would tend to still consider it political violence. You know, you could ask the same thing about, you know,
[00:49:38] is, is a mass murder in a, in a synagogue, is that political? And I think on the surface, you’re just like,
[00:49:45] no, that’s probably religious or that’s probably anti-Semitic, but I see that as political because,
[00:49:52] um, underlying the, at least those decisions, let’s, let’s put Tyler Robinson and let’s put, um,
[00:50:00] you know, let’s say, let’s even say that the guy who drove the, the car, the truck into the church yesterday,
[00:50:06] like things that are hazier and, and less cohesive, but a lot of the violence that we see directed at
[00:50:15] civilians, uh, you know, black Americans, Jews, um, uh, Latinos, women, um, is perpetrated by
[00:50:24] white nationalist groups. And, and the reason that’s political is that they’re targeting these
[00:50:29] groups, not because they necessarily hate them and just want to inflict pain. They’re targeting
[00:50:33] these groups because this is their strategy to reclaim America that, and the strategy is if they
[00:50:41] can, they can intimidate these groups into submission or better yet,
[00:50:45] they can convince them to leave the country entirely or leave Michigan entirely or leave
[00:50:50] whatever state they’re in entirely. Then the demographics change in favor of whites and
[00:50:56] whites can one once again, regain what they believe is their rightful, um, head of, of the
[00:51:04] political system. So, so even when something doesn’t look political, it, it, it, it looks
[00:51:09] racist or it looks anti-Semitic. It is almost always driven by,
[00:51:15] you know, the changing demographics here in the United States and changing demographics here in
[00:51:19] the United States matters to white supremacists because it means that their lock on power
[00:51:24] is declining. Certainly some, some cases are, are, are more clear cut than others. It’s just,
[00:51:32] look, like you were saying, when we have kids, basically, you know, shit posting online,
[00:51:39] inscribing gamer internet memes onto bullets,
[00:51:43] it’s hard to tell sometimes how much of the violence is more like some kind of nihilistic
[00:51:50] troll job and how much of it is driven by sincere beliefs. You know, in the end,
[00:51:56] murder is murder and it doesn’t matter because people are dead. People are dead. But in terms
[00:52:00] of understanding the underlying problem so that we can figure out what to do about it,
[00:52:05] the motivations of people do matter. And sometimes the motivations of people are just fucking
[00:52:12] incoherent.
[00:52:12] But in some ways, it doesn’t it doesn’t matter if if the if let’s say these incoherent individual lone wolf incoherent attacks continue and they increase, which I actually think they will, because if we continue not to regulate social media and in an age of A.I.
[00:52:29] where we will increasingly have more and more unemployed young people with nothing to do but to stay online and we know that radicalization happens online, then this type of even incoherent violence is likely to increase.
[00:52:43] Whether it’s political or not doesn’t really matter if you have political leaders who are then going to exploit that violence and they’re going to exploit it to create an even bigger wedge between members.
[00:52:58] Members of society and to use it as a justification for emergency powers and potentially martial law.
[00:53:06] That seems to be one consequence of having more random nihilistic acts of violence is that it actually may make it easier for the violence entrepreneurs to project their own narratives onto otherwise incoherent acts.
[00:53:17] And ultimately, what actually happened and why won’t matter.
[00:53:20] What will matter is what millions of people believe happened.
[00:53:23] So wouldn’t it be great for Trump if if in the next few weeks we had a number.
[00:53:28] Of incoherent terrorist attacks in Portland, you know that there were, you know, a few kids in Portland who kind of lost it over the next few weeks, it wouldn’t matter what their motivation was or whether it was political at all, but it would be used that way.
[00:53:45] Are you surprised we don’t have more violence than we do actually mean that the fact that.
[00:53:53] In this country, we have a shit ton of guns, more guns than anyone else.
[00:53:59] We have expansive, robust protections for speech more than any other country, which I think is good, by the way.
[00:54:07] But it also means there’s a lot of reckless and hateful speech.
[00:54:12] Given those two conditions, do you think it’s just reasonable to conclude that there’s just going to be a higher baseline of political violence here?
[00:54:22] Well, for sure, we have more political violence than, you know, comparable countries.
[00:54:28] We have more advanced industrialized democracies around the world.
[00:54:31] And that is that is because we have more guns than anybody else.
[00:54:34] Am I surprised we don’t have more?
[00:54:36] Actually, I’m not because, like, Americans really are pretty extraordinary people.
[00:54:45] I had dinner last night with my brother and his wife and his wife is German.
[00:54:50] And she had two young people from Germany visiting.
[00:54:53] We all had dinner together.
[00:54:55] And they said that they were really worried about coming to the United States.
[00:54:58] Because they they were like, oh, my gosh, like, it’s violent and everybody has guns.
[00:55:02] And and they recounted a story that day that a neighbor knocked on the front door and my sister in law opened the door and they were like, why are you open the door?
[00:55:12] Don’t open the door.
[00:55:13] They could have a gun.
[00:55:14] And I just started laughing.
[00:55:16] And I was just like, that’s actually not the way it is.
[00:55:19] And then when I asked him, like, what has been the biggest surprise for you?
[00:55:22] You’ve been here in America for a week.
[00:55:24] And they’re they’re just like, how friendly and kind and generous.
[00:55:28] Generous Americans are like every interaction we have had has been extremely positive.
[00:55:35] And and that’s why I’m not surprised.
[00:55:37] Drive around the United States, go to the reddest parts of the United States and go to a, you know, go to the local restaurant and people will be friendly.
[00:55:48] And and and and, you know, there is there is something unique about Americans.
[00:55:53] And and what it makes me sort of think about the countermeasures.
[00:55:58] Oh, my God, given how awesome this country is and how warm our people are, like, what would it be like if we if we simply had less guns or what if what would it be like if we had real gun control so that, you know, people with mental health issues or a history of domestic violence don’t can’t easily get guns?
[00:56:20] Like, like, what if we if we just put reasonable, rational, humane controls in place?
[00:56:28] God, it would be even better.
[00:56:31] Reasonable, rational.
[00:56:33] Come on, settle down.
[00:56:35] Settle down.
[00:56:36] I look, I will say I’m glad you made those points.
[00:56:39] Right.
[00:56:39] Because I live I live in southern Mississippi.
[00:56:42] All right.
[00:56:42] I didn’t live here for a long time, but I grew up here and I moved back not too long ago.
[00:56:48] It’s fine.
[00:56:49] People are, for the most part, wonderful like they are everywhere else.
[00:56:54] And I don’t want to come on this show and use this platform to, like, hysterically.
[00:56:58] Overstate how terrible and dangerous things are, but I also know that there there’s a lot about this moment that actually is scary and I don’t know what the right balance is, you know, I don’t want to be an alarmist, but I also want to be sober and clear eyed and maybe what I’m really getting at is how should we feel about just where we are generally right now?
[00:57:26] I’m genuinely.
[00:57:28] Worried.
[00:57:29] And I’ll I think America, I think for things to get better, it’s the only way it’s going to happen is from the bottom up that we have, you know, three hundred and forty million Americans.
[00:57:44] And if if they decided to demand real democracy, if they were to demand that our leaders uphold democratic norms, that we have.
[00:57:58] We have much more power than we think.
[00:58:00] So so, you know, for me, it’s whether the American public actually wakes up and realizes that this moment we’re in is a critical, you know, potential turning point and that they have all the power they would ever need to to stop the slide towards authoritarianism.
[00:58:27] But that.
[00:58:28] If they remain passive, you know, they’re they’re going to lose it.
[00:58:33] So.
[00:58:36] Let me ask you this.
[00:58:38] How much of a problem is it that we have a dysfunctional Congress that can’t even keep the government open, much less.
[00:58:48] Enact any reforms of legislation that that might help with any of our underlying problems.
[00:58:54] I mean, you say we need to succumb from the bottom up.
[00:58:57] Is that to say that?
[00:58:58] There’s no chance in hell any solutions are going to come from the top down.
[00:59:01] I think there’s no chance in hell it’s going to come from the top down.
[00:59:05] Listen, the main check on executive power in this country is Congress.
[00:59:10] That is the main check on the president.
[00:59:12] And they have completely absconded that they have completely given their power to the president, to a president who is outright stated that he wants to be an imperial president.
[00:59:22] He would love to be king.
[00:59:24] And they have essentially handed over their own.
[00:59:28] Power.
[00:59:28] Who does that?
[00:59:29] Usually people are very protective and they will they will fight to keep the power that they have.
[00:59:35] And here we have a Congress that simply handed it over to the president.
[00:59:38] So it’s not going to come from the top down.
[00:59:41] You know, American citizens are going to have to take their power back.
[00:59:44] And that that happens usually in two ways.
[00:59:48] Massive turnout at the polls.
[00:59:51] Imagine imagine if in the midterm elections, let’s just say the midterm elections, if, you know,
[00:59:58] 75, 80 percent of eligible voters voted like that would just change the outcome of Congress, even with gerrymandering.
[01:00:06] Imagine imagine if that happened in the in the 2028 elections, if we had massive turnout.
[01:00:12] So you see reform coming from the bottom up through massive campaigns for turnout at elections and through peaceful, peaceful protests that are sustained that include,
[01:00:27] you know,
[01:00:28] usually around three, three and a half percent of the population and that include a broad range of the population.
[01:00:35] So we know what what works to to actually change the system, but it’s going to come up.
[01:00:42] It’s going to come down to the American public being willing to take action.
[01:00:47] Now, you have a lot more to say about this, and if people want to read those thoughts, how can they find your excellent Substack?
[01:00:55] You can find me on Substack.
[01:00:57] It is called.
[01:00:57] Here.
[01:00:58] Be dragons.
[01:00:59] I love the title.
[01:00:59] Some people don’t, but it’s a reference to old maps, which I love.
[01:01:04] The title is Here be dragons warning signs from the edges of democracy.
[01:01:10] Well, count me in the camp that loves it.
[01:01:11] Barbara Walter, this is great.
[01:01:13] I appreciate you on short notice coming in and talking to us about this.
[01:01:18] Thank you so much.
[01:01:19] My pleasure. Thanks, Sean.
[01:01:27] OK, I hope you enjoyed this episode.
[01:01:30] I know it was a little heavy, but it felt necessary and useful, I hope.
[01:01:37] But as always, we do want to know what you think.
[01:01:41] So drop us a line at the gray area at Vox dot com, or you can leave us a message on our new voicemail line at one eight hundred two one four five seven four nine.
[01:01:53] And please, if you have the time, go ahead and rate and review and subscribe.
[01:01:57] To the podcast.
[01:01:59] It helps us grow our show.
[01:02:02] This episode was produced by Beth Morrissey, edited by Jorge Just, engineered by Christian Ayala, fact checked by Melissa Hirsch and Alex Overington wrote our theme music.
[01:02:13] New episodes of the gray area drop on Mondays.
[01:02:16] Listen and subscribe.
[01:02:18] The show is part of Vox.
[01:02:20] Support Vox’s journalism by joining our membership program today.
[01:02:24] Go to Vox dot com slash members to sign up.
[01:02:27] And if you decide to sign up because of this show, let us know.
[01:02:42] And don’t forget, if you’re a fan of the show, do me a favor and consider becoming a Vox member.
[01:02:47] If you do, you can get this podcast without ads.
[01:02:51] That’s right. No ads.
[01:02:53] There’s also a member exclusive newsletter.
[01:02:55] And you’ll help Vox.
[01:02:57] In the show, which is good news for all of you philanthropists out there.
[01:03:01] If you sign up now, you’ll save 20 bucks on an annual membership.
[01:03:05] That’s more than 30 percent off.
[01:03:07] Go to Vox dot com slash members to join.