America’s New Age of Political Violence — with Barbara F. Walter

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: The Prof G Pod with Scott Galloway

Episode: America’s New Age of Political Violence — with Barbara F. Walter
Date: September 14, 2025
Host: Scott Galloway
Guest: Prof. Barbara F. Walter (UC San Diego, author of How Civil Wars Start)
Topic: Political violence in the US, root causes, comparative insights, and potential solutions

---

Overview

In this urgent and timely episode, Scott Galloway sits down with Professor Barbara F. Walter, a leading expert on civil wars and political violence, to discuss America’s escalating atmosphere of political violence following the high-profile murder of Charlie Kirk. Drawing on global expertise and US history, Walter outlines the structural conditions that make societies prone to violence, assesses current US vulnerabilities, and suggests possible policy responses.
The tone is sober, analytical, and at times deeply personal, as both host and guest grapple with the societal and human costs of radicalization.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Kirk Assassination and the Political Moment

[01:31]

• Galloway opens by emphasizing the different, ominous mood following the murder of Charlie Kirk:
  • “This feels as if we're on the precipice of something really dark.”
  • He draws a distinction between this event and past crises like January 6, noting an increased sense of threat and instability.

2. How Crises Fuel Authoritarianism

[03:26]

• Walter: Authoritarian “endgames” typically involve the exploitation or manufacture of crises:
  • “The strategy that you see these aspiring dictators pursue time and time again is they seek a crisis or an emergency... You use a violent episode to, one, demonize your opponent... and two, to convince people that power needs to be centralized, to declare a state of emergency, to declare martial law, and people will almost always exchange freedom for security.”
  • She cautions that, while Kirk’s murder is not the ‘Reichstag moment,’ the threat of such a moment exists between now and 2028 with potential for manipulation by political actors.

3. Social Media, Radicalization, and Young Men

[05:27]

• Galloway addresses the link between online behavior, young men, and violence.
• Walter: Facebook research revealed that time spent online increases risks of radicalization, depression, and violence.
  • “Spending hours and hours a day alone in your living room or in your bedroom watching violent videos or engaging in really extremist chat rooms does increase how radical you ultimately become and how likely you are to use violence.”
  • Young men, already at higher risk, are especially vulnerable to these online pipelines of extremism.

4. Warning Signs: Is America at Risk for a Civil War?

[09:06]

• Walter: Cites CIA’s Political Instability Task Force research. Two main predictors of civil violence:

  1. Anocracy (partial democracy):
     • “The vast majority of civil wars do not happen in healthy democracies and they do not happen in full autocracies. They happen in between, in this middle zone... with elements of both.”
  2. Identity-based political parties:
     • Where political parties align around race, religion, or ethnicity, not ideology.

• By both measures, the US is “solidly in the anocracy zone” and at risk:

  • “We are no longer considered by any group that studies democracy a full democracy... If you look at our political parties, they started breaking down by race and religion starting around 2018.”

• Immediate triggers:

  • Contested elections, loss of trust in electoral systems, and 'zero-sum' politics where losing means permanent exclusion.

5. Racial and Identity Divisions

[17:35 & 18:19]

• Galloway and Walter discuss the increasing alignment of political parties with ethnic and religious identities.
• Walter:
  • Although Trump has made some effort to reach Latinos, “the vast majority of Black Americans voted Democrat... whites overwhelmingly vote Republican—about 80%.”
  • “This starts to meet this criteria of identity based rather than ideologically based.”

6. Societal Response: Then and Now

[21:09]

• Walter: Contrasts past and current American reactions to political violence:
  • In the 1990s (Oklahoma City bombing), the response was “absolute horror, absolute condemnation” and aggressive FBI action.
  • Today, she sees a fractured response with some groups calling for retribution and the FBI being politicized and less effective.

7. Campus Trends: The Normalization of Violence

[27:10]

• Galloway flags rising student support for violence to silence speakers (“1 in 3 say violence is acceptable to stop a speaker”).
• Walter:
  • Attributes much of this change to the Internet and social media algorithms feeding emotionally charged, uncompromising content:
    • “We have a society that is much more distrustful of each other, distrustful of the system, isolated from each other... and then they hear something different... they're ready to go to battle.”
  • Criticizes universities for failing to teach debate and respect for speech.

8. The “Three-Legged Stool” of Political Violence

[31:10]

• Galloway’s thesis on root causes:

  1. Algorithms that promote rage
  2. Struggling young men (economically, socially, romantically)
  3. Ready access to guns
  • “We now believe... it’s not Russians... or income inequality... that is our enemy. It's our neighbor who has different political beliefs.”

• Walter: Fully agrees; radicalization would be far less likely “if the gunman... hadn’t had access to the Internet... and access to guns.”

  • Memorable quote:
    • “If this kid hadn't had access to the Internet, he would be a scholarship student and wouldn't be spending the rest of his life in prison, and Charlie Kirk, a father of two, would still be alive.” [33:48]

9. What to Do: Solutions and Policy Recommendations

[35:31]

• Walter: The most important step is restoring a “strong, healthy democracy”—but this is unlikely in the short term because political incentives discourage necessary reforms.

  • Known democratic deficits: gerrymandering, an unreformed Senate and electoral college, big money in politics.
  • Both parties have failed or refused to reform these.

• Most actionable solution:

  • Regulate social media algorithms.
    • “Have the courage to take on the tech companies, give up the money... do what’s right for America. Do what’s right for your teenage boy, and don't allow them to basically control the minds and the limbic systems of our kids. Set them up for a life that will be more divided, more hate filled, less prosperous, more violent than they would have otherwise gotten.” [39:04]

10. Final Note

• Both express a profound sense of heartbreak for all affected by political violence—victims, perpetrators, families, and the nation.

---

Notable Quotes

• Scott Galloway [01:31]:
  “This feels as if we're on the precipice of something really dark.”

• Barbara Walter [03:26]:
  “If they think they're losing, that democracy is about to disappear, they'll fight against that... And people will almost always exchange freedom for security.”

• Barbara Walter [09:06]:
  “The vast majority of political violence, the vast majority of civil wars do not happen in healthy democracies... They happen in between, in this middle zone.”

• Barbara Walter [33:48]:
  “If the gunman who killed Charlie Kirk hadn't had access to the Internet... he would still be in college and he'd still have a future ahead of him, and Charlie Kirk would still be alive.”

• Barbara Walter [39:04]:
  “Regulate the algorithms of social media... Set them up for a life that will be more divided, more hate filled, less prosperous, more violent than they would have otherwise gotten.”

---

Important Timestamps

• [01:31]: Galloway frames the darkness of the moment, introduces guest
• [03:26]: Walter explains how political crises are used by aspiring dictators
• [05:27]: Discussion of young men, online radicalization, and Facebook’s internal findings
• [09:06]: Core predictors of civil wars, how the US compares
• [18:19]: Discussion of racial identities in US political parties
• [21:09]: Historical versus current responses to domestic extremism
• [27:45]: Walter on internet-driven student radicalization and the failure of universities
• [33:06]: Galloway’s “three-legged stool” thesis and Walter’s agreement
• [35:31]: Walter’s solution: regulating social media algorithms and the limitations of political reform

---

Conclusion

This episode delivers a comprehensive, sobering analysis of America’s rising political violence. Prof. Walter’s expertise gives context to both the warning signs and possible interventions, while Galloway’s reflections bring the crisis down to the level of families and individuals. The episode stands out for its blend of data-driven insight and palpable emotional urgency.

---

Transcript

[A]

AI agents are getting pretty impressive. You might not even realize you're listening to one right now. We work 24. 7 to resolve customer inquiries. No hold music, no canned answers, no frustration. Visit Sierra AI to learn more. Support for the show comes from Mercury. What if banking did more? Because to you, it's more than an invoice. It's your hard work becoming revenue. It's more than a wire, it's payroll for your team. It's more than a deposit, it's landing your fundraise. The truth is, banking can do more. Mercury brings all the ways you use money into a single product that feels extraordinary to use. Visit mercury.com to join over 200,000 entrepreneurs who use Mercury to do more for their business. Mercury Banking that does more. Ford BlueCruise Hands Free highway driving takes the work out of being behind the wheel, allowing you to relax and reconnect while also staying in control. Enjoy the drive in BlueCruise enabled vehicles like the F150 Explorer and Mustang Mach E. Available feature on equipped vehicles terms apply. Does not replace safe driving. See Ford.com BlueCruise for more details.

[B]

So the murder of Charlie Kirk. This feels different. It feels as if we're on the precipice of something really dark. And I was thinking, when's the last time the nation was in this type of dark mood? And I would argue it's been a very long time. There's something very strange going on here. The vibe is very much that we are perhaps entering a descent into some sort of darkness. Even the January 6th riot or insurrection, whatever the term you want to use, it was embarrassing, or I found it embarrassing and humiliating and it made me angry. But this makes me, or I think this makes us somewhat, a little bit queasy. This feels as if something really terrible might happen, that this might be the starting gun or the ending gun for some sort of downward spiral. And we wanted to bring in someone who has a background in civil wars and political violence. So we found Professor Barbara Walter, who is a professor at UC San Diego School of Global Policy. Anyways, with that, let's bust right into it in this very, what feels like a very precarious, unsettling time. Here's our conversation with Professor Barbara Wall. Professor Walters, where does this podcast find you?

[A]

I'm in San Diego right now.

[B]

I was born in San Diego. My parents were living in Toronto. My mom was seven months pregnant and they got sick of the Toronto winter and they read an article saying San Diego had the best weather in North America. So they drove there, and I was born there a few weeks later. Anyways, let's bust right into this. As someone who studied political violence, what stands out to you most in the aftermath of the Kirk assassination?

[A]

So what worries me about the Kirk murder, or any type of crisis or crisis or emergency that happens between now and 2028, is that there is always an end game to democracy. And the end game is how does an aspiring dictator actually finally shut the door on democracy? And it's not easy to do because citizens don't wanna give up their rights and freedoms. And so if they think they're losing that democracy is about to disappear, they'll fight against that. So the strategy that you see these aspiring dictators pursue time and time again is they seek a crisis or an emergency, or they manufacture a crisis or a war. Netanyahu is doing that right now in the Middle east to keep himself in power. But it could also be something like the Charlie Kirk murder, where you use this. And we have a name for people who use. They're violence entrepreneurs. You use a violent episode to, one, demonize your opponent, say, oh, my gosh, look, they're animals, or they're dangerous or they're gonna kill you. And two, to convince people that power needs to be centralized, to declare a state of emergency, to declare martial law, and people will almost always freedom for security. And so I don't think this is that Reichstag moment. And I write about it in my Substack newsletter. This is not the Reichstag moment. But I think there will be a moment between now and 2028 where Trump finds some crisis and uses it to scare the bejesus out of Americans and convince them that he needs to gain more power to protect them, and Americans are going to give it to them.

[B]

I've read that a lot of times that these individuals think that they're, in order to capture social capital, believe that this is sort of a heroic act of violence. I've also noticed a pattern with political violence that it tends to be young men, young white men. And I'm curious also, have you done any studies connecting online behavior and a certain type of online behavior with either political violence or just mass shootings in general?

[A]

I haven't done that particular research. Interestingly enough, Facebook has. Do you remember a few Decembers back, there was a whistleblower, a Facebook employer named Francis Haugen, who turned over tens of thousands of pages of internal Facebook documentation to Congress and to the Wall Street Journal. And those documents outlined the internal experiments and studies that Facebook had done with the universe of the data that only Facebook has access to. And they looked at the effects of online time on a whole host of outcomes, from depression to anxiety to violence. And, you know, not surprisingly, they found that the more time you spent on Facebook and I assume other social media outlets, and again, you'd have to look at the content they were looking at, the more likely you were to experience a lot of these negative outcomes. So Facebook knows that. We also found out recently that Facebook suppressed information they had about the effects of social media on children. So we know that spending hours and hours a day alone in your living room or in your bedroom watching violent videos or engaging in really extremist chat rooms does increase how radical you ultimately become and how likely you are to use violence. And then to get back to young men, the vast majority of. Of this type of violence is committed by young men. And young men are spending more and more time online. And in some ways, it's really. It's a tragedy. It's a tragedy. Here are all these, you know, young men with, you know, promising futures. This was a straight an A student. He got a full scholarship to college. He had his whole world ahead of him, and yet most of his time increasingly was spent online. And we'll find out exactly what he was looking at and what he was engaging in. But we know that that does not make for healthy, well adjusted, peaceful people.

[B]

There's been a lot of discussion or a lot of rhetoric around, you know, kind of this is war, and then some other people saying that feels. One of the reasons this just feels so awful is it feels like there's a sense in the air that we may be on the precipice of something just very bad. And you have actually studied civil wars and around the world. And what are the kind of the. You study them globally. When you look at America today, what parallels or kind of warning signs do you see?

[A]

Well, I'll start with the underlying conditions. For five years between 2017 and 2021, I served on a task force run by the CIA called the Political Instability Task Force. And one of the goals of that task force was to come up with a model that would help the US Government predict what types of countries were likely to experience political violence and political instability within the next two years. And we. When this model was created, you had two types of people on the task force. You had experts on conflict like myself, and you had data analysts who worked for the agency. And the data analysts asked the experts to. They asked them to tell them everything we thought might potentially lead a country down the path towards war. And we gave them 38 different factors. So we actually didn't know which were the most important ones. So things like poverty, whether a country heavily discriminated against a particular group, whether a country was ethnically homogeneous or not, all sorts of stuff. And the analysts went away and when they came back they said, it turns out only two conditions were highly predictive and they were not the conditions that the experts expected. The first condition is something we called anocracy. All that means is a partial democracy. So, so the vast majority of political violence, the vast majority of civil wars do not happen in healthy democracies and they do not happen in full autocracies. They happen in between, in this middle zone where a country has some elements of democracy and they have some elements of autocracy. And they especially happen in these anocracies if they're rapidly moving from one side to another. So if you have a democracy that's rapidly declining, that puts it at risk of political violence. If you have an autocracy that's rapidly democratizing, think about Yugoslavia in the 1990s. That's where you get political violence. So that's the most important feature. Do you have a weak and rapidly changing type democracy? The second is whether. Whether citizens in those anocracies were basically choosing political party based on race, religion or ethnicity rather than on ideology. So you're joining a political party not because, not mostly because you're conservative or liberal, but you're joining because you're black or white or Muslim or Christian or Serb or Croatia. So if a country had these two features, it was a partial democracy with these identity based political parties. The task force put that country on a watch list. We called it the watch list and we considered it at high risk of political violence and instability within the next two years. So if you take those underlying conditions and you think about the United States today, the United States is now solidly in the the anocracy zone. Based on the measure we used on the task force, we are no longer considered by any group that studies democracy, a full democracy. We are in this middle zone. If you look at our political parties, they started breaking down into by race and religion starting around 2018. It got a little bit better in the last election where Latino men and African American men gravitated from the Democratic Party towards the Republican Party. But I suspect that's going to go back in the next election. So by both of these measures, the United States is in this high risk category today. Those are the underlying conditions. So then look at the more immediate conditions. So what tends to trigger civil war? What tends to trigger civil war? Often contested elections. It's elections that people don't trust, elections that are very close, and elections that have this sort of winner take all, zero sum feeling to them that if you lose the election, there might never be another election again and you might permanently be shut out of power. When you have that surrounding elections, people tend to start to give up on playing by the rules and the more extreme elements in the parties and their message, which is, you know the system is broken, you know we're never going to fix it, violence is justified. That message begins to resonate with the more moderate members of the party, and that's when you start to get in trouble.

[B]

We'll be right back.

[C]

Support for the show comes from Vanta As a founder, you're moving fast toward product, market fit, your next round or your first big enterprise deal. But with AI accelerating how quickly startups build and ship, your security expectations are higher earlier than ever. Getting security and compliance right can unlock growth or stall it if you wait too long. Vanta is a trust management platform that helps businesses automate security and compliance with deep integrations and automated workflows built for fast moving teams. So whether you're a startup tackling your first SoC2 or ISO 27001 or an enterprise managing vendor risk, Vanta's trust management platform makes it quicker, easier and more scalable. The results? According to an IDC study, Vanta customers slash over $500,000 a year in costs. Establishing trust isn't optional. Vanta makes it Automatic. Go to vanta.comvantage Prof. G to save $1,000 today through the Vanta for Startups program and join over 10,000ambitious companies already scaling with Vanta. That's V A n t a dot com Prof. G to save $1,000 for a limited time. Support for the show comes from Built Rewards. Paying rent every month can sometimes feel like you're just sending your money into the void, never to be seen again. But it doesn't have to be that way if you're paying rent without earning anything in return. Allow me to introduce you to Bilt Rewards. Bilt is a rewards program designed for renters who want to earn something for their largest monthly expense. By paying rent through Bilt, you earn flexible points that can be redeemed towards hundreds of hotels and airlines, a future rent payment, your next Lyft ride, and more. But it doesn't stop there. Built wants to make your entire neighborhood more rewarding. You can dine out at your favorite local restaurant restaurants and earn additional points, get VIP treatment at certain fitness studios, and enjoy exclusive experiences just for Built members every month. Built is turning a monthly expense into an opportunity to earn rewards and discover the best that your neighborhood has to offer. Your rent is finally working for you. Earn points on rent and around your neighborhood, wherever you call home by going to join built.com profg that's J-O-I N B I L T.com profile Prop G make sure to use the URL so.

[B]

They know we sent you.

[C]

Support for the show comes from LinkedIn. One of the hardest parts about moving to a new city is finding your people. You can look far and wide, but it's hard to find the people who just get you. And the same goes for you to be marketers. Locating the right people who align with your business and an audience that connects with your product and your mission can make all the difference. But instead, instead of spending hours and hours scavenging social media feeds, you can just tap LinkedIn ads to reach the right professionals. According to LinkedIn, they have grown to a network of over a billion professionals, making it stand apart from other ad buys. You can target your buyers by job title, industry, company role, seniority, skills and company revenue, giving you all of the professionals you need to reach in one place. So you can stop wasting budget on the wrong audience and start targeting the right right professionals only on LinkedIn ads. LinkedIn will even give you $100 credit on your next campaign. So you can try it yourself. Just go to LinkedIn.com Scott that's LinkedIn.com Scott Terms and conditions apply only on LinkedIn ads.

[B]

I think that's fascinating, this notion of an anocracy and that is somewhere in between if you're Singapore, China or Russia. Quite frankly, not a lot of risk if you're, I don't know, Japan or Canada. Healthy democracy, but something some hybrid in between isn't a good place to be. I think that's really fascinating. The second thing you mentioned that I didn't get a strong feel for whether we're there or not is when things are when there's racial divisiveness. A lot of this rhetoric is positioned as white Christian nationalists. Obviously non whites tend to gravitate, I think towards a more progressive viewpoint. Well, I'll stop there. Do you think we fit the conditions for that second criteria?

[A]

You know, it's really interesting. You know, I thought by this time Donald Trump in his second term we would clearly fit that criteria because I, you know, Donald Trump in his first term was more upfront. I thought about supporting the white nationalist agenda. He sort of allotted the rioters or the people who were parading in Charlottesville in 2017. He stepped back a bit with that. And I think he's realized that, for example, Latino community could be a potential voting bloc for him. You know, he hasn't really, you know, his immigration rates have disproportionately affected non whites. But I think he's a little more sensitive to the fact that Latinos helped him win. They're the fastest growing population here in the United States. They're not going away and he doesn't want to alienate them too much. And because the white population is declining compared to other groups in the United States, the Republican Party needs to reach across racial and religious lines. And so I think he's been a little more sensitive to that. But having said that, you know, after the 2020 election, if you looked at who voted, you know how Americans vote, the vast majority of black Americans voted Democrat. They still do. A majority of Latinos vote Democrat, A majority of a large majority of Muslims and Jews and Asians vote Democrat, and whites overwhelmingly vote Republican. It was about 80, 80% of whites voted Republican. And this is in a country that's multi ethnic and multi religious. So that really starts to meet this criteria of identity based rather than ideologically based. And also when you look at who gravitated towards the Republican Party over the last 10, 15 years, it was working class whites. And ideologically they would be much better served by the Democrats. So they're choosing the Republican Party for a whole host of other reasons unrelated to what would be in their economic and social interest.

[B]

So what's your sense of things? Do you feel that the table is set for something? And revolutions can take on different forms. Right. Or civil war can take on different forms. Do you think the table has been set for some sort of civil unrest that only gets worse and worse? Or like most things, will this begin? Will the half life of this be a few weeks and we'll move on to the next big thing?

[A]

You know, I wish I didn't have to say this. I think we're actually in a really very tough bad spot. And I'll tell you why. America has experienced political violence throughout our history. And in the 60s we saw that, but the response was almost always uniform. If we go back Even to the 1990s, in the 1990s, we started to see the rise of violent extremist militias in the United States. And Americans didn't really get a, didn't see this until the Oklahoma city bombing in 1995. And that sort of threw them into the limelight. And the response to that by American citizens was absolute horror, absolute condemnation. It didn't matter what drove this person, it didn't matter what political affiliation he had or all Americans condemned that violence. The second thing that happened was it activated the FBI to aggressively go after militia groups across the country and figure out who the leaders were, figure out where they were organizing and really in some respects neutralize them. So if you look at 1995, it was the peak of militias in the United States until recently. And after the FBI started focusing on this problem, we saw a pretty consistent and rapid decline that is not happening today. We now we've seen the rise of militias pretty quickly since about 2008 with the election of Barack Obama. And now we're seeing a series of domestic terror attacks and the response isn't by the FBI. Let's look at the problem that we have and let's root it out and let's figure out what's driving this. And the response by Americans is not, this is absolutely terrible. You're seeing pockets saying this is war, we need to get retribution, we need to eliminate the enemy. And this is not a healthy dynamic. We need to treat this in a unified way. That violence in whatever guys, especially politically motivated violence is not acceptable. And the FBI needs to address that. And we have an FBI that is politically motivated and not necessarily interested in rooting out all types of violence.

[B]

We'll be right back. Foreign.

[C]

We all have goals in life. Maybe you want to start a business, maybe you want to start a family, or maybe you want to throw a couple of pairs of socks and a frame pack and travel around the world. Whatever your hopes and dreams are, betterment can help you save and invest to get there. Betterment helps people and small businesses put.

[B]

Their money to work.

[C]

They automate to make saving simpler, optimized to make investing smarter and build innovative technology backed by financial experts. Whether you're saving for retirement, a down payment on a house or your kid's education, Betterment's goals based outlook helps you ground your financial decisions in your actual life. Their globally diversified portfolios help give you a solid financial foundation in turbulent times. And their tax smart features can help you save money. So if you want to stop worrying about how you're going to get there and start thinking about where you want to go, betterment might be a good option. Option don't just imagine a better future, start investing in one with betterment. Be invested in yourself. Be invested in your business. Be invested with betterment. Go to betterment.com to learn more. Investing involves risk performance, not guaranteed Support for the show comes from Upway. If you're tired of being stuck in traffic or watching gas prices climb higher and higher, you're not alone. There's a better, freer way to move. Move through your day and it might just change how you feel about commuting. An E bike from Upway can give you that feeling of freedom, fresh air, no traffic, no stress. It's not just good for your health, it's better for your wallet, your time and honestly, your happiness. Upway makes it easy. They offer top brands including Specialized, Cannondale and Aventon at up to 60% off retail. Every E bike is thoroughly inspected by a professional mechanic and comes with a one year warranty so you can ride with peace of mind. You can see search by brand or style, book a call with a real human for help, or even stop by their showrooms in New York or LA. So go to Upway Co and use code PROPG2025 to get $150 off your first ebike purchase of $1,000 or more. That's Upway code PRPG2025. Go ahead.

[B]

You won't regret it.

[C]

Support for the show comes from LinkedIn. We say this all the time on our show, but it bears repeating. Running a small business isn't just a full time job. It's about a dozen full time jobs that you rarely, if ever get to clock out of. At least until you get to the point where you can start hiring the dream team. And if you've made it that far, you already know there's no time to mess around. That's where LinkedIn Jobs comes in. LinkedIn makes it easy to post your job for free, share with your network and get qualified candidates that you you can manage all in one place. And LinkedIn's new AI feature can even help you write job descriptions and then quickly get it in front of the right people with deep candidate insights. And if you decide you want to go the extra mile to find the perfect candidate, LinkedIn says that promoted jobs get three times the number of qualified applicants. It's all these little things that let you find help fast without compromising on quality, which add up to you finally having extra time in the day for, I don't know, relaxing or knowing my listeners. You'll probably use that extra time to Expand your empire even further. Post your job for [e-mail] Prof. That's LinkedIn.com Prof. To post your job for free. Terms and conditions apply.

[B]

You're a full time. Prof. I spend a lot of time on campus. And there seems to be a very disturbing trend among students where they seem more accepting to the notion of violence as a means of countering what they see as violence, and that is words. And today, student acceptance of violence to silent speakers is at a record high. One in three students say violence is acceptable to stop a speaker, up from 1 in 5 in 2020. What do you account for the change or what do you think is responsible for the change?

[A]

I think the single biggest factor that's driving a lot of the breakdown of societal norms and societal threads and societal decency and civility is the Internet. You know, if you look at countries, if you look at democracies, if you look at speech, it really didn't start to unravel and get really heated and negative and uncompromising until about the, you know, late 2000s. And that, of course, is the introduction of the smartphone and the rise of people's reliance on social media for most of their news. And then when you started to have algorithms that were, you know, when the tech companies figured out that they could design algorithms that would push information into people's hands, that was sort of addictive, information that they couldn't keep their eyes off of, that kept them tied to their phones. That information was in many cases, the most emotionally charged, the most incendiary. It's information that was designed to ramp up people's emotions and sense of fight or flight. And I don't think it's a surprise that 20 years later we have a society that is much more distrustful of each other, distrustful of the system, isolated from each other. And I think that's what we're seeing. So I think that's the biggest reason is that a lot of these kids are getting their information from social media sites and they're being fed only a very particular segment of information, and they come to believe that, and it's delivered to them in the most impassioned way, which, of course, makes them particularly and passion as well. And then you see them come on campus and they've spent hours and hours and hours online talking to people who agree with them and tell them nothing different. And then they hear something different. They've also been told that those people are wrong and dangerous and they're ready to go to battle. So that's, I Think a big part of it. I actually think universities have done a terrible job educating students and taking this issue head on and talking about the importance of free speech, teaching students about debate, teaching students to listen to arguments and to take them seriously, and then to debate the ideas in a reasonable, logical way. I think we've basically not thrown our hands up. I think we've basically decided that maybe that was too hard or it might get us in trouble. Universities aren't really known and professors aren't really known to be the most courageous people. And I think it's just easier to just put our heads down and think that life is going to continue as it always has. And now we're seeing the effects of that.

[B]

Like most people, I've been thinking a lot about this and I want to put forward a thesis on what the root causes are. And you've already touched on a few and have you respond to it and then move to what some potential solutions might be. I see the three legs of the stool here, if you will, is one. What we've been talking about, and that is a connection between algorithms that promote incendiary content and rage to profit. We used to think sex sells. Actually, we found something that sells better, and it's rage. And the algorithms have figured that out and pit us against each other. And it's worked. We now believe that it's not Russians pouring over the border in Ukraine or the CCP or income inequality or climate change that is our enemy. It's our neighbor who has different political beliefs in us. And then two young men who are really struggling in our nation. Lack of economic and romantic opportunities. Biologically, prefrontal cortex doesn't catch up to a woman's until they're 25. Lack of male role models, an education system, I would argue that is somewhat biased against them, lack of economic opportunities. And then you pair that with, number one, they begin to sequester from society. And like any mammal, when they're not surrounded by other relationships, they start to go, quite frankly, crazy. Similar to an orca in a tank. Alone or leave your dog alone for a day and see what happens. And then the kicker to all of this, we don't have a monopoly on the first two. What we do have a monopoly on is divisive content, struggling men who have access to the guns. I found this crazy stat in the US I'm in London right now. In the UK, there's going to be 30 gun deaths this year. There's 120 a day in the United States. So since Charlie Cook's assassination or murder two days ago. There's already been eight times the number of gun deaths in the US that there will be all year in the uk. Where do I have that wrong? And what color would you add to that?

[A]

It is absolutely right, and I couldn't state it better than you just stated it. The only thing I'll add is if the gunman who killed Charlie Kirk hadn't had access to the Internet, if this was pre 2008, the world that you and I grew up in, and he didn't have access to guns, he would still be in college and he'd still have a future ahead of him. And Charlie Kirk would say still be alive. He would not have been radicalized. All of these poor kids, most of them are young men, are being radicalized online. And the radicalization pipeline goes straight through the five biggest tech companies of the world, all of which are American.

[B]

What you just said is so powerful. I hadn't thought of it that way. I mean, it's just so obvious. But I think that's what real insight is, as you say, just something obvious. That it's obvious after you hear it. And that is if this kid hadn't had access to the Internet, he would be a scholarship student and wouldn't be spending the rest of his life in prison, and Charlie Kirk, a father of two, would still be alive. I can't stop thinking as a parent of two boys, I guess some combination of family members and friends basically figured out that he had done it. And can you imagine that drive to the jail station, to the prison to turn around?

[A]

Usually it breaks my heart as a parent. Breaks my heart. It breaks my heart, everybody involved, and.

[B]

I can't even imagine. But that is just so. I think that's just so. You know, I just hadn't thought of it that way, that if this kid hadn't had access to the Internet, most likely this just wouldn't have. This just wouldn't have happened. So let's move to solutions. You are on these task forces. You're not only helping to identify for our intelligence apparatus what nations are vulnerable such that we can plan. What if you were asked to serve on another task force? And my guess is you probably will be. That said, all right, what are some common sense solutions to reduce political violence, the likelihood of civil war? I won't even go to gun violence, because that's just. Let's talk about political violence and reduce the likelihood of civil war. What would you suggest or two or three programs that the government should be.

[A]

Considering so, Scott, there are lots of common sense solutions. The problem is we don't have common sense politicians right now on either side. And so, and I'll tell you why. We know from the US Government's own task force that if you have a strong, healthy democracy, you don't experience this type of violence. You actually experience peace and prosperity, like the United States has done for, you know, certainly since the end of, end of World War II and for black Americans since the civil rights movement. So that is the single most important thing we can do, is to strengthen our democracy. But if you look back and we know all the really undemocratic features of the American government, everybody knows what needs to be changed. We need to get rid of gerrymandering, we need to reform the Senate, we need to get rid of the electoral college. We absolutely have to get big money out of politics. When the bi. When Biden came into power in 2020, the Democrats controlled all three branches of government, right? And they knew that democracy was in trouble here in the United States, and they were not able to get a single reform passed. So our democracy was no stronger after Joe Biden left office than it, than it was beforehand. So what does that tell us? It tells us that we're not going to reform our democracy anytime soon. The Democrats either aren't able to reform it or aren't willing to reform it, and the Republicans are not going to reform it because they benefit from, they disproportionately benefit from the current, current system. So then go to the second fact, which is, you know, these identity based politics can really create a very combustible political atmosphere. Well, I mean, maybe. Right. Maybe Trump and the Republicans will increasingly reach across religious and racial lines, but then they're gonna face the same problem that Democrats faced in the 1960s. If they reach and across racial and religious lines, they're gonna lose a big portion of their base. And a big portion of their base are conservative whites, and a subset of that are white nationalists. So they will fight having the Republican Party have a bigger tent. So that's probably not gonna happen anytime soon. So then what would you do? If I was on another task force and someone said, okay, give us a common sense solution that we can implement now that will almost certainly have a big and quick effect. Regulate the algorithms of social media. Right. Again, like the five biggest tech companies in the world are all American companies, and they are essentially unregulated. And we are increasingly seeing all the big negative societal effects that unregulated social media is having. Not just on the American public, but on our democracy and on societies and democracies around the world. That's what I would tell our politicians. I would say, have the courage to take on the tech companies, give up the money that's pouring into your campaign coffers, do what's right for America. Do what's right for your teenage boy, and don't allow them to basically control the minds and the Olympic systems of our kids. Set them up for a life that will be more divided, more hate filled, less prosperous, more violent than they would have otherwise gotten.

[B]

I think we should leave it there. Barbara F. Walters is a professor at UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy and a leading expert on civil wars, extremism and domestic terrorism. She's the author of the New York Times bestseller How Civil Wars Start and How to Stop Them. She joins us from San Diego. I just want to repeat again what you said and which is so obvious it really kind of was puncturing that if this young man had, had, had not had access to the Internet, it's unlikely that he would have taken the life of a father of two and be facing a life behind bars. He could have had a much different life and not injected what is massive instability to the American experiment and, you know, with one shot of a rifle. Very much appreciate your time, Professor.

[A]

Yeah, thank you very much for having me on. And thanks for your work as well. Starting a business can seem like a daunting task unless you have a partner like Shopify. They have the tools you need to start and grow your business. From designing a website to marketing to selling and beyond, Shopify can help with everything you need. There's a reason millions of companies like Mattel, Heinz and Allbirds continue to trust and use them. With Shopify on your side, turn your big business idea into Sign up for your $1 per month [e-mail] specialoffer.