“One inch away from a possible civil war” – Trump’s near-shooting also means a narrow rescue for American democracy

With a attack against Donald Trump at a rally in Pennsylvania on July 13, 2024, the United States experienced one other violent episode in its increasingly polarized politics. Former President Trump, who’s officially set to change into the Republican presidential candidate within the 2024 election, survived the assassination attempt when, as initial reports said, a the bullet grazed his ear. But one demonstrator was killedother bystanders were injured and the suspected shooter can also be dead. The Conversation's political editor Naomi Schalit spoke to University of Massachusetts, Lowell, scientist Arie Perliger after the event. Perliger shared insights from his study of political violence and assassinations. Given the strong political polarization within the US, Perliger said, “it's no surprise that people end up behaving violently.”

Schalit: What was your first thought while you heard the news?

Pearls: The very first thing that occurred to me was that we’re principally just one centimeter away from a potential civil warI consider that if Donald Trump had actually suffered fatal injuries today, the extent of violence that we’ve got seen up to now could be nothing in comparison with what would have happened over the following few months. I consider that may have unleashed a brand new level of anger, frustration, resentment and hostility that we’ve got not seen within the United States for a lot of, a few years.

The attackat the least at this early stage, it’d confirm the strong sense amongst many Trump supporters and lots of people on the far right that they’re being delegitimized, that they’re on the defensive, and that there are efforts to fundamentally prevent them from participating within the political process and stop Trump's return to the White House.

For many individuals on the far right, what we’ve got just seen suits thoroughly right into a narrative that they’ve been constructing and spreading for months.

Political assassination attempts usually are not nearly killing someone. They have an even bigger goal, don't they?

In some ways, Assassinations to avoid the lengthy technique of downgrading and defeating political opponents when there may be a sense that even an extended political struggle is not going to be enough. Many perpetrators see murder as a way That will allow them to realize their political goals in a short time and effectively without having to have quite a lot of resources or quite a lot of organization. If we try to attach that to what we've seen today, I believe quite a lot of people see Trump as a unicorn, a singular phenomenon that in some ways has absorbed your entire conservative movement. So when you remove him, you’re feeling just like the problem shall be solved, or may very well be.

I believe the conservative movement has modified dramatically since Trump was first elected in 2016. Many features of Trumpism at the moment are quite popular in various parts of the conservative movement. So even when Trump eventually decides to step down, I don't think Trumpism – as a set of populist ideas – will disappear from the Republican Party. But I can definitely understand why individuals who see Trump as a threat consider that removing Trump will solve all problems.

In a study on the causes and effects of political assassinationsYou have written that if the electoral process fails to deal with “the most serious political grievances,” electoral competition has the potential to trigger further violence, including the assassination of politicians. Did you see that on this attempted assassination?

Democracy cannot work if the several parties, the several movements, usually are not willing to work together on certain issues. Democracy works when several groups are willing to succeed in some type of consensus through negotiations, to work together and cooperate.

What we’ve got seen over the past 17 years, essentially since 2008 and the rise of Tea Party Movementis that there may be increasing polarization within the United States. And the worst thing about that polarization is that the American political system has change into dysfunctional within the sense that we’re pushing out all politicians and decision makers who’re eager about working with the opposite side. That's one thing. Second, people delegitimize politicians who’re willing to work with the opposite side, thus portraying them as individuals who’ve betrayed their values ​​and their political party. And third, people delegitimize their political rivals. They turn a political disagreement right into a war wherein there is no such thing as a room for cooperation to deal with the challenges they consider the nation faces.

When you mix these three dynamics, you essentially create a dysfunctional system where either side are convinced that it's a zero-sum game and that it's the top of the country. If the opposite side wins, it's the top of democracy. When either side keep drumming into people's heads that losing an election is the top of the world, it's no surprise that individuals will eventually be willing to take the law into their very own hands and use violence.