In a nation already strained by political fault lines, a chilling prediction has emerged about the future of the United States. Could we be on the brink of a fracture so severe that states might break away?
According to Daily Mail, a political expert has raised alarms about the growing risk of a second civil war, with California possibly leading the charge toward secession by 2035. This stark warning comes amid escalating tensions between state and federal powers.
Professor Benjamin Cohen, a political economist from the University of California-Santa Barbara, argues that the odds of violent political polarization are far from negligible. His hypothetical scenario paints a grim picture of California declaring independence in 2035, clashing with a federal response under a future administration. It’s a sobering thought for a country built on unity yet increasingly divided by ideology.
In Cohen’s envisioned crisis, a hypothetical President JD Vance threatens a military takeover of Sacramento, supported by National Guard troops from neighboring conservative states. Such a move, while speculative, underscores how quickly rhetoric can escalate to conflict when state and federal priorities collide. One must wonder if our current political discourse is laying the groundwork for such drastic measures.
Cohen emphasizes the power of identity as a driving force behind potential secession movements. He notes that in so-called “dream states,” citizens may prioritize community values over national allegiance, a trend that could unravel the fabric of the union. This isn’t just academic theory—it’s a warning about what happens when shared purpose erodes.
A recent YouGov poll supports Cohen’s concerns, revealing that 40% of Americans believe a civil war within the next decade is somewhat or very likely. Strikingly, the same percentage sees this conflict unfolding between Democrats and Republicans rather than individual states. This suggests a deeper, partisan rift that transcends geography and cuts to the heart of our political system.
Cohen himself admits difficulty in predicting how such a conflict would divide the nation, yet insists the probability is “substantially greater than zero.” That phrase alone should give pause—when did the unimaginable become a measurable risk? For conservatives, this highlights the danger of unchecked progressive agendas pushing states to their breaking point.
The concept of secession, as Cohen explains, involves a state rejecting federal authority, the U.S. Constitution, and national laws to form an independent entity. This would mean handling taxes, defense, and trade autonomously—a logistical nightmare, not to mention a legal one, since the Supreme Court has ruled unilateral secession illegal. The federal government, history suggests, would not stand idly by.
Current events in California add fuel to this speculative fire, with riots in Los Angeles over federal immigration enforcement policies sparking violent confrontations. President Trump has deployed National Guard troops to protect ICE agents during raids, a decision upheld by an appeals court. For many on the right, this is a necessary stand against chaos, though it undeniably heightens tensions.
President Trump has openly criticized California Governor Gavin Newsom, calling him “grossly incompetent” and labeling Los Angeles rioters as “insurrectionists.” He even suggested he would support arresting Newsom, warning that such leadership brings the nation closer to civil conflict. While firm, this stance reflects a frustration with state-level resistance to federal policy that many conservatives share.
“I don’t want a Civil War,” Trump stated on June 9, addressing Newsom’s defiance. “Civil War would happen if you left it to people like him.” This blunt assessment, while controversial, resonates with those who see progressive policies as divisive rather than unifying.
Cohen’s broader analysis, detailed in his book “Dream States: A Lurking Nightmare for the World Order,” warns of a societal breakdown that could redraw state borders based on political ideologies. He points to examples like New York, where urban Democratic strongholds contrast sharply with rural Republican leanings. This mismatch fuels a desire among some to realign geography with belief systems, a risky proposition at best.
The YouGov poll further reveals a startling 31% of Americans fear the U.S. could become a fascist dictatorship by 2035, while 20% predict a communist shift. These numbers reflect a profound distrust in the stability of our democratic framework. For conservatives, this is a call to safeguard foundational principles against radical overreach from any side.
Cohen laments the “breakdown of a sense of community,” a sentiment that rings true when watching footage of clashes between police and protesters in Los Angeles over immigration enforcement. These aren’t just policy disagreements—they’re visceral, emotional divides that challenge the idea of a united America. The right often views such unrest as the consequence of ignoring federal authority, a problem decades in the making.
Ultimately, Cohen’s prediction of states breaking away by 2035, while speculative, forces us to confront uncomfortable truths about our national trajectory. Whether it’s California or elsewhere, the notion of secession is no longer just a historical footnote—it’s a possibility we must address through dialogue, not division. For those of us who value a strong, cohesive union, the time to bridge these gaps is now, before hypothetical scenarios become harsh realities.
