The U.S. is becoming increasingly ungovernable, and some experts believe it could descend into civil war. What should Canada do then?
To my mind, though, the fifth parallel is the most disconcerting: the propagation of a āhardline security doctrine.ā Here Iāve been influenced by the research of Jonathan Leader Maynard, a young English scholar who is emerging as one of the worldās most brilliant thinkers on the links between ideology, extremism and violence. In a forthcoming book, Ideology and Mass Killing, Dr. Leader Maynard argues that extremist right-wing ideologies generally donāt arise from explicit efforts to forge an authoritarian society, but from the radicalization of a societyās existing understandings of how it can stay safe and secure in the face of alleged threats.
Hardline conceptions of security are āradicalized versions of familiar claims about threat, self-defence, punishment, war, and duty,ā he writes. They are the foundation on which regimes organize campaigns of violent persecution and terror. People he calls āhardlinersā believe the world contains many ādangerous enemies that frequently operate in and through purported ācivilianā groups.ā Hardliners increasingly dominate Trumpist circles now.
Dr. Leader Maynard then makes a complementary argument: Once a hardline doctrine is widely accepted within a political movement, it becomes an āinfrastructureā of ideas and incentives that can pressure even those who donāt really accept the doctrine into following its dictates. Fear of ātrue believersā shifts the behaviour of the movementās moderates toward extremism. Sure enough, the experts I recently consulted all spoke about how fear of crossing Mr. Trumpās base ā including fear for their familiesā physical safety ā was forcing otherwise sensible Republicans to fall into line.
The rapid propagation of hardline security doctrines through a society, Dr. Leader Maynard says, typically occurs in times of political and economic crisis. Even in the Weimar Republic, the vote for the National Socialists was closely correlated with the unemployment rate. The Nazis were in trouble (with their share of the vote falling and the party beset by internal disputes) as late as 1927, before the German economy started to contract. Then, of course, the Depression hit. The United States today is in the midst of crisis ā caused by the pandemic, obviously ā but it could experience far worse before long: perhaps a war with Russia, Iran or China, or a financial crisis when economic bubbles caused by excessive liquidity burst.
Beyond a certain threshold, other new research shows, political extremism feeds on itself, pushing polarization toward an irreversible tipping point. This suggests a sixth potential parallel with Weimar: democratic collapse followed by the consolidation of dictatorship. Mr. Trump may be just a warm-up act ā someone ideal to bring about the first stage, but not the second. Returning to office, heāll be the wrecking ball that demolishes democracy, but the process will produce a political and social shambles. Still, through targeted harassment and dismissal, heāll be able to thin the ranks of his movementās opponents within the state ā the bureaucrats, officials and technocrats who oversee the non-partisan functioning of core institutions and abide by the rule of law. Then the stage will be set for a more managerially competent ruler, after Mr. Trump, to bring order to the chaos heās created.













