Radicalization

Key words: radicalization, extremism, dehumanization, alt-right, far-right, The conspiracy theory, Q-Anon, pipelines, social networks, capitol insurrection, deplatforming

Although the definition can vary somewhat, a report from the Bipartisan Policy Center defines radicalization as the "process whereby groups or people become political extremists." In this context, extremism can mean either extremist ideas, loosely defined as ideas that are in opposition to society's core values, or extremist methods, which suggests a disregard for the lives or freedom of others. Although some may use the word "radicalization" in a more benign context (e.g. describing a major shift from one end of the political spectrum to another), the word often implies an increased willingness to do violence in the name of a particular cause. Additionally, political radicalization comes from unmonitored social media platforms as well as conspiracy theories, like QAnon. It is important to understand how radicalization works and the ways in which it may manifest in order to navigate the internet safely and avoid the trappings of extremism.

Individualized Experience
Radicalization is an individual experience with some loose trends. People may be radicalized directly by a recruiter or indirectly through exposure to a particular community. People can also be radicalized at different times of their life and toward different ideologies. There is no precise map of the radicalization process; however, there are some patterns. People who were radicalized but were later reformed often say that their radicalization came from some deep anxiety, a lack of identity, or intense external pressure. Also, some have suggested that radicalization can be described by several broad cognitive phases including normalization, acclimation, and dehumanization.

Cognitive Phases
There is not a precise, universal process by which people undergo radicalization, and the somewhat ambiguous definition of radicalization can make it difficult to identify real life cases. However, in his study of alt-right radicalization online, author Luke Munn identifies three cognitive phases of radicalization that may be broadly applied to other extremist ideologies. These three phases—normalization, acclimation, and dehumanization—are not linear. The phases overlap and interact with each other in a dynamic process.

Normalization
Normalization is the phase where potentially harmful ideas are introduced, just not in their final form. For instance, rather than promote overt white supremacism, a white supremacist may repackage their beliefs and make them more easily digestible. In an online context, this may mean hiding behind the internet language of memes and references, or using "edgy humor" to deflect all criticism. Thus, someone may become accustomed seeing people use racial slurs, promote harmful stereotypes, or spread hate symbols, for all of this is done under the guise of it being "just a joke." Once someone has become accustomed to "ironic" bigotry, they will not have as visceral of a reaction when they experience actual bigotry, if they are even able to identify it as bigotry at all. In short, normalization makes it hard to distinguish a joke from real life bigotry. Once the joke has become indistinguishable from the actual language of hate groups, it is no longer a joke.

Acclimation
Acclimation is the phase of progression. Once a person gets used to a relatively moderate idea, they may then move on to a slightly more extreme version, and then they move to an even more extreme version, and so on and so on. This process is not necessarily bad on its own; after all, plenty of ideas get introduced in this way. But acclimation is a concern when it is associated with hatred and violence. It is the mechanism by which someone may progress from white pride, which is a dog whistle in and of itself, to white nationalism or white supremacy.

Acclimation can be recognized with Q-Anon in the sense of radicalization. “Q-Anon was born on an internet Image board called 4chan, created by the computer programmer Christopher Poole in the early 2000s.” (Sciencedirect.com) But since the development of other technology, there has been more opportunity to increase growth and popularity on the internet.

At first, a young man by the name of Milo Yiannopoulis, during the Trump campaign in 2015, had discovered a sense of community on a channel in the website 4chan. He described this newfound community as “an immense population of disenfranchised young men who were largely voiceless.” (Sciencedirect.com) Since Yiannopoulis, QAnon has evolved in our current world today. We know Q-Anon as a group of people who believe that celebrities, most leftists, and left-leaning political officials are satanic worshipers that are pedophilic, cannibalistic, and are constantly plotting against Donald Trump and his followers. Q-Anon is a form of acclimation in that it demonstrates how it was once a platform for people who felt like they had no voice in the world of politics. From that point on, as people became more comfortable expressing themselves, it became more extreme. In this case, Q-Anon believes that celebrities, liberals, and Democrats are child-eating pedophiles who worship the devil and run a sex ring and are always plotting against Donald Trump and his followers.

Dehumanization
Dehumanization is the phase which most directly leads people to commit violence against a particular group. During this phase, the person being radicalized constructs an "other," devoid of any nuance or humanity. This "other" often acts as a scapegoat for those radicalized. The person being radicalized is never allowed to fully engage with someone who has opposing views; they are only allowed to engage with a "straw man," constructed from stereotypes, caricatures, quotes taken out of context, and a few extreme anecdotes.

Christian Picciolini, a reformed neo-Nazi who has now dedicated his life to countering racism and radicalization, described in a TED Talk an incident where a man confessed his intense hatred of all Muslims. Picciolini asked the man if he had ever talked to a Muslim before, or even met one, and he admitted that he had not. Picciolini then called a local mosque and arranged a meeting with the man and the imam, who apparently became great friends.

Dehumanization also creates the impression of uniformity, allowing someone to portray the opposition as a hive-minded unit rather than a collection of individuals who may even disagree on some issues. Dehumanization allows for the creation of an enemy which people can then easily justify the use of violence against them.

Read more about how dehumanization can also contribute toward general online rage on the "Anger and Outrage" page.

Pipelines and Social Networks
While radicalization may be an individualized process, it is not an individual process. This means that radicalization takes place within a vast network of other people, often across multiple platforms, who all produce content and may directly or indirectly support someone else's radicalization. A radicalization pipeline is the direct, often algorithmic, pathway by which people are funneled from one kind of content to more and more extreme content. Pipelines exist within a vast web of online content creators, making them tricky to pick out and identify.

To learn about one way that social networks affect politics, check out the polarization page.

Alt-right YouTube Pipeline
Perhaps the most famous alleged pipeline is the Alt-right YouTube Pipeline. A "pipeline" describes the online path by which people are funneled from milder content toward increasingly extreme content through algorithms, suggested videos, and suggested channels.

In “Alternative Influence: Broadcasting the Reactionary Right,” Rebecca Lewis maps out what she calls the "Alternative Influence Network," a collection academics, celebrities, and content creators, all linked together via collaborations and/or interviews, with beliefs ranging from mainstream libertarianism and conservatism to extreme views like white nationalism. Lewis expresses concern over how there may be as few as two degrees of separation between more mainstream creators and extremists. She gives an example: political commentator and YouTube personality Dave Rubin is connected to the white nationalist and anti-semitic conspiracy theorist Millennial Woes through fellow YouTuber Sargon of Akkad, who made a guest appearance on both of their channels. Though some would argue that an interview is not necessarily an endorsement, Lewis argues that interviewers who do not challenge a guest's views in any meaningful way implicitly endorse their views.

However, it is important to note that this could theoretically just be the nature of a social network, especially an online social network. Everyone is connected to everyone else. With enough research, you could probably link any two popular YouTubers with less than five degrees of separation, especially if the YouTubers frequently host guests. However, that does not necessarily dismiss the importance of understanding these networks. These networks may still be a problem if there is a verifiable pipeline that actively leads people to more extreme content. It is one thing to say that there is a connection between two people, and it is another thing to say that the average viewer is following that connection.

Telegram
Telegram is a social media platform that is utilized heavily by the alt-right as an alternative source to big tech social media platforms. The usage of Telegram increased as companies like Facebook and Twitter began to block various far right content from their pages in attempt to deplatform these groups.

Telegram is an extremely private website, allowing users to hold secret chats, or unsend messages. This is particularly dangerous because nature of Telegram can lead to increased radicalization too, since there is little to no crackdown on their behavior. Additionally, Telegram has been used for planning and execution violent attacks, which has caused Telegram to have been accused of enabling terrorist communication by Russia.

Radicalization and the January 6, 2021 Insurrection
The combination of online radicalization and the usage of far-right social media pages were among some of the many factors that led to the U.S. Capitol insurrection on January 6.

Planning
In the aftermath of the attack, information came out that details the online planning of the Capitol chaos months before it happened. One example cited is a video promoting Trump supporters coming to Washington DC on January 6. The video also “offered to help people find rides to get there”. Aside from YouTube and Twitter, sites like Parler, Gab as well as 4chan, saw mass organizing for far-right groups. There had been only a little restriction placed on these sites and that there is real evidence of specific instructions for taking the Capitol. Several of the insurrectionists livestreamed themselves at the Capitol, including a labeled white nationalist, Tim Gionet. Gionet streamed his experience to thousands of Trump supporters while they commented things like “HANG ALL THE CONGRESSMEN."

What impact did the far right leaning conspiracy have on the Capitol?

According to the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) at the University of Maryland (Voanews.com), "At least 34 Q-Anon adherents participated in the Capitol siege that disrupted the certification of President Joe Biden's election victory, while 32 other Q-Anon followers committed ideologically motivated crimes before and after the Capitol insurrection." Supposedly, all 66 people involved used weaponry, kidnapping, and murder tactics to enforce their "authority." However, it should be noted that not all Q-Anon supporters are supporters of violence and approve of the insurrection. "Not all the violent extremists are jihadists or white supremacists." (Voanews.com) According to this source, though, multiple people have been arrested for their crimes against the Capitol, most of which have been Q-Anon supporters. People, especially Q-Anon supporters, are angry at the unsuccessful attempt of voting Trump back into office. Because of Q-Anon's large following on social media, primarily Twitter and Youtube, the anonymous group leaders have been instructing their followers to take back the country that belongs to them. According to Donald Trump, “I’ve heard these are people that love our country.” (Wsj.com) This “storm” would expose corrupt Democratic politicians for being satanic worshipers and child abusers and eventually lead to their arrests, for being members of this quote on quote, “cult.”  They have been saying for months, years even that a storm is coming, each with a new date in mind, but nothing has prevailed true after each day passes. Thus, the followers tried to fulfill their own prophecy.

In short, the Q-Anon theory directly radicalized Americans which led to the planning and insurrection of the US Capitol building via social media networks.

Deplatforming
The action of deplatforming far-right extremists can prove quite effective in reducing harmful behavior/speech.

There has been a marked decrease in posts inciting violence after the “Great Deplatforming” saw the removal of Donald Trump. An article by the ABC states “Of note, there were hundreds of thousands fewer QAnon tweets compared to the barrage two weeks earlier.” Deplatforming dramatically limits the ability of far-right groups to reach a mainstream audience. So, this means that everyday people will not see these posts on their Facebook or Twitter page and will have to search it out if they want to find it. This is a big endorsement of deplatforming.

Meanwhile, there is the risk that deplatforming these groups can lead to further radicalization. Mentioned above, Telegram saw an increase in usage as other sites were being removed. Radicalization may be increased as deplatforming is on the rise.

Takeaways and Advice
1. Radicalization is not always the result of direct recruitment. It may also be the result of participation in or exposure to a particular online community.

2. It is important to challenge the use of "ironic bigotry" and humor that promotes harmful ideas and stereotypes. People must either refuse to partake in it or challenge those who do. Otherwise, the lines between joke and bigotry is blurred.

3. When navigating an online space, be wary of unproductive discourse, which may involve the use of hyperbole, overgeneralization, or dehumanizing language. If you wish to debate ideas online, make sure you are engaging with real people and not a caricature of a person or a "straw man." Be willing to embrace the nuance of a situation and accept that people with opposing views are not a hive-mind; while they might share some core values, they may also disagree on the details.

4. Distance yourself from and/or challenge people who eagerly endorse violence against a particular group.