2mo ago

‘A perfect storm’: Extremism online and political polarization are increasing risk of attacks, experts say

www.nbcnews.com ‘A perfect storm’: Extremism online and political polarization are increasing risk of attacks, experts say

Accessing extremism online has never been easier, the threat has never been higher, and the ideology of those conducting attacks has never been more splintered.

Summary

Experts warn that online extremism and US political polarization are fueling radicalization, creating a “perfect storm” for attacks like the ISIS-inspired New Orleans incident.

Shamsud-Din Jabbar, a veteran who killed 14 people, followed a pattern of lone-actor radicalization linked to personal grievances.

While the majority of radicalized individuals will not commit acts of terror, the rise in Islamist extremism and the increasing diversity of ideologies pose significant challenges.

The FBI has ramped up efforts to combat domestic terrorism, but the threat remains, with concerns about potential attacks from both the far-right and anti-Trump ideologies.

8 comments

I am so fucking sick of media's knee jerk reaction to both-sides this shit. It's all right wing reactionaries, be they Muslim, Christian, Atheist, or other. The problem is right wing extremism, not political polarization.
- I am so fucking sick of media’s knee jerk reaction to both-sides this shit. It’s all right wing reactionaries, be they Muslim, Christian, Atheist, or other. The problem is right wing extremism, not political polarization.
  Because:
  The mainstream media wants viewers from "both sides" in order to maximize viewership and revenue. So they feel they have to "both sides" every issue in order to not piss off half of their viewing base with every news segment.
  The mainstream media is gripped with fear that if they acknowledge that one side has a point, they will be perceived as "biased". Which again leads them "both sides" ing an issue to try to not piss off their customers or draw the ire of the other side.
  And now we can add this to that list:
  Trump has openly committed to using the power of the US government to retaliate against those who report on him unfavorably, and has already shown his willingness and ability to follow through. The most notable example is getting ABC to cough up $15 million and apologize to Trump simply because George Stephanopoulos repeated a judge's proclamation that what Trump did met the common definition of rape. Jeff Bezos refused to endorse Harris in order to avoid Trump's ire. Mika and Joe Scarborough made the Mar-a-Lago pilgrimage in order to avoid Trump's wrath.
  Heck, "Both sides" ing the issue is probably the best we're gonig to get now. We've already seen coverage at mainstream sites like CNN and MSNBC shift much more favorably towards Trump. Look at what Trump forced ABC to do. I would not be surprised to see a shift in tone where "both sides" isn't enough any more, and open praise of Trump and criticism of his critics becomes the only way to avoid Trump's wrath, a-la North Korea state media.
  
  I don't really disagree except that I think it's a mix of not wanting to appear biased and actually being biased. The mainstream media establishment actually views left wing "extremists" as more threatening than right wing extremists. The right doesn't challenge power, and the left does.

Wait til everyone sees what happens if they gut the VA. Last time the government fucked with veterans benefits the veterans marched on washington.

This being c/politics I feel justified in pointing out that growing extremism among politicians probably has much more of an effect than extremism "online."

What a nothing headline lol
"Lighting torches and brandishing pitch forks is leading to mob-like behavior!"
Anything to not talk about why it's actually happening

Dear imperial media... Endless fascist terrorism is not "both sides".
Maybe a driving force is the ongoing genocide(s)?

8 comments