Terrorism actively uses the Internet to inform, motivate and attract lone extremists to its side. The self-radicalization of people on the Internet as a path to violence is a growing threat that is very difficult to combat: the authorities often propose to deal with it in their usual ways – by creating special forces that will focus, judging by the fragmentary explanations, on dealing with the consequences, not with the causes of the exacerbation of young people, declaring the problem of youth radicalization (Bastug et al., 2020). This paper examines the main causes and types of radicalism, as well as what role the Internet plays in the hands of terrorists. The main thesis of this work is that the Internet contributes to the radicalization of people, usually young people; and that the reasons lie not only at the level of state problems but are also associated with the personal problems of people who find like-minded people in their radical views.
The reasons that prompted these young people to take extreme measures can be different – not only ideological, but also every day, and most likely, we are talking about their combination. After various terrorist attacks, online radicalization is suddenly in the spotlight, as if it were something new and unique (Bastug et al., 2020). It should be noted that according to psychological studies of online communications and the connections that arise in them, relationships on the Internet are established and developed much faster than in life (Frissen, 2021). As a consequence, this is especially true for people with extreme views.
On the Internet, no matter what people believe or how far they go in their beliefs, it is easy to find those who share their views. The Internet allows one to become part of a community of like-minded people, even if the unifying ideas are radical Islamism, white nationalism, neo-Nazism, or animal liberation radicalism (Macdonald & Whittaker, 2019). People who express radical views online may find those who ask similar questions, hold the same extreme world views, or seek to convert new believers. Many, though not all, are young people. Young people are mainly involved in this process since young people, as a rule, feel more comfortable in the Internet environment, while older people are used to face-to-face communication.
The Internet, in essence, is a channel of communication and communications accessible to everyone and everywhere, a source of a mass of information. It cannot be denied that most people in the world use the Internet, including terrorists. As a result, it can be concluded that the Internet is a communication tool and information support for terrorists, a communication channel for the often anonymous transmission of information, intimidation, disinformation, and other illegal acts. The Internet possibilities are very significant, which opens up access to such large-scale opportunities both in peaceful life and for violations. Radicalization is no exception, although, in reality, it is a two-way process. Despite the high degree of persuasiveness of radical statements and other psychological tools for attracting people to misconduct, not everyone succumbs to these tricks.
The radicalization processes themselves can be divided into two types: the first type leads to violence, and the second does not. Concerning radicalization leading to violence, several studies have examined the relationship between ideas and violent action. An example is Chris Heffelfinger’s model of radicalization, which covers four stages, namely: introduction to extremist ideology; immersion in the position or thinking algorithms of the given ideology; disappointment with the inaction of other adherents of ideology; the determination to commit violence in the name of affirming an idea (Heffelfinger, 2019). Ideas are a significant incentive for terrorist violence, but they are not a necessary and sufficient basis for it. However, various pathways can lead to violence, including dissatisfaction with politics, group dynamics, and a sense of adventure. While poverty is not the cause of terrorism in general, it can be a significant factor in conflict zones.
If people have questions or ideas that, in ordinary communication, can make them an outcast, then the Internet allows them to find like-minded people who share these ideas and considerations. However, not all ideas that go beyond the generally accepted are blameworthy, and not all extreme points of view are necessarily dangerous. Many ideas that are now generally accepted, for example, heliocentrism, at one time seemed simply unacceptable. Nevertheless, this process requires some control, which is carried out by the authorities.
One of the countermeasures that the US government has adopted is rapid deployment. There are some cases of home-grown terrorism in which a person who professed the ideals of jihad was allowed to participate in a terrorist conspiracy. Other conspirators were undercover agents who checked the willingness of the ward to resort to violence (Heffelfinger, 2019). Another way of solving the problem is based on contact with the local community. Authorities can partner with individuals and organizations to counter the ideology of violence. However, this approach is also not without flaws due to the impossibility of drawing a line between those who profess extreme views and those who are ready to move from words to deeds and resort to violence. On the one hand, people, as a society, welcome freedom of expression, and the inclusion of people with different ideologies and ideas to understand our very complex world. On the other hand, society also wants to protect the population from violence. There is a contradiction between these two sets of ideals, which should be resolved not only by the authorities but by society itself.
References
Bastug, M. F., Douai, A., & Akca, D. (2020). Exploring the “demand side” of online radicalization: Evidence from the Canadian context. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 43(7), 616-637.
Frissen, T. (2021). Internet, the great radicalizer? Exploring relationships between seeking for online extremist materials and cognitive radicalization in young adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 114, 106549.
Heffelfinger, C. (2019). The Risks Posed by Jihadist Hackers. CTC Sentinel, 6, 1-5.
Macdonald, S., & Whittaker, J. (2019). Online radicalization: Contested terms and conceptual clarity. In Online terrorist propaganda, recruitment, and radicalization (pp. 33-45). CRC Press.