4 ms·
Certainly the radicalization may happen offline. But in the cases at hand, it did not. There is a significant uptick in violence associated with online radicali
by geofft 7y ago
Certainly the radicalization may happen offline. But in the cases at hand, it did not. There is a significant uptick in violence associated with online radicalization, and no corresponding uptick in violence associated with offline radicalization. You can say that the role of the internet is overblown, but the evidence is there.
Besides, it's a sort of weird position to take on an a) online forum b) of tech people that the internet does not have a significant role in facilitating communication that would not otherwise happen.
- internet_user 7y agowhere is the data? you have something that proves causality of online communication and radicalization? You make it sound it's almost like terrorism didn't exist before the internet.
- geofft 7y ago> where is the data? All of these shooters have manifestos that describe how they came to believe what they believed. > You make it sound it's almost like terrorism didn't exist before the internet. No, I don't. I specifically said "uptick." This line of argument makes as much sense as showing up in a comment thread about the Capital One breach and saying "You make it sound it's almost like privacy violations didn't exist before the internet." Of course it did, but not at this scale, and we're talking about scale.
- bloaf 7y agoThere has been a significant uptick in everything online over the last 25 years because in that time the internet population has grown from 0.5% of the worlds population to over 55%. Literature says that the internet does facilitate extremist communication/nucleation, but does not replace the meatspace as the primary radicalization agent. https://academic.oup.com/ia/article-abstract/93/5/1233/4098292 https://academic.oup.com/ia/article-abstract/93/5/1233/40982...