ARGUMENT: HYBRID DOMESTIC EXTREMISTSBlurry Ideologies and Strange Coalitions: The Evolving Landscape of Domestic Extremism

Cynthia Miller-Idriss and Brian Hughes, writing in Lawfare, note the emergence of an intriguing phenomenon – the convergence of far right and far left extremists and the breakdown of old ideological walls. They write that over the past several months, for example, far-right extremists have valorized the Unabomber and praised the Taliban. A re-launched white supremacist group announced a new “Bolshevik focus” calling for the liquidation of the capitalist class. A growing ecofascist youth subculture—spread largely through social media imageboard accounts and commercial merchandise—celebrates nature worship and rootedness within a physical homeland while calling for a white ethnostate; “boogaloo” adherents marched alongside racial injustice protesters; and  

They add:

Coming on the heels of a violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol at the hands of a strange coalition of unlawful militias, white supremacists, QAnon conspiracy theorists, Proud Boys and ordinary Trump voters, these trends highlight the strange and unanticipated ways in which domestic violent extremism scenes in the United States are fragmenting and reassembling. The transformation is taking place both organizationally and post-organizationally.

On the organizational side, political violence is emerging from a loose new coalition that spans the extremist spectrum in ways that muddle the ideological basis typically understood to be at the root of terrorist and extremist violence. On the post-organizational side, exposure to extremist content and radicalization into ideologies and violence outside the boundaries of organized groups is increasing—largely through online encounters with propaganda, disinformation and extremist ideas.

The authors note that this phenomenon could be seen in the protests against shutdown orders and mask mandates, which drew a strange mix of heavily-armed unlawful militia members, conspiracy theorists waving QAnon signs, and anti-vaxxers whose traditional base draws primarily from leftist and alternative medicine spaces.

This phenomenon could also be seen during the George Floyd protest marches, in which  “boogaloo” adherents who advocate a new civil war marched alongside racial injustice protesters because of shared anger at law enforcement. And could also be seen in the collaboration between those who believe in radical ecology and the preservation of natural ecosystems and those who believe that environmental sustainability is linked to racial entitlement to the land and requires extreme immigration control or deportation.

Miller-Idriss and Hughes explain that there are at least four reasons for the increased muddling of ideological rationales: the increasing ability of cross-ideological concepts to mobilize violence; rising event-driven violence; tactical convergence; and communication infrastructure.

They conclude:

This state of affairs makes it all the more evident that current counter-extremism approaches are woefully inadequate. Policymakers will not be able to solve tomorrow’s problems of extremism with the surveillance and securitized tools honed in yesterday’s battles. On the contrary, the only hope there is for reducing pressing extremist threats to democracy is through early prevention and intervention. This includes reducing people’s vulnerability to online manipulation, providing digital and media literacy training for all, and reducing the kinds of moral disengagement and dehumanization that are demonstrated precursors to political violence. But understanding the nature of the evolving problem is an essential first step.