We Must Understand Why Youth Are radicalized. It’s Not Just Manipulation
The 4 December killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in New York highlights this issue. The lead suspect, a 26-year-old man, allegedly carried a three-page manifesto criticizing corporate America and had engaged with violent extremist literature critiquing wealth inequality. While he was active online, he does not neatly fit the mold of a socially isolated or mentally unwell offender. Nor is it clear whether a specific online group radicalized him.
But the killer’s identity is not the most important issue. After the murder, many young people were quick to understand, even praise, the violence online and vilify the healthcare industry. The lack of universal condemnation of the killing is disturbing—but also reveals political dissatisfaction. Agency is critical to understanding this killing: it was likely motivated by personal and political grievances stemming from social and economic insecurity, either real or perceived, which unfortunately resonate with many young people—including Australians.
Addressing broader causes of youth radicalization will require a shift in policy. Resolving vulnerabilities will take a whole-of-society strategy that goes beyond the traditional roles of law enforcement and intelligence agencies and engages other sectors, such as education, mental health services and community groups.
Early intervention is key to pre-empting radicalization. This necessitates better understanding of vulnerabilities that fuel radicalization, and creation of a supportive environment that offers young people help before they turn to violent ideologies.
Research into the psychological, social and environmental factors that make young people susceptible to extremism is crucial. This research must inform policies and interventions to support and guide at-risk youth. Early interventions, such as mental health support, programs to prevent social isolation and initiatives to foster stronger community connections, can protect against radicalization. This approach requires a shift in focus from reactive law enforcement to proactive support.
Schools and families must be empowered to play a more proactive role in identifying and supporting at-risk youth. We must show schools and families how to recognize early signs of radicalization and intervene. This will require identification of specific vulnerability factors and making strategies and support available before issues escalate.
The above solutions will address vulnerabilities. To address agency, the government must also better engage young people, understand their grievances and implement policy in response. Disenfranchised young people contribute to a range of social risk factors, including increased criminality, growth in extremist political movements, and even violent extremism.
We must also continue to recognize the legal distinction between radicalization and violent extremism. Extremist political views may repel repellent many, but they are legal in democratic societies. We must prevent violence, not free expression, and preserve our democratic values and freedoms.
The government must shift towards a whole-of-society approach addressing vulnerabilities and agency, as well exacerbating factors such as social media, to effectively implement policies to fight youth radicalization.
Henry Campbell is the strategic engagement and program manager of ASPI’s Northern Australian Strategic Policy Centre (NASPC), Strategic Policing and Law Enforcement Program and Counterterrorism Program and John Coyne is director of national security programs at ASPI. This article is published courtesy of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI).
