在线互动如何激进化,而群体参与如何抑制:2019年至2021年行动西兰迪亚的案例研究

IF 1.2 4区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Science Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/00323187.2022.2101493
James Halpin, Chris Wilson
{"title":"在线互动如何激进化,而群体参与如何抑制:2019年至2021年行动西兰迪亚的案例研究","authors":"James Halpin, Chris Wilson","doi":"10.1080/00323187.2022.2101493","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Scholars have long seen radicalisation as a predominantly group based phenomenon, occurring largely through ‘real world,’ in person interaction. By contrast, the internet is seen as playing only a limited ‘facilitating’ role in radicalising people to violence. However, a series of attacks by far right extremists over the past decade has demonstrated that this perspective is less accurate than it once was. Almost none of these terrorists were members of extremist groups and had only engaged with other extremists on the internet. In this article, we examine the relative importance of face-to-face group interaction and physically isolated internet-based radicalization in driving individuals towards extremist violence. We do so through a detailed case study of Action Zealandia, New Zealand’s leading ideological white nationalist group. The study is based on eighteen months of infiltration of the group by one of the authors from 2019 to 2021. When interacting online, members often adopt highly extremist personas, in some cases threatening mass violence. By contrast, face to face interaction and group membership pushed the group away from extremist violence. This was due to several factors: police pressure and a lack of opportunity for the movement to grow, and the often uninspiring nature of offline interaction.","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How online interaction radicalises while group involvement restrains: a case study of Action Zealandia from 2019 to 2021\",\"authors\":\"James Halpin, Chris Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00323187.2022.2101493\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Scholars have long seen radicalisation as a predominantly group based phenomenon, occurring largely through ‘real world,’ in person interaction. By contrast, the internet is seen as playing only a limited ‘facilitating’ role in radicalising people to violence. However, a series of attacks by far right extremists over the past decade has demonstrated that this perspective is less accurate than it once was. Almost none of these terrorists were members of extremist groups and had only engaged with other extremists on the internet. In this article, we examine the relative importance of face-to-face group interaction and physically isolated internet-based radicalization in driving individuals towards extremist violence. We do so through a detailed case study of Action Zealandia, New Zealand’s leading ideological white nationalist group. The study is based on eighteen months of infiltration of the group by one of the authors from 2019 to 2021. When interacting online, members often adopt highly extremist personas, in some cases threatening mass violence. By contrast, face to face interaction and group membership pushed the group away from extremist violence. This was due to several factors: police pressure and a lack of opportunity for the movement to grow, and the often uninspiring nature of offline interaction.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20275,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2022.2101493\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2022.2101493","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要长期以来,学者们一直将激进化视为一种主要基于群体的现象,主要通过“现实世界”的人际互动发生。相比之下,互联网在促使人们走向暴力方面只起到了有限的“促进”作用。然而,过去十年中极右翼极端分子的一系列袭击表明,这种观点不如以前准确。这些恐怖分子几乎都不是极端组织的成员,只在互联网上与其他极端分子接触过。在这篇文章中,我们研究了面对面的群体互动和身体孤立的基于互联网的激进化在驱使个人走向极端主义暴力方面的相对重要性。我们通过对新西兰主要的白人民族主义意识形态团体“新西兰行动”的详细案例研究来做到这一点。该研究基于其中一位作者从2019年到2021年对该群体18个月的渗透。在网上互动时,成员们经常采用高度极端主义的人物形象,在某些情况下甚至威胁到大规模暴力。相比之下,面对面的互动和团体成员身份使该团体远离了极端主义暴力。这是由于几个因素造成的:警方的压力和运动发展的机会不足,以及线下互动往往缺乏灵感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How online interaction radicalises while group involvement restrains: a case study of Action Zealandia from 2019 to 2021
ABSTRACT Scholars have long seen radicalisation as a predominantly group based phenomenon, occurring largely through ‘real world,’ in person interaction. By contrast, the internet is seen as playing only a limited ‘facilitating’ role in radicalising people to violence. However, a series of attacks by far right extremists over the past decade has demonstrated that this perspective is less accurate than it once was. Almost none of these terrorists were members of extremist groups and had only engaged with other extremists on the internet. In this article, we examine the relative importance of face-to-face group interaction and physically isolated internet-based radicalization in driving individuals towards extremist violence. We do so through a detailed case study of Action Zealandia, New Zealand’s leading ideological white nationalist group. The study is based on eighteen months of infiltration of the group by one of the authors from 2019 to 2021. When interacting online, members often adopt highly extremist personas, in some cases threatening mass violence. By contrast, face to face interaction and group membership pushed the group away from extremist violence. This was due to several factors: police pressure and a lack of opportunity for the movement to grow, and the often uninspiring nature of offline interaction.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Political Science
Political Science POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: Political Science publishes high quality original scholarly works in the broad field of political science. Submission of articles with a regional focus on New Zealand and the Asia-Pacific is particularly encouraged, but content is not limited to this focus. Contributions are invited from across the political science discipline, including from the fields of international relations, comparative politics, political theory and public administration. Proposals for collections of articles on a common theme or debate to be published as special issues are welcome, as well as individual submissions.
期刊最新文献
Party priorities in different pre-election New Zealand policy statements, 1984-2023 Strategic uses of constitutional originalism by conservatives in US gun politics and beyond Democracy, impartiality and the online political activity of Aotearoa New Zealand’s public sector employees: similarities and differences with other Westminster countries Large Language Models Can Argue in Convincing Ways About Politics, But Humans Dislike AI Authors: implications for Governance Settler memory and Indigenous counter-memories: narrative struggles over the history of colonialism in Aotearoa New Zealand
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1