Last January, the world watched the stunning spectacle of the US Capitol violently attacked by . . . Americans. Yet, there are many reasons to fear that a similar type of insurrection could be repeated. There is evidence that strategists who promoted the Capitol attack were doing so to buy time for carrying out a total overthrow of democracy by subverting the electoral process. My focus here, however, is not on the suits the strategists hiding behind closed doors but on the boots, the people so stirred by conspiracy theories and Trumps Big Lie about a stolen election that they committed violence.

In nations not at war, political violence usually comes from the fringes. But right now we are facing something new: 18 percent of Americans surveyed in a recent poll agreed that true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country. That 18 percent translates to roughly 46 million adults. Of course, only a fraction of those who claim to support violence would be willing to risk imprisonment to carry it out. But that fraction could grow, or not, depending on how the nations leaders respond to this challenge.

The individuals who answered the call to invade the Capitol are now, rightly, facing legal consequences. Some will face jail time; few will be incarcerated for long. Whats likely to happen to them, and to us, when they are released?

Some people manage to leave violent movements and reintegrate into mainstream society. For two years, Ive been part of a research team at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health investigating how and why. What were beginning to learn is that many of the former violent extremists we interviewed including jihadis, white-identity violent extremists, and others refer to underlying social and emotional difficulties as important factors in their radicalization. And those factors are at least as important as intellectual endorsement of theories of racial or religious supremacy.

While jihadis and white nationalists have very different ideologies, the psychological motivations driving them are often remarkably similar. Many of the former terrorists in our sample attributed their capacity to disengage from these violent movements more to emotional factors than to intellectual ones: support from their families, finding a new sense of purpose through work (including counseling others trying to disengage), developing trusting relationships with prison personnel or probation officers, and strengthening other types of prosocial relationships. They also referred to experiences that complicated their inhumane views of the enemy such as a Muslim persons explanation of what it felt like to be a member of a hated minority group as a child. Some have referred to their racist views as a kind of addiction.

For over 20 years, Ive been interviewing jihadis, white-identity violent extremists, and Serb nationalist war criminals, in an attempt to discover what motivates them and how to prevent further acts of violence. One commonality is that the claimed rationale for violent extremism such as the wish to protect ones people from perceived injustice often masks a deeper fear of being outclassed, outnumbered, or humiliated by some other. To be clear, these fears are often based on perception, not reality, and are no justification for heinous acts of hate. But by studying them we may be able to find effective ways to stop violence before it starts.

Diversity racial, ethnic, gender, and other sorts is most distasteful to those who are innately authoritarian, a latent trait shared by about a third of the population. When theres more diversity or multiculturalism than authoritarians can bear, theyre prone to becoming overtly racist and even violent. Importantly, many studies show that the feeling of sociocultural threat is a driver of conspiracy theories, authoritarian movements, and racist violence. The most important driver for the insurrectionist movement, according to polling by political scientist Robert Pape and his team, is the unfounded fear that African American people or Hispanic people in our country will eventually have more rights than whites.

Some organizations are finding ways to fight extremism by addressing these emotional factors. Moonshot, an organization that works to end online harms, uses Google ads to redirect individuals searching for information about hateful ideologies or violent extremist groups. Moonshot has found that these individuals are more receptive to messages such as anger and grief can be isolating which offer meditation apps or mental-health support than they are to counter-narratives that offer intellectual arguments against hate. In the period surrounding January 6, 2021, more than 270,000 Americans clicked on Moonshots ads offering counseling.

Another organization, Boston-based NGO Parents for Peace, responds to helpline calls from individuals worried about a family members radicalization. Since the presidential election, the organization has been flooded with requests for help. A lot of the work involves helping families find therapists, strengthening family ties, and providing emotional support.

We face a grave and continuing threat of political violence. Leaders who condone or endorse political violence, either implicitly or explicitly, should be held accountable and condemned by people across the ideological spectrum. We know from former extremists that certain strategies have been effective at reducing or even preventing violent behavior. Perhaps surprisingly, the most effective strategies dont involve persuasion or debate. Sometimes compassion, empathy, and connection can convert someone who is on the precipice of violence.

Jessica Stern is a research professor at Boston University and a senior fellow at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Send comments to magazine@globe.com.

Visit link:

What reformed extremists taught me about preventing another Capitol insurrection - The Boston Globe