Who Will Be a Violent White Supremacist? Part 2: Programs that are bound to fail

Global Information Society Watch 2014 – Communications surveillance in the digital age. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Author: Association for Progressive Communications (APC

by Alice LoCicero

Why do so many resources go into counter-terrorism programs that are bound to fail? Here it’s important to distinguish between research programs and community programs that are implemented to identify potential homegrown terrorists. While I think it’s unlikely, for many reasons, that researchers will be able to identify future terrorists anytime soon, well-intentioned people can reasonably disagree on that point. Research done ethically and openly (without deceit) may be justifiably funded.

But when it comes to implementing programs, such as the DHS sponsored Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) programs funded throughout the US and overseas, they are not only based on deceit and junk science, they are also apt to be harmful in several ways:

  • They increase bias.
  • They cause disruption and harm in communities.
  • They blatantly encourage providers such as teachers, doctors, and mental health professionals to violate their professional ethics by spying on their students, patients, and/or clients. 
  • They target specific communities based on demographic factors. 
  • They deceive the participants and the public.
  • They criminalize normal adolescent development.
  • They criminalize thought.
  • They encourage a colonialist attitude, assuming that communities cannot help themselves, but need mainstream professionals and authorities to design ways to assist them.

After reflecting on the deadly events in Charlottesville, Christchurch, El Paso, Pittsburgh, and other places, many Americans are starting to wonder why the government is spending so much of its resources on spying on Muslim communities. They wonder if it would be better to apply these funds to counter the rise of alt-right extremists. The answer is a loud, “No” for all the reasons above. 

The CVE type programs are in violation of science, human rights, understanding of adolescent development, and the right to explore thoughts and conversation without being criminalized. 

Abuse of ethical standards? Experts in support of war

By guest contributor Michael D. Knox, Ph.D.

Since the end of World War II, the United States has bombed more than 25 countries. In these 68 years, no other nation has killed and injured more people living outside its borders. We have more nuclear weapons, more chemical weapons, and more soldiers than all other nations combined.

Nazi physician Karl Brandt sentenced at International Military Tribunal.
Nazi physician Karl Brandt is sentenced at International Military Tribunal. Image in public domain, from Wikimedia Commons.

In 2014, the U.S. continues drone and missile attacks on residential neighborhoods in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, and Yemen. We use concentration camps, torture, assassination, threats of war, and spying on our own people.

The invasions, the killing of thousands of children, the suffering of the wounded, the torture, the environmental impact, and so on, occur only because of support provided by professionals, educators, and scientists whose ethical standards should preclude any involvement with war.

These specialized experts include university professors, scientists, healthcare providers, journalists, engineers, teachers, and the clergy. Modern U.S. wars could not be fought without the complicity of these respected groups. Such groups were also part of the German war machine.

If you are a member of a group with ethical standards, be aware of what contributions your colleagues may be making to the U.S. war efforts. Consider how ethical standards apply, hold violators accountable, and do what you can to get your profession out of the war business.

All Americans, regardless of occupation, should consider what they are doing to sustain war. Without citizen support there would be no U.S. warfare.  Please consider what you might do to show your opposition to the bloodshed. Examples of what other Americans have done are recorded in the US Peace Registry.

Michael D. Knox, Ph.D., is distinguished professor emeritus at the University of South Florida, Tampa, and chair of the US Peace Memorial Foundation. He is also editor of the US Peace Registry. Dr. Knox’s work is now focused on recognizing Americans who have had the courage to publicly oppose one or more U.S. wars www.uspeacememorial.org/WorldPeace.htm.