When the dust clears, folks will inevitably start talking about "countering violent extremism" #CVE aimed at the types of folks who stormed the capitol today. Here are a few things to think about.
What is CVE? Well, its a lot of diff things, lets go through them:
➡️ trying to ID potentially violent folks, very hard to do, where do you even start when you can't focus your resources on an identifiable minority as #CVE has done so far. No evidence it works at all.
➡️ trying to ID potentially violent folks, very hard to do, where do you even start when you can't focus your resources on an identifiable minority as #CVE has done so far. No evidence it works at all.
➡️ community outreach to build relations with "affected communities" in the hope they will tell you what's going on. Generally cops/DHS/FBI have mtgs with ppl they identify as community leaders. Not clear how this translates when you can't really identify a "community."
➡️ counter-messaging. I think this is pretty kumbaya-like. Govt can fund groups to spread messages of peace & love, but never seen any evidence that it works. Count me skeptical.
➡️ monitoring what people say online to identify potential violence. Couple of issues to b careful of: 1) lots of people talk shit online, very few do anything violent; 2) today shows even if ppl are plotting violence online, if there is no political will to respond, dsnt matter.
➡️ brings me to my next point, if political leaders are inciting violence and feeding grievances, there's #CVE means nothing.
➡️ #CVE proponents have always said not enough $ & not enough coordination.
➡️ terrorism = political violence. That's what we saw today. Prosecute those who were violent, but we need to find a political solution. And Republicans need to take the lead in finding that solution.
➡️ that's hard to do, much easier to throw a bone to #CVE. but its the right answer.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
