The events surrounding the 2020 U.S. election and the January 6 insurrection have challenged scholarly understanding of concepts like collective action, radicalization, and mobilization. In this article, we argue that online far-right radicalization is better understood as a form of distributed cognition, in which the groups’ online environment incentivizes certain patterns of behavior over others. Namely, these platforms organize their users in ways that facilitate a nefarious form of collective intelligence, which is amplified and strengthened by systems of algorithmic curation. In short, these platforms reflect and facilitate undemocratic cognition, fueled by affective networks, contributing to events like the January 6 insurrection and far-right extremism more broadly. To demonstrate, we apply this framing to a case study (the “Stop the Steal” movement) to illustrate how this framework can make sense of radicalization and mobilization influenced by undemocratic cognition.
AhmedS. (2013). The cultural politics of emotion. Routledge.
2.
AlfanoM.CarterJ. A.CheongM. (2018). Technological seduction and self-radicalization. Journal of the American Philosophical Association, 4(3), 298–322. https://doi.org/10.1017/apa.2018.27.
3.
AllenD. S. (2004). Talking to strangers: Anxieties of citizenship since Brown v. Board of education. University of Chicago Press.
BelewK. (2018). Bring the war home: The white power Movement and paramilitary America (1st ed.). Harvard University Press.
11.
BennettW. L.SegerbergA. (2012). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661
12.
BilewiczM.SoralW. (2020). Hate speech epidemic. The dynamic effects of derogatory language on intergroup relations and political radicalization. Political Psychology, 41(S1), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12670
13.
BondS.AllynB. (2021). How the ‘Stop the steal’ Movement outwitted Facebook ahead of the Jan. 6 insurrection. NPR. October 22.
14.
BucherT. (2018). If. Then: Algorithmic power and politics. Oxford University Press.
15.
CarstarphenM. G.KathleenE. W.WendyK. Z. A.HouckD. W.McPhailM. L.FrankD. A.JacksonR. C.McVeyJ. A.GilbertC. J.DavisP. G.CorriganL. M. (2017). Rhetoric, race, and resentment: Whiteness and the new days of rage. Rhetoric Review, 36(4), 255–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/07350198.2017.1355191
16.
CarterP.KondorK. (2020). Researching the radical right: Making use of the digital space and its challenges. In LittlerM.LeeB. (Eds.), Digital extremisms: Readings in violence, radicalisation and extremism in the online space, palgrave studies in cybercrime and cybersecurity (pp. 223–252). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30138-5_11
DeweyJ. (1916). In BoydstonJ. A. (Ed.), The Middle Works of John Dewey, Volume 9 1899-1924: Democracy and Education. Southern Illinois University Press.
26.
DeweyJ. (2008). In BoydstonJ. A. (Ed.), The bearings of pragmatism upon education. In The Middle Works of John Dewey, Volume 4 1899–1924: Essays on Pragmatism and Truth, 1907-1909 (pp. 178–191). Southern Illinois University Press.
DonovanJ.LewisB.FriedbergB. (2019). Parallel ports: Sociotechnical change from the alt-right to alt-tech. In FielitzM.ThurstonN. (Eds.), Post-digital cultures of the far right: Online actions and offline consequences in Europe and the US (pp. 50–67). [transcript] Press.
EmbrickD.CarterJ. S.LippardC.ThakoreB. (2020). Capitalism, racism, and trumpism: Whitelash and the politics of oppression. Fast Capitalism, 17(1), 203–224. https://doi.org/10.32855/fcapital.202001.012
31.
ForestalJ. (2021). Beyond gatekeeping: Propaganda, democracy, and the organization of digital publics. The Journal of Politics, 83(1), 306–320. https://doi.org/10.1086/709300
32.
FoxS. (2000). Communities of practice, Foucault and actor-network theory. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 853–868. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00207.
33.
GaneshB.BrightJ. (2020). Countering extremists on social media: Challenges for strategic communication and content moderation. Policy & Internet, 12(1), 6–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.236
34.
GardelsN.BerggruenN. (2019). Renovating democracy: Governing in the age of globalization and digital capitalism. University of California Press.
35.
GillespieT. (2018). Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, content Moderation, and the hidden decisions that shape social Media. Yale University Press.
GuessA. M.LyonsB. A. (2020). “Misinformation, disinformation, and online propaganda. In persilyN.TuckerJ. A. (Eds.), Social media and democracy: The state of the field, prospects for reform (pp. 10–33): Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108890960.003
HorganJ.MeredithK.PapatheodorouK. (2020). Does deradicalization work? In SilvaD. M. D.DeflemM. (Eds.), Radicalization and counter-radicalization. (Vol. 25, Sociology of crime, law and deviance) (pp. 9-20). Emerald Publishing Limited.
InwoodJ. (2019). White supremacy, white counter-revolutionary politics, and the rise of Donald Trump. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 37(4), 579–596. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399654418789949
45.
JasserG.McSwineyJ.PertweeE.ZannettouS. (2021). ‘Welcome to #GabFam’: far-right virtual community on Gab. New Media & Society, 146144482110245. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211024546.
JohnsonJ. (2018). The self-radicalization of white men: ‘Fake news’ and the affective networking of paranoia.” communication. Culture and Critique, 11(1), 100–115. https://doi.org/10.1093/ccc/tcx014
48.
KarabellZ. (2021). Here’s what happens to a conspiracy-driven party. Politico. January 30. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/01/30/heres-what-happens-to-a-conspiracy-driven-party-463944(Retrieved 16 November 2021).
49.
KoehlerD. (2014). The radical online: Individual radicalization processes and the role of the Internet. Journal for Deradicalization, 1, 116–134.
50.
LandemoreH. (2018). What does it mean to take diversity seriously: On open-mindedness as a civic virtue the ethics of diversity: diversity and dispositions. Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy, 16, 795–806.
LewisR. (2018). Alternative influence: Broadcasting the reactionary right on YouTube. Data & Society.
57.
LippardC. D.Scott CarterJ.EmbrickD. G. (2020). Protecting whiteness: Whitelash and the rejection of racial equality. University of Washington Press.
58.
LivingstonS.BennettL. W. (Eds.). (2020). The disinformation age: Politics, technology, and disruptive communication in the United States. Cambridge University Press.
59.
MarwickA. E.Boydd. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313
60.
MarwickA. E.LewisR. (2017). Media Manipulation and disinformation online. Data & Society.
61.
MassanariA. (2015). #Gamergate and the fappening: How reddit’s algorithm, governance, and culture support toxic technocultures. New Media & Society, 19(3), 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815608807
MilanS. (2015). From social movements to cloud protesting: The evolution of collective identity. Information, Communication & Society, 18(8), 887–900. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2015.1043135
64.
MillsC. W. (1999). The racial contract. Cornell University Press.
65.
MoranS.NakataK.InoueS. (2012). Bridging the analytical gap between distributed cognition and actor network theory using a tool for information trajectory analysis. In Proceedings of the 30th European conference on cognitive ergonomics - ECCE ’12 (p. 72). ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/2448136.2448151
RosenblumN. L. (2016). Good neighbors: The democracy of everyday life in America. Princeton University Press.
75.
SchradieJ. (2019). The revolution that wasn’t: How digital activism favors conservatives. Harvard University Press.
76.
SenguptaN. K.OsborneD.SibleyC. G. (2019). On the psychological function of nationalistic ‘whitelash’. Political Psychology, 40(4), 759–775. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12563
SmithL. G. E.BlackwoodL.ThomasE. F. (2020). The need to refocus on the group as the site of radicalization. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(2), 327–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619885870
TocquevilleA. (1969). In MayerJ. P. (Ed.), Democracy in America. HarperPerennial Modern Classics.
82.
van der NagelE. (2018). ‘Networks that work too well’: Intervening in algorithmic connections. EmilyMedia International Australia, 168(1), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X18783002
83.
Van DijckJ.de WinkelT.SchäferM. T. (2021). Deplatformization and the governance of the platform ecosystem. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211045662.
