Bondi Beach is known the world over as a happy place, a place that is full of sunshine, families, visitors, and partying. The image was shattered not long ago when a brutal assault on a mass gathering transformed a peaceful crowd into a terror and tragedy crowd. Human beings were killed and wounded just by being there. With Australians mourning, one of the hard facts that have to be considered is that this attack was not a random one; it was driven not by a specific religion or culture. It’s concerned with radicalization, the dangerous process of turning extreme views into violence.
Radicalisation is the process whereby an individual starts to develop a feeling that violence is needed or correct in order to defend an ideology or a cause. This does not occur in one day. It is propagated through anger, segregation, isolation, disinformation and constant exposure to radical message especially through the internet nowadays. Preliminary investigation on the Bondi Beach case indicates that the attackers were motivated by extremism, which emboldened them to consider ordinary people as ideal victims. It was that radicalisation, rather than faith or nationality, is the real weapon.
There is one part of the attack that deserves more attention than it received. In the middle of the attack and commotion, a muslim man came forward and helped in stopping the attacker, putting his own life at risk to save others. This moment matters. It highlights that both violence and courage do not have any religion. These and similar actions subvert the myths that land radicals use to defend their hate.
A similar tendency has already been witnessed in Australia. The Lindt café siege in 2014 shocked the nation and showed that the man who believed in extremist ideology could introduce horror into everyday life. More recently, the authorities uncovered plans by young people who have been radicalised by the use of the internet, some of whom were still underage. Such crimes were not created in mosques, churches or communities; on the contrary, such crimes were created in digital spaces where radical ideologies were condoned and anger rewarded.
Since the 2014 siege of Lindt Cafe in Sydney led by Man Haron Monis, to the 2019 Christchurch mosque massacres by white supremacist Brenton Tarr, the 2015 Paris attack by ISIS-inspired militants, the 2011 Norway killings by far-right extremist Anders Breivik, and several successful and unsuccessful attacks across Australia and Europe, by both Islamist and far-right extremists, recent history has seen how radicalization rather than religion or race has repeatedly occurred.
The same stories are replicated all over the world. The single fiber that connects mass shootings based on the belief of the far right to those acts was all financed on the pretext of religious ground is radicalisation. Varied titles are used, yet it is an equivalent concept makes the complex wars around the world into the plots of enemies and revenge. Social media promotes this trend by moving people deeper into the echo chamber, where hate is normalised, and violence is justified.
In the modern world, radicalisation is a dangerous thing, to its propagation through a soft manner. It does not necessarily become known with slogans and threats. It is manifested as humor on the internet and more often as conspiracy theories and selective news gradually solidifies in to hatred. The young population that needs validation ad identity is most vulnerable to this. The anger in this case turns into some sort of affiliation, and extreme ideologies offer a misplaced sense of direction.
The hazards of the future are self-evident. With the development of technology, extremist messages are more refined, touching and persuasive. Now, the artificial intelligence can produce propaganda in large quantities, and it is hard to differentiate reality from manipulation. International political forces are instantly converted into local conditions and advertised to be turned into legitimate causes of domestic abuse. Radicalism will be fueled by the lack of resilience in society, where new followers will be drawn to it.
This is why the response of the people to such an attack is important, like the governmental investigations. Accusing whole groups of people adds to the polarisation and supports radical thoughts further. Radicalisation is founded on the fact that people are being attacked due to their identity. Any irresponsible headline or general accusation is a means to disseminate that story.
Bondi Beach is one of the examples of something strong about Australia, common spaces, everyday diversity and the sense of belonging. These assailants tried to use such transparency to cause fear. They did not succeed because the strangers united, people representing various groups, cultures united and the majority of Australians cannot accept the hatred as being normal.
Unless radicalism is taken and understood, such instances might become widespread. Yes, when it is conceived as a social process which can be counteracted by education, responsible media, digital awareness and solidarity of the community, this tragedy will not characterise the future.
