Read on Twitter
We have been receiving a lot of questions about the military backgrounds of United States extremists. Here are some stats from our PIRUS and BIAS datasets to help put the issue into context. @START_UMD @bsosumd @UMDResearch 1/
While it is difficult to estimate the extent of extremist sympathies in the US military, the majority (84.4%) of the individuals in our data who were arrested for ideologically motivated crimes through 2018 did not have military backgrounds. 2/
Of those who did (239 individuals), 77.82% radicalized after they had left the military. 3/
8.59% of the hate crime offenders in our BIAS dataset had US military experience. A small minority (12.16%) of the individuals with US military experience committed their hate crimes while they were active duty. 4/
55.65% of the individuals in PIRUS with military service backgrounds held far-right extremist views (versus 11.3% far-left, 15.9% Jihadist, and 17.15% single issue). 5/
Of the far-right extremists in PIRUS with military service backgrounds, 53.38% expressed views of white supremacy, 33.83% were affiliated with anti-government and/or Sovereign Citizen movements, and 13.53% were members of organized militias. 6/
The subjects in PIRUS with military backgrounds were only marginally more likely than individuals without records of military service to successfully conduct violent attacks in the US. 7/
Individuals without records of military service were successful 27.39% of the time in conducting violent attacks. 8/
By comparison, individuals with past military experience were successful 28.49% of the time, and those who were active in the military at the time of their plots were successful 30.19% of the time. 9/
The subjects in PIRUS with military experience show higher rates of certain risk characteristics when compared to those who did not serve in the US military. 10/
These include documented or suspected mental health concerns (25.1% vs. 13.89%) and substance abuse disorders (21% vs. 12%). 11/
As the Biden Administration works on a strategy to tackle extremism in the ranks, we hope that decision-makers will consider the potential dangers in removing individuals with extremist ties from the military without also providing rehabilitation support services. 12/
As Pete Simi and his colleagues have argued ( https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1057610X.2013.802976#.UsrEqrTikck), individuals who are involuntarily removed from the military may experience an identity crisis that makes them more likely to engage in extremist activities. 13/
Tackling extremism in the ranks cannot simply be an exercise in investigating crimes or code of conduct violations. Rooting out extremism in the military will require that prevention, intervention, and rehabilitation play central roles in a unified strategy. 14/END
