If you regularly scan the headlines of major news sources of late you will have noted a curious tendency. When it comes to terrorism, the only stories which seem to get any traction are those which lament the “rise” in what is widely termed “far-right extremism.” This umbrella description covers everything from neo-Nazis to white supremacists to anti-vaxxers to, believe it or not, violent “incels” (involuntary celibates who apparently target women out of frustration over their lack of sexual gratification).
There are several problems with this analysis. Firstly, it is wrong in that the single greatest terrorist threat, globally as measured in several well-documented studies, is jihadi in nature, not far right. Numbers don’t lie, after all. (Of note is that I was recently called a racist by someone at Public Safety Canada for pointing out these figures, and the very data I used was dismissed as “Islamophobic.”)
Secondly, while the far right is indeed worrisome, and our spies at CSIS are dedicating more counter-terrorism resources to monitor it here in our country, no nation, including Canada, has seen a “spike” in attacks that result in casualties (unlike 2023’s increase in jihadi deaths). Can that change? Of course. Anything can happen, but there is little evidence to support the conviction that it will. (Online hate and invective rarely translates into real-world acts of violence).
Most importantly, however, for our purposes, is the almost complete ignorance and avoidance of another form of IMVE, that is emanating from the left side of the political spectrum. Here I would include environmentalists, climate-change activists, and even some First Nations activists (burning down churches, anyone?).
As concerns over climate degradation and a lack of perceived adequate response from governments mount, there is a faction within this broader movement which is willing to use violence to make their point and pressure authorities to take action. Curiously, some of the acts carried out appear on the surface to be counter-productive (at least to me).
So, let me get this straight. Weaning ourselves off fossil fuels (especially oil and coal) is seen as an urgent priority for the world to keep our planet from frying itself. Environmentalists have been screaming about this for years after all. And yet the removal of a few trees, which I imagine would be hugely offset by the increase of electric vehicles in no time, is seen as a more pressing need? Am I missing something here?
When a country fails to treat all forms of terrorist violence—irrespective of the underlying motivation—equally, it fails its population. I hate predictions, but I would not be shocked if this kind of environmental sabotage and violence continues to climb. Will it take a death for those in power to wake up, condemn it, and do something about it?
