The available findings on the so-called ‘terror gram scene’ clearly show that this is not a marginal phenomenon, but an acute and dynamic threat to internal security.
When Home Secretary Thomas Strobl states that the digital space must not be ‘a legal vacuum, a breeding ground for extremist propaganda and recruitment,’ he is describing the core of the problem – and at the same time the political mandate for action.
Particularly alarming is the extreme youthfulness of the scene. An average age of just over 16 and so-called ‘lightning radicalisation’, in which ‘50 per cent of the path to radicalisation takes less than a year’, illustrate how quickly disorientation, frustration or social isolation can lead to violent extremism. The fact that this radicalisation takes place predominantly online and that attacks and rampages are openly ‘glorified’ and ‘called for imitation’ makes the need for action even more urgent.
At the same time, the text shows that government action is effective – when it is decisive and coordinated. The fact that ‘cases are almost always (in three-quarters of cases) detected by the security authorities themselves’ is clear evidence of the high performance of the authorities involved. Close cooperation between the police, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the judiciary has demonstrably contributed to ‘radicalised individuals being identified at an early stage and terrorist plans being prevented’. This approach must not only be continued, but further expanded.
At the same time, the study points to structural causes that cannot be ignored. The high proportion of individuals with ‘diagnosed mental illnesses or psychological abnormalities’ and the widespread ‘family neglect and social disintegration’ make it clear that prevention must go far beyond traditional security measures. The environment – families, schools, youth welfare services, social work – is rightly highlighted as a ‘special early warning system’.
The fight against this development is therefore not the task of individual authorities, but a responsibility for society as a whole. Repression, prevention and intervention must be considered together. The state must not allow digital platforms to serve as recruitment grounds for a scene whose declared goal is ‘to cause chaos through violence and thus bring about the collapse of social order.’
The study provides a clear basis for this: it describes the problem precisely, openly identifies risks and at the same time shows that effective counter-strategies are possible. The crucial thing now is to consistently translate these findings into lasting action – to protect potential victims, but also to protect those young people who would otherwise go from digital radicalisation to real violence.
