Robson: Canada has a youth extremism problem it can’t continue to ignore

Not sure how practical or implementable it is, and existing prevention programs have a mixed record, but focus on behaviours, rather than beliefs is appropriate:

….A practical National Polarization Metrics model

Canada does not need a new bureaucracy. It needs a light-touch doctrine that makes prevention routine. A “National Polarization Metrics” model would use behavioural indicators that are measurable and non-partisan, focusing on coercive targeting and intimidation rather than beliefs: repeated harassment aimed at identifiable groups; doxxing and coordinated pile-ons; credible threats; and violence-normalizing signalling that changes what peers believe is acceptable.

That doctrine should assign accountable ownership. Every campus and school board needs an escalation lead with a clear mandate to consistently log incidents, coordinate support and safety planning, quickly preserve evidence, and trigger referrals when thresholds are met.

Far from weakening civil liberties, this reduces arbitrary decision-making and makes outcomes less dependent on institutional mood.

It also requires routable handoffs. Educational settings should have a consistent pathway for when matters stay at the level of documentation and support, when they require municipal policing involvement, and when patterns suggest coordination or mobilization indicators that justify a threat-assessment channel. Canada’s National Strategy on Countering Radicalization to Violence frames early intervention as a national priority, but it leaves Canada without a single escalation ladder that is understood—end-to-end—across education systems, municipal police, and federal threat assessment.

Finally, evidence preservation must become doctrine. A standardized 24-72-hour capture-and-preserve practice—time-stamped collection, secure storage, minimal access logging, and a consistent referral format—would strengthen downstream deterrence without criminalizing student life….

Prevention must become doctrine, not late reaction

A pluralist society can withstand disagreement. What it cannot withstand is normalized intimidation combined with institutional paralysis—especially when digital ecosystems accelerate conflict faster than administrators, police, or courts can react. If Canada wants to confront its fault lines before they deepen, it must stop treating youth extremism as cultural weather and start treating it as a measurable pathway.

That means building the missing bridge: shared indicators, accountable ownership, rapid evidence preservation, and standardized handoffs. Not to stigmatize communities, and not to criminalize student life—but to ensure coercion and violence-normalizing signalling do not become the price of campus politics, or the prelude to community harm.

Daniel Robson is a Canadian independent journalist specializing in digital extremism, national security, and counterterrorism. 

Source: Canada has a youth extremism problem it can’t continue to ignore

Unknown's avatarAbout Andrew
Andrew blogs and tweets public policy issues, particularly the relationship between the political and bureaucratic levels, citizenship and multiculturalism. His latest book, Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias, recounts his experience as a senior public servant in this area.

2 Responses to Robson: Canada has a youth extremism problem it can’t continue to ignore

  1. Raphael Solomon's avatar Raphael Solomon says:

    But isn’t it too late when behaviours begin to manifest? I don’t like criminalizing beliefs or thoughts and I don’t think it’s great to treat them as somewhat less than criminal either. But the nexus between thoughts and actions is clear and frequently transits very fast. Can we afford to wait for actions?

    • Andrew's avatar Andrew says:

      Fine line. But there are a range of behaviours, ranging from extremist social media sites and groups that can be preliminary to violence.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.