Read previous articles in the series: part I and part II.
The best way to counter radicalization is to cultivate resilience within the community. In our report “Faces of Polish Radicalization” we refer to this as a vaccine for radicalization. Countering radicalization involves many actions at the state and institutional level, including education and even health care. Today, I will focus on actions that could be undertaken by local government organizations and community activists.
The first proposal is not to introduce programs aimed at individuals most at risk of radicalization (which may surprise some), but rather to take a step back and reflect on ourselves and our work environment work. I suspect that very few readers of Hive Mind break the law in defense of the values they believe in; call for extremism, attack, or dehumanize other social groups. At the same time, I also suspect that it is much easier for us to be outraged by emotionally charged articles from the ideological side we identify with, without checking how the issues are presented in the media from other perspectives. Many of us have probably found it hard not to feel a slight satisfaction when someone with views close to our own insults or mocks a politician or activist whose views or actions we disagree with. Finally, let’s check whether, within the institutions we work for, we aren't complicit in producing content that stirs emotions, promises shocking information in headlines, etc. After all, it’s no secret that such articles or posts get the most clicks. Stepping away from the spiral of radicalization and polarization is the first step to getting closer to the problem and better understanding those who struggle with it.
Once we do that, we can consider what else is broadly understood as building a culture of trust—essential for functioning well in society, and for society as a whole, to function well.
Building a culture of trust
As numerous studies show, little social trust plays a significant role in the radicalization process —both the trust we place in institutions and generalized trust in other people. This can be translated into a mindset that assumes people can generally be trusted; people typically have good intentions, don’t want to deceive me, and act according to principles. Trust forms the foundation of social relationships. Without trust, building healthy relationships and effectively collaborating with others is difficult. Social trust contributes to social stability because it limits conflicts and increases a sense of solidarity. Finally, it is crucial for the legitimacy of authority and institutions. People are more likely to accept decisions made by the government or other institutions if they trust them and believe they are acting in their best interest.
Cyclically conducted studies show that in Poland, people who trust others are in the minority. For every five distrustful people, there is one trusting person (according to CBOS, in 2022 only 19% of people trusted others). A similar situation exists with institutions—generally speaking, we don’t trust them, although this largely depends on the specific institution. The highest level of trust is placed in the military (76%), while the lowest is in political parties (18%). Global research conducted by Ipsos even indicates that Poland has one of the world's lowest levels of social trust. There's a lot of work to be done. The theme of a lack of trust in both people and institutions came through very strongly in our study on radicalization.
"It seems to me that there’s no thinking about what is good, what makes sense, or what considers everyone’s interests. What matters is pushing through your own goal. Consequently, it leads to a certain kind of reaction and radicalization. There’s no consideration that there might be a common solution."
"The governance and running of the state aren’t transparent. I was devastated by the situation with the pollution of the Oder River. Someone must have known, but it was covered up. And no one went to jail, nothing. That makes me distrust this government, this state. It depresses me, I don’t feel safe."
"Sweden, for me, is somewhat of an oasis of normality. It’s still a country where people trust each other and trust the government. The rest of Europe is turning right and no longer wants to trust."
Participation in communities, associations, and charitable/pro bono activities contributes to an increase in generalized social trust. In contrast, social alienation can lead to estrangement from society and a search for belonging in radical groups. Research shows that the lowest levels of social trust are found among those who are less educated and have lower economic status. Therefore, inviting these groups to collaborate seems to be the most urgent task.
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) face a second important task—building trust in institutions by working on transparency and sharing information about their activities, finances, and goals. They can collaborate with other organizations, local authorities, businesses, and the academic community. These partnerships can contribute to more effective actions and increase trust in NGOs as important social partners. Moreover, they can engage the community in programs’ implementation, planning and organization. Social participation gives people a sense of influence over their surroundings.
Developing Soft Skills
The tendency toward radicalization is not solely a result of psychological factors but is also heavily influenced by social ones. Our susceptibility to radicalization is largely determined by our sense of community, our openness to others' needs and perspectives, and our ability to manage difficult emotions. Social organizations have a significant role to play in fostering these soft skills, as they operate in environments where these skills can be developed and help to prevent radicalization.
Among the critical soft skills essential for resilience to radicalization are:
Empathy: The ability to empathetically understand and share the emotions of others helps to build positive relationships and alleviate social tensions that could lead to radicalization. It prevents the rejection or dehumanization of those who think differently.
Emotional Regulation: The skill of recognizing and managing one’s emotions, as well as appropriately responding to the feelings of others, allows individuals to handle their own and others' stress better, facilitating smoother communication. This is particularly important in the online space, where it is much easier to insult someone or an entire social group while taking advantage of anonymity and the distance created by not personally knowing the individuals targeted by hate speech.
Openness to Dialogue and Collaboration: Engaging in open and constructive dialogue with people with different views and beliefs is fundamental to working effectively with others. Building positive and lasting interpersonal relationships fosters a sense of belonging, being understood, and feeling valued.
The way the aforementioned soft skills protect us from radicalization is well illustrated by the words of a woman who moved from a large city to a rural area, where most of the community holds very different views and values:
“I usually don’t engage in debates with these people. I believe that leading by example is a good approach. Recently, I received a message from a farmer who told me that he changed his attitude towards nature thanks to me. I prefer to invite people into my life for a moment and show them alternative ways of living. Often, their attitudes are driven by fear. I try to find out what they are afraid of. Once, I gave a woman a ride, and she said she had to put on her hearing aid, but at first, she was afraid of it because it was German-made. I think kindness is key. There's this belief that we must dislike each other if we think differently. For example, I have friends who are hunters. I don’t try to convince anyone to stop eating meat.”
Additionally, as another interviewee succinctly and powerfully put it:
"Without all these emotions, it would be easier for me to trust."
Critical Thinking – A Key Competency in the Information Age
I have previously written about the links between radicalization and disinformation. Here, I want to focus on how NGOs can help people navigate a world of unreliable information. It is crucial to create comprehensive educational materials and impactful social campaigns that raise awareness about disinformation and monitor traditional and social media. Encouraging communities to combat disinformation actively through actions like reporting false content, sharing credible information, and promoting fact-based discussions is also essential.
We must not forget the importance of fostering critical thinking in society, which is a key skill in the information era. Critical thinking empowers us to analyze information, distinguish facts from opinions, and assess the credibility of information sources. The ability to separate truth from disinformation provides us with an effective tool for defending against manipulation, indoctrination, and the exploitation of our anger and fear. In this context, it is equally important to educate people about how emotions can influence our thinking and judgment of information.
The significance of this is evident in the conversations we conducted as part of the study above. Almost every respondent expressed a need to share their bitter reflections on how difficult it is today to discern the truth in the media and avoid being overwhelmed by emotions:
“We are flooded with lies. TV lies, politicians lie—it's one big deception. It scares me. Barking instead of exchanging information—it’s terrifying. It’s hard to tell what’s a lie and what’s not anymore.”
“Everything is based on fear and sensationalism. 'You won’t believe what Robert Lewandowski did! … He burped.' These are often empty stories. When you're online, you're in a constant state of agitation. With each new piece of information, the sense of danger, war, and catastrophe grows.”
“I don’t verify information in a conscious, scientific way—only by judging what stands behind the media. Because there are no free, independent media anymore. It is hard even to call them media. They don’t present information for us to evaluate ourselves; they formulate the content.”
“We’re closing ourselves in information bubbles, surrounded by fake news that strongly affects our emotions. (...) We all experience this, I feel the same way. It goes wild if I search for a book for my daughter on Google. Algorithms learn about us and then shape us. There's no clean slate when using the internet.”
Trust, dialogue, collaboration, empathy, and critical thinking are the essential tools that NGOs and social activists can use to build society’s resilience to radicalization. Let’s work together to develop these competencies and build a stronger society, capable of detecting disinformation and countering radicalization.
Disclaimer: All quotes come from interviews conducted as part of the research.
Author: Katarzyna Fereniec-Błońska - a researcher with over 13 years of experience designing and conducting social and marketing research for Kantar and the Paris office of Ipsos, where she led a global project combining qualitative and quantitative studies with machine learning. At Curiosity, she worked with NGOs, cultural institutions and startups. In her research work, she is interested in social change and the impact of technology on lifestyles.
Background illustration by: junce11
Learn more on countering disinformation - register for our free online self-paced course:
