[ad_1]
Leah Feiger: Let’s be honest, a militia consisting of 2,500 individuals spread across the United States, meticulously coordinated on Telegram, and advocating for the use of firearms in response to various scenarios like natural calamities or unsubstantiated allegations of election fraud is undeniably alarming. I have serious concerns.
David Gilbert: Absolutely, and this crucial aspect often gets overlooked. When crafting articles like these, many tend to dismiss it as a non-issue, labeling it as fabrication or mere posturing.
Leah Feiger: Indeed.
David Gilbert: However, within these Telegram channels, there exist individuals keen on joining armed militant groups. This trend encapsulates a broader resurgence in extreme right paramilitary activities and dialogues witnessed by myself and fellow experts in online realms over the recent weeks and months—a truly perturbing development.
Leah Feiger: Let’s take a brief intermission, and upon our return, delve into the emerging mainstream appeal of such militias and its implications for 2024. Welcome back to WIRED Politics Lab. David, you mentioned the resurgence of militias. Could you elaborate on that?
David Gilbert: By resurgence, I mean that Lang and the network of militias he spearheads form just a fraction of a broader movement that me, along with other journalists and researchers closely monitoring the domain, have observed in recent times. This surge in activity is intricately linked to the upcoming 2024 election, signaling a call for vigilance in the event of certain outcomes—particularly a potential loss by Donald Trump.
Leah Feiger: How does Lang envision the scenario following a hypothetical defeat of Donald Trump?
David Gilbert: Lang anticipates widespread civil unrest and public outrage in the event of a Trump loss, questioning the legitimacy of Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election.
Jake Lang: No, I believe it’s predominantly an improbable statistical anomaly.
David Gilbert: During our conversation, Lang enumerated a range of well-known election conspiracy theories from 2020.
Jake Lang: Election fraud, theft, manipulation, conspiracy—whatever term you prefer. It did not reflect the will of the populace.
David Gilbert: Looking ahead to 2024, Lang foresees a potential crisis in the aftermath of a Trump defeat, foreseeing heightened anger among the populace—fueling the readiness of his militia to intervene.
Leah Feiger: Is this a credible threat, considering the abundance of online rhetoric? What connections have you and your fellow researchers established between this current moment and events from 2020?
David Gilbert: The network spearheading these initiatives appears significantly more robust and expansive, having cultivated nationwide connections and groups—whether virtual or physical—over the past four years. Prior to 2020, select researchers and journalists raised concerns, signaling a looming crisis which some intelligence agencies also acknowledged, but regrettably, no concrete measures followed. Presently, approximately five months away from the election, indicators have intensified notably. In the recent weeks, discussions on militias and sheriffs’ posses have surged, underscoring the preparation for 2024 and the anticipation of potential disruptions post-election. The similarity with 2020 lies in the tendency to overlook prevalent warnings. The events unfolding this time exhibit greater magnitude, although current attention seems lacking.
[ad_2]
