On February 16-18, the White House held a national summit on “countering violent extremism” (or CVE). Since it has been implemented by the federal government, CVE has almost exclusively been focused on American Muslim communities. Many advocates around the country responded with harsh criticism of the Summit’s focus and the architecture behind the CVE framework generally.
Over at The Guardian, Linda Sarsour (@lsarsour) and I wrote a piece asking why the federal government did not have a similar focus on other forms of violent extremism such as the rise in rightwing extremist groups. We write:
The threat of right-wing domestic extremism is not far-fetched. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), since the year 2000, the number of hate groups in the United States has increased by 56%; they now include anti-immigrant, anti-LGBT, anti-Muslim and anti-government “Patriot” groups. The federal government too is aware of the threats from these groups. In April 2009, a report by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on right-wing extremism was leaked and then withdrawn. It revealed the government’s assessment that “white supremacist lone wolves” posed the most significant domestic terrorist threat in the US.
Yet, despite this complicated and growing landscape of domestic right-wing groups, the Obama Administration’s Countering Violent Extremism programs continue to focus on the threat of radicalization in Muslim communities.
Read more here.
More Resources on the CVE framework:
*Basic Information from the Brennan Center for Justice
*Questions about the CVE framework compiled by Darakshan Raja, Washington Peace Center, Dr. Maha Hilal, National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms, and Ramah Kudaimi, Washington Peace Center
*Why civil rights concerns should be addressed: an oped by Hina Shamsi, ACLU
*Why the CVE framework is inherently flawed: an oped by Faiza Patel, Brennan Center
Find tweets about CVE under #CountertheNarrative