I’m not sure I understand the framing of violent extremists as victims actually. There are many reasons to make bad choices, but that doesn’t mean we have to respect those choices or take the results seriously. So too here.
I'm not sure if anybody is framing them as victims here. It's not wise to frame the rain as the oppressor because it falls on your head, either. They just exist because of reasons. I don't think anybody here thinks it's good that they exist. The GP just pointed out that "why?" is important question. Maybe the most important and it should be answered with research and intelectual honesty, instead of just "because evil exists".
If violent extremists have no choice about how they act, then you should accept that society too has no choice but to reject them. It's just the rain falling, right?
If violent extremists do have a choice, then we can also choose our response to them. And pretty clearly that response should be to ignore their demands and treat them as having abdicated any say in our political system. Otherwise, you validate violent extremism, which creates more violent extremism. Which is bad, right?
There were other choices here. They chose not to make them. It's no one's responsibility to decide other people's bad choices are noble or worthy.
> If violent extremists have no choice about how they act, then you should accept that society too has no choice but to reject them.
Of course, but wouldn't it be nice to have a comprehensive answer to "why?" so we can be free of them completely? Or at least find out why it's impossible if it really is.
The choice should be creating environment in which they don't spawn.
Being free of violent extremism completely is impossible. Someone will always choose violent extremism as their method of political action. Considering their demands based on real, articulable, resolvable concerns validates their methods and encourages their activities.
If they want to be taken seriously, they should abandon their methods. Listening to them will not resolve their concerns and contains no teachings. It instead spreads violent extremism throughout society.
I’d love a source proving a causal relationship, but to answer your question strictly as asked I have to say “no, I don’t need more examples of studies examining correlations” mostly because there obviously isn’t a number that would satisfy the requirement of a proof for that assertion
> However, analyses show
that crime is not driven by poverty alone, but
rather by inequality. Countries with high
overall levels of poverty do not necessarily
have higher levels of crime. It is places with
high levels of income inequality that typically
have the highest levels of crime. Another
driver of crime is a breakdown in social
norms and values which results in, and is
worsened by, factors such as
unemployment, incomplete education, a
break down in family structures, limited
opportunities and exclusion from the formal
economy.
So I’m gonna again say no this does not prove the assertion