Army commander vows to issue special order to weed out extremists in the ranks

[MJP]

Yet, the interpretations by the politicians/Commanders is all that matters for them to come down on members. The whole concept of "hate speech/hate crimes " is wishy washy and will be prone to misuse.

Same thing was said about Op HONOUR. Magically people who don't say dodgy shit in the first place have no issues.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Fighting systemic racism, extremism will be priority for next military chief: Trudeau

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says priorities for the next commander of the Canadian Armed Forces include tackling systemic racism and rooting extremism from the ranks.

This is the first time Trudeau has shared his vision for the role since Gen. Jonathan Vance announced in July he was getting ready to step down as chief of the defence staff.

Trudeau told The Canadian Press during a wide-ranging interview today that the new defence chief will be named soon, though he stopped short of providing a timeline.

Trudeau says aside from operational and strategic skills and experience, the chosen candidate will need to focus on making the military more inclusive and reflective of Canadian values.

The military in recent years has been stung with a variety of controversies.

That includes what Trudeau described as "concerning" and "troubling" reports of extremism among some service members.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/fighting-systemic-racism-extremism-will-be-priority-for-next-military-chief-trudeau/ar-BB1bZswM?li=AAggXBV


Extremism is a problem, is it being blown out of proportion in the CAF?

I can think of the MCpl reservist case.
Couple Navy guys showing up at a Proud Boys protest.
Canadian Ranger showing up at the PM's place.

These guys apparently

Matthews’s case is not isolated. Global News reported in 2019 that an internal Armed Forces investigation found at least 16 members had links to six different hate groups since 2013 including La Meute, the Soldiers of Odin, and Atomwaffen Division — a neo-Nazi terrorist group linked to attempted bombings, hate crimes and at least one murder in the United States.

https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2020/09/25/canadian-armed-forces-moves-to-crack-down-on-racism-and-extremism-within-its-ranks.html

So we're looking at 20ish members since 2013 out of approximately 95,000 regular force and reserve members.
Is the Canadian Forces hiding the true number of extremists in our ranks? Are there dozens? Hundreds?
Is stamping out extremism and racism not a priority for our current CDS?

 

[Remius]

This happened over a decade ago.  I had to deal with two members of a reserve unit I won’t name,  they weren’t too keen on having a black section 2ic.  So they put up a confederate flag in their room.  Said they were civil war buffs when questioned.  They could not actually say when the civil war actually happened or name a single battle upon further questioning.  They also carved a swastika in their drill boots so when their 2ic would look down he would see it.  A MCpl from that same unit who was a bit more enlightened stated that sort of crap was common at his unit. 

You may be right Jarn.  Maybe it is specific cases as this unit was from a mostly out skirt rural area and not urban or regular force where it would be easier to stamp out. 

I have no doubt it exists.  The CAF is a large organisation. And the reserves is a good place for extremists to get into for whatever reason.

But there have been enough public cases and likely not so public under watch cases to merit scrutiny.

I don’t know though.  I’m out of the loop on this and came from a unit where this wasn’t tolerated.  Peers would have handled it before it ever got to the CoC.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Release the Sociologists!!!



Investigating hateful ideologies and extremism in the Canadian Armed Forces

Author: UNB Research

University of New Brunswick researcher, Dr. David Hofmann, and Ontario Tech University researcher, Dr. Barbara Perry, have been granted $750,000 in April to investigate hateful ideologies and extremism within the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) over the next three years.

From this understanding, they will provide recommendations and insight to CAF leadership to help address these concerning ideologies.

“Anyone paying attention to the news lately knows that this is an issue that keeps cropping up. I think this is a chance to create meaningful change within the CAF as an institution, and I have to commend them; they’re putting a lot of time and effort into actively trying to deal with this issue. It’s not like they’re sweeping it under the rug. They are also willing to listen to outside expertise, which not everyone is open to doing,” said Dr. Hofmann.

Before the project officially launched this past fall, the team had been in ongoing conversations with General Jonathan Vance, the Chief of the Defence Staff of the CAF, last year as he sought their guidance and expertise on how to respond to right-wing extremism within the military. They were encouraged by the Chief of Defence Staff to apply for a grant from the Department of National Defence’s Mobilizing insights in Defence and Security Program (MINDS).

Dr. Hofmann and Dr. Perry are the co-leads on the project and will be working with research hubs in British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada.

Their goal is to form a research network connecting diverse experts across Canada. They will be conducting several phased projects over the next three years to examine the extent, depth and breadth of hateful conduct in the CAF, and will use their findings to provide policy and practical recommendations for the CAF who are actively trying to combat extremists within the military.

“This project really excites me because we’re funded by the Department of National Defence to make real, empirically, scientifically informed recommendations that will be heard by the highest levels. This means that we have a chance to really help the CAF combat this worrisome trend,” said Dr. Hofmann.

The first phase of the project will consist of a media and environmental scan of the phenomenon. The team will be conducting as many interviews with CAF members as possible, followed by statistical analyses and surveys in the second phase.

In order to build a comprehensive understanding of hateful conduct within the CAF, Dr. Hofmann describes the interview method with an analogy of a radar signal to gauge what CAF members may have seen, heard and think.

“It’s not like we can walk up to them and ask them, ‘Hey, are you a neo-Nazi, do you want to talk to me about being a neo-Nazi in the CAF?, Even if they hold those ideas, they’re not going to share it.

“When a radar signal goes out, you don’t literally see the object you’re looking for, but you get an idea of what the object is or where you need to go based upon everything that’s around it,” he adds.

He is also planning on contributing his expertise on social network analysis in the future to ground their findings with rigorous and valid data to make informed policy recommendations.

Dr. Hofmann is also a co-investigator for a three-year Public Health Safety Canada funded project where he has been conducting an environmental scan of right-wing extremism across Canada with Dr. Perry, who is the head researcher. This project has helped build momentum for the team’sproject with the CAF.

Dr. David Hofmann is an Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of New Brunswick. His research interests include charismatic authority in terrorist groups, right-wing extremism in North America, transnational criminal organizations, terrorist radicalization, and terrorist leadership.

http://blogs.unb.ca/research/2020/11/hofmann-caf-hate-and-extremism.php

 

[Kat Stevens]

Release the Sociologists!!!



Investigating hateful ideologies and extremism in the Canadian Armed Forces

Author: UNB Research

University of New Brunswick researcher, Dr. David Hofmann, and Ontario Tech University researcher, Dr. Barbara Perry, have been granted $750,000 in April to investigate hateful ideologies and extremism within the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) over the next three years.

From this understanding, they will provide recommendations and insight to CAF leadership to help address these concerning ideologies.

“Anyone paying attention to the news lately knows that this is an issue that keeps cropping up. I think this is a chance to create meaningful change within the CAF as an institution, and I have to commend them; they’re putting a lot of time and effort into actively trying to deal with this issue. It’s not like they’re sweeping it under the rug. They are also willing to listen to outside expertise, which not everyone is open to doing,” said Dr. Hofmann.

Before the project officially launched this past fall, the team had been in ongoing conversations with General Jonathan Vance, the Chief of the Defence Staff of the CAF, last year as he sought their guidance and expertise on how to respond to right-wing extremism within the military. They were encouraged by the Chief of Defence Staff to apply for a grant from the Department of National Defence’s Mobilizing insights in Defence and Security Program (MINDS).

Dr. Hofmann and Dr. Perry are the co-leads on the project and will be working with research hubs in British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada.

Their goal is to form a research network connecting diverse experts across Canada. They will be conducting several phased projects over the next three years to examine the extent, depth and breadth of hateful conduct in the CAF, and will use their findings to provide policy and practical recommendations for the CAF who are actively trying to combat extremists within the military.

“This project really excites me because we’re funded by the Department of National Defence to make real, empirically, scientifically informed recommendations that will be heard by the highest levels. This means that we have a chance to really help the CAF combat this worrisome trend,” said Dr. Hofmann.

The first phase of the project will consist of a media and environmental scan of the phenomenon. The team will be conducting as many interviews with CAF members as possible, followed by statistical analyses and surveys in the second phase.

In order to build a comprehensive understanding of hateful conduct within the CAF, Dr. Hofmann describes the interview method with an analogy of a radar signal to gauge what CAF members may have seen, heard and think.

“It’s not like we can walk up to them and ask them, ‘Hey, are you a neo-Nazi, do you want to talk to me about being a neo-Nazi in the CAF?, Even if they hold those ideas, they’re not going to share it.

“When a radar signal goes out, you don’t literally see the object you’re looking for, but you get an idea of what the object is or where you need to go based upon everything that’s around it,” he adds.

He is also planning on contributing his expertise on social network analysis in the future to ground their findings with rigorous and valid data to make informed policy recommendations.

Dr. Hofmann is also a co-investigator for a three-year Public Health Safety Canada funded project where he has been conducting an environmental scan of right-wing extremism across Canada with Dr. Perry, who is the head researcher. This project has helped build momentum for the team’sproject with the CAF.

Dr. David Hofmann is an Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of New Brunswick. His research interests include charismatic authority in terrorist groups, right-wing extremism in North America, transnational criminal organizations, terrorist radicalization, and terrorist leadership.

http://blogs.unb.ca/research/2020/11/hofmann-caf-hate-and-extremism.php

And undoubtedly their approach will be purely objective with no preconceived notions. Do they still sell Witchfinder General hats at William Scully?

 

[Jarnhamar]

And undoubtedly their approach will be purely objective with no preconceived notions.

I read their bios and thought the same thing.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I read their bios and thought the same thing.

"Liberals have invented whole college majors - psychology, sociology and women's studies - to prove that nothing is anybody's fault."

P. J. O'Rourke

 

[Blackadder1916]

I read their bios and thought the same thing.

But did you read any of their publications?  Preconceived notions, anyone?

 

[Kilted]

I wonder how far back they are going to investigate.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Then start researching these two and forming up to fight them with the size of funding they received, they are going to be up your asses in a big way.

 

[ArmyRick]

Dr Barbara Perry Is like the WORST choice they could have picked. Watch her videos, even ethnic communities can not stomach her. The common theme you will see is she no specific facts to back up her arguments just vague statements and innuendos.
I could barely stand to listen to her Ted Talk video.

 

[Jarnhamar]

But did you read any of their publications?  Preconceived notions, anyone?

Preconceived notions like the CAF is a hotbed for right-wing extremism, good point. I haven't read any of their publications yet, I'm currently in the middle of watching videos Dr Perry's put out.

 

[Ralph]

Some people seem a bit triggered. What exactly is the issue with determining if there's a scientific method to identify military members who hold extremist views? I, for one, have never seen anyone sexually assault anyone - does that mean it doesn't happen? Are you under the impression that these two professors have been deputized by the CFNIS to conduct sweeping dragnets against all the right-thinking individuals? Have some more egg nog and chill.

 

[Brash]

Some people seem a bit triggered. What exactly is the issue with determining if there's a scientific method to identify military members who hold extremist views? I, for one, have never seen anyone sexually assault anyone - does that mean it doesn't happen? Are you under the impression that these two professors have been deputized by the CFNIS to conduct sweeping dragnets against all the right-thinking individuals? Have some more egg nog and chill.

Reading the last dozen or so comments regarding the grant announcement as well, and I don't find anyone that has been triggered.
Nor do I find anyone at issue with 'a scientific method to identify military members who hold extremist views'.
Nor do I find comments that indicate that they themselves will be mistakenly swept up in 'a sweeping dragnet'.

It seems you are trying to mischaracterize the dissent that has been expressed towards the selection of grant recipients whose prior publicized opinions indicate they employ a less-than-scientific-method, as instead simply rooted in conspiracy or anti-authority sentiment. 
This is known as a straw man argument tactic.

 

[Ralph]

Reading the last dozen or so comments regarding the grant announcement as well, and I don't find anyone that has been triggered.
Nor do I find anyone at issue with 'a scientific method to identify military members who hold extremist views'.
Nor do I find comments that indicate that they themselves will be mistakenly swept up in 'a sweeping dragnet'.

It seems you are trying to mischaracterize the dissent that has been expressed towards the selection of grant recipients whose prior publicized opinions indicate they employ a less-than-scientific-method, as instead simply rooted in conspiracy or anti-authority sentiment. 
This is known as a straw man argument tactic.

Fine - that's your opinion.
Can you share the link showing evidence that these grant recipients employ a less-than-scientific-method? Shouldn't we be telling somebody about this if it can be verified?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Some people seem a bit triggered. What exactly is the issue with determining if there's a scientific method to identify military members who hold extremist views? I, for one, have never seen anyone sexually assault anyone - does that mean it doesn't happen? Are you under the impression that these two professors have been deputized by the CFNIS to conduct sweeping dragnets against all the right-thinking individuals? Have some more egg nog and chill.

Well, it's a project worth almost a million bucks, and I don't see anything mentioned about the procurement process they used to identify this group to do the work, so it would seem reasonable to be a bit suspicious....

 

[Ralph]

Well, it's a project worth almost a million bucks, and I don't see anything mentioned about the procurement process they used to identify this group to do the work, so it would seem reasonable to be a bit suspicious....

You don't see anything mentioned where? On the grant announcement?

 

[Navy_Pete]

Well, it's a project worth almost a million bucks, and I don't see anything mentioned about the procurement process they used to identify this group to do the work, so it would seem reasonable to be a bit suspicious....

Here's the program that it was awarded under;there are a few different research grant type programs, but there is a whole application/screening process for all of them. Some of them you can send in proposals for review and approval, while others there is a call for a specific research topic and you submit a proposal. DRDC also has research contracts, and they follow the normal RFP process, and there are probably a few other relevant programs, but can pretty much guarantee all of them will have some kind of bureaucratic vetting/approval process.

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/programs/minds.html

Found out while doing a masters that there doesn't seem to be a program to support research funding dedicated envelopes for research done under sponsored PGs, so looked into applying to a few of these kind of things as a normal academic. It's a lot of bureaucracy and found an alternate source for some funding and some donated supplies, but from what I can tell from academia a big part of being a 'successful' academic is being good at applying and receiving these grants, and not necessarily any real results. Seems a bit weird to me there isn't a pool of money available for PGT research in these programs, as you think that it would make sense financially to do it concurrently with PGs that you are paying for anyway. That would be more efficient then going through the sponsor organization, which would be some kind of special project with a lot of lead time to figure out who is paying for it.

No complaints on my end as I had full support from my sponsor, just seems like a missed opportunity to help focus PGs on DND issues, as it would have been far easier for me to do something readily available from the existing commercial work in the hopper, which would have been totally useless to the RCN.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Here's the program that it was awarded under;there are a few different research grant type programs, but there is a whole application/screening process for all of them. Some of them you can send in proposals for review and approval, while others there is a call for a specific research topic and you submit a proposal. DRDC also has research contracts, and they follow the normal RFP process, and there are probably a few other relevant programs, but can pretty much guarantee all of them will have some kind of bureaucratic vetting/approval process.

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/programs/minds.html

Found out while doing a masters that there doesn't seem to be a program to support research funding dedicated envelopes for research done under sponsored PGs, so looked into applying to a few of these kind of things as a normal academic. It's a lot of bureaucracy and found an alternate source for some funding and some donated supplies, but from what I can tell from academia a big part of being a 'successful' academic is being good at applying and receiving these grants, and not necessarily any real results. Seems a bit weird to me there isn't a pool of money available for PGT research in these programs, as you think that it would make sense financially to do it concurrently with PGs that you are paying for anyway. That would be more efficient then going through the sponsor organization, which would be some kind of special project with a lot of lead time to figure out who is paying for it.

No complaints on my end as I had full support from my sponsor, just seems like a missed opportunity to help focus PGs on DND issues, as it would have been far easier for me to do something readily available from the existing commercial work in the hopper, which would have been totally useless to the RCN.

Good info, thanks!

Also, calling it a 'research' project helps take the pressure off of everyone re: doing something, anything, about the findings of course

 

[Brad Sallows]

If it's "scientific", then a hypothesis will be formulated and tested.  Empirical observation will either confirm or deny the hypothesis.