How Civil Wars Start: And How to Stop Them

Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 2022

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Background

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Introduction

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Key Figures

Themes

Index of Terms

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Tools

Beta

Discussion Questions

Chapter 5Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapter 5 Summary: “The Accelerant”

Content Warning: The source text depicts acts of violence and other crimes associated with civil wars.

In this chapter, Walter focuses on a powerful new weapon that generates anger and resentment and accelerates political instability and violence: social media.

Walter begins by discussing her own experiences observing Myanmar’s transition from military to civilian rule in 2011. After decades of rule, the military finally agreed to give up power, allow elections, and free Aung San Suu Kyi, who is a well-known opposition leader and political prisoner. While Walter remained hopeful about the transition, she was also concerned that Myanmar could fall into the anocracy zone, especially if Aung San Suu Kyi was elected prime minister. There were two reasons for her concern. The first is that the military, which had held so much power, would suddenly lose all its power. As noted in Chapter 3, this type of loss of power can lead to civil war.

The second is the rise of factions, particularly a Buddhist superfaction. Buddhists were Myanmar’s sons of the soil. Muslims, including the Rohingya people, represented the minority group. For years, Buddhist nationalists demanded more power and rights and discriminated against Muslims. Walter worried that “an opening up of the political system to competition could create even more incentives for Buddhists to flex their political muscle and exploit this divide” (103).

Initially, the transition went smoothly. However, as the government weakened its restrictions around internet and social media, the situation changed. Buddhist ultranationalist monks began to use social media to post false news stories and hate speech and spread lies and fear about the Muslim population. Myanmar’s military leaders followed suit. Government leaders supported these stories since they did not want to face the ire of the monks or military. Soon violence broke out.

Multiple individuals, including journalists, students, human rights organizations, foreign governments, and citizens of Myanmar themselves, raised concerns about how social media platforms were being used to incite violence and spread misinformation and hate speech. Unfortunately, social media platforms, such as Facebook, ignored these concerns. Many blame the ongoing persecution and killings of Muslim Rohingya people by the Myanmar military—actions that constitute ethnic cleansing—since 2016 on the refusal of social media platforms to crack down on these issues. Facebook did finally acknowledge its contributions to this violence.

Next, Walter turns to Rodrigo Duterte and his rise to power as president of the Philippines. Prior to 2015, most Filipinos did not know of Duterte, who was then mayor of a city in Mindanao. To increase his visibility across the country, Duterte hired a marketing consultant to help him build a social media army. Social media influencers praised Duterte, criticized his opponents, and created popular hashtags that helped amplify content related to Duterte. Duterte, in turn, used social media to amplify his populist agenda. The strategy worked and Duterte became president. Duterte is not the only individual to use social media to help him win elections: Walter notes other examples including Jair Bolsonaro (Brazil) and Viktor Orbán (Hungary).

Walter concludes by emphasizing that “it’s the algorithms of social media that serve as accelerants for violence” (127). These algorithms lead people to content that focuses solely on crises. As a result, people grow increasingly fearful and disillusioned about the state of their country. They lose hope about their future being better. This situation makes them more likely to turn to ethnic entrepreneurs, who amplify these feelings of fear and hopelessness and encourage violence as a means of addressing them. Violence seems like the only alternative as people lose hope.

Chapter 5 Analysis

In Chapter 5, Walter introduces a second theme: Social Media’s Corrosive Influence on Democracy. Researchers uncovered the dangers of social media for political stability by examining where the backsliding of democracies was occurring. Most places around the world saw this decay, with countries in Africa being the glaring exception. Data suggest that the lack of access to the internet explains this phenomenon. Most other places around the world already heavily used the internet by this point except Africa. Unfortunately, the situation changed when social media began penetrating the continent. The increase in use of social media as a main form of communication coincides with the rise of conflict across the continent. Thus, Walter and other researchers argue that social media has had a corrosive influence on democracy.

The primary purpose of this theme is to highlight how social media platforms have fueled global conflict and undermined democracies. Walter explores three interconnecting ways these platforms have corroded democracies. The first way is the spread of misinformation (inaccurate or false information) and disinformation (intentional spreading of misleading information), which is an issue related to social media’s business model of engagement. Ethnic entrepreneurs, who previously were shut out from mainstream media companies and political processes, now had a tool they could use to spread their propaganda. Research shows that incendiary information attracts greater engagement with people. Once people start engaging with this content, behavior algorithms push them toward increasingly more incendiary material. Thus, the variety of sources people receive information from shrinks, reinforcing people’s beliefs about the world.

The second way is that social media platforms enable voters to elect populist, anti-democratic leaders themselves. Populist leaders use these platforms to stoke fear through the spread of misinformation and disinformation. As a result, everyday people begin to question whether their democratic government is actually protecting them. People turn to the populist leader as an alternative since they focus so heavily on law and order.

Finally, social media platforms also increase factionalism because they encourage divisive content. Walter suggests this corrosive factor is likely why Sweden, which is considered a very liberal country, saw a former Neo-Nazi party become the third largest political party in the country. The party’s leader found an audience for its perspectives, which focused on anti-immigration rhetoric, through social media platforms. The content focused on “restoring ‘the national home’” (121) by removing immigrants. Social media enables populist leaders to shape people’s views about groups or individuals they consider “other.”

Walter uses examples from all around the world, including India, the US, Hungary, Sweden, South Africa, the Islamic State, and France, to illustrate how democratic-leaning countries in different parts of the world have all been impacted similarly with the spread of access to the internet and social media. In doing so, Walter illustrates why the last decade has seen the rise of far-right and populist leaders, who were once considered unelectable in liberal democracies.

Walter also continues to punctuate her narrative with the experiences of ordinary people. In this chapter, she focuses on American journalist Shane Bauer, who was able to infiltrate militias in the US. His experience emphasizes how social media algorithms manipulate people. He started by simply liking three different militia groups. To be accepted into these groups, however, he opened a social media account where he posted negative material about immigration, then-President Barack Obama, and memes of American flags. He then sent friend requests to people in the militias, who immediately started accepting them since Bauer appeared to hold similar viewpoints. Bauer was even able to go to an event hosted by one of the militia groups. These militia members did not realize Bauer was not a believer. Social media enabled him to mask his true beliefs while still spreading misinformation and disinformation.