A series of linked school shootings in the United States, a pair of stabbing sprees in Sweden and other attacks around the world have brought the concept of nihilistic violence to the public’s attention. But as awareness has grown so has uncertainty about the nature of this category of violence. Some recent incidents have been mischaracterized or inaccurately linked to this phenomenon. Other cases of nihilistic violence have been incorrectly labeled as the result of ideological forms of violent extremism. Therefore, the concept has introduced confusion, making it more difficult to define violent threats and prevent them.
Acts of nihilistic violence, and the tactics used, often appear similar to well-known forms of extremism, but they differ in their motivations. Nihilistic violent actors lack an overarching ideological motive: they are generally driven by misanthropy, or a desire to gain acceptance or notoriety in online communities. Unlike violent extremists, they lack a political or ideological framework.
At the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), we have identified at least eight incidents of mass violence in the United States last year linked to subcultures of nihilistic violence. Our research shows that those incidents caused twice as many deaths as attacks by ideologically motivated extremists.
Getting the distinction right between ideological and nihilistic violence is essential for researchers, law enforcement and policymakers to effectively address and prevent both forms of mass violence. However, overapplying the label of nihilistic violence risks obscuring the ideological motivations behind certain acts of mass violence. Misclassifications of high-profile incidents blunt the understanding of practitioners seeking to counter this threat.
Three cases of mass violence in just three months are emblematic of the fine-grained but critical differences between nihilistic and ideological violence: an incident in Finland where a 16-year-old boy livestreamed himself stabbing several young girls at school, an attack in Wisconsin carried out by a 17-year-old who allegedly murdered his parents and plotted to assassinate the U.S. President, and the bombing of a fertility clinic in California. All three were referred to as “nihilistic” by the media or official sources, but only the first is an example of nihilistic violence. The others were primarily driven by ideological motives. Accurately assessing these cases requires a careful analysis of the attackers’ online rhetoric and behavior, the communities to which they belonged, and the targets of their violence.
In a manifesto believed to have been penned by the Finnish attacker, he explicitly stated that his motive was to do something “significant” and “exciting.” Neither the manifesto nor additional reporting described a political rationale for his attack. Similarly, ISD analysts have identified more than a dozen school shootings or disrupted school shooting plots in the United States over the last 18 months that were linked to the True Crime Community, which we identify as a subculture of nihilistic violence. As in the Finnish attack, the writings and targeting choices of these attackers showed no ideological goals.
Contrasting these True Crime Community incidents with ideologically motivated attacks illuminates the problem. The manifesto of the Wisconsin double murderer expressed hope that the assassination of President Donald Trump would instigate a political revolution and save the white race. Similarly, the individual who bombed the Palm Springs fertility clinic subscribed to an obscure anti-natalist belief system called efilism, an “ism” that comes from spelling the word life backwards. Adherents of this niche form of extremism reject human procreation, believing that humanity threatens all life For instance, the Palm Springs bomber viewed life as a form of suffering, believed in vitro fertilization was morally wrong and believed that bombing a fertility clinic would prevent future suffering.
Unlike cases of nihilistic violence, the California and Wisconsin attacks had political motives and sought to achieve ideological goals, making them distinct from acts of nihilistic violence. While the ideologies motivating these attacks were obscure and esoteric, dismissing them as nihilistic is misleading, as it obfuscates the fact that those responsible had a clear moral and political logic.
A Flawed Label
U.S. law enforcement appears to have recognized the threat posed by nihilistic violence. Government agencies have been particularly forward-leaning in dismantling the leadership of an online network called 764, which glorifies violence and extorts minors into committing self-harm for primarily non-ideological reasons. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI have displayed a tremendous ability to adapt their existing structures and approaches to take on the emerging threat.
However, the DOJ’s label for the phenomenon — “Nihilistic Violent Extremism,” or NVE — is flawed. In recent charging documents, the DOJ has defined NVE as “criminal conduct within the United States and abroad, in furtherance of political, social, or religious goals that derive primarily from a hatred of society at large and a desire to bring about its collapse by sowing indiscriminate chaos, destruction, and social instability.” We acknowledge the need to operate within existing authorities and within the bounds of law enforcement procedures. Nevertheless, this definition is overinclusive while simultaneously failing to capture significant portions of the nihilistic violence threat landscape.
The first issue with the DOJ’s definition is that it suggests nihilistic violence must have an ideological goal – a direct contradiction that raises confusion about the distinction between nihilistic and ideological violence. Perpetrators of nihilistic violence may have a goal for committing an attack, but their motivations are most often an internal desire to harm a particular number of individuals or to gain notoriety within these types of communities online. Their goal is not political or social change.
The second issue is the requirement that such goals must derive from a “hatred of society” at large. This stipulation is broad enough that it can be applied to most extremists – for example, white supremacists hate society at large due to multiculturalism, while jihadists do so because of religious pluralism.
Finally, the condition that NVE must include a desire for the collapse of society describes a method commonly known as accelerationism, which a wide range of extremist movements, including white supremacists and jihadists, have adopted to affect political change.
The attention to nihilistic violence is welcome, but the NVE label is imprecise and risks becoming a catch-all category to describe any form of extremist violence. While many recent attackers have lacked clear ideological motivations, using NVE to describe ideologically motivated attacks diminishes our understanding of what truly motivates different cases of mass violence.
There has already been significant confusion over the application of this label. The aforementioned Wisconsin double murder suspect expressed a clear white supremacist political objective, yet authorities placed him in the NVE category.
Some counter-extremism practitioners have cited the suspect’s affiliation with an occult group called the Order of Nine Angles (O9A) as evidence that he belongs in the NVE category. However, O9A is a well-established extremist ideology that seeks to accelerate societal collapse in pursuit of a ”cleansed” social order. There is also a long history of O9A adherents engaging in white supremacist violence. Therefore, the NVE label obfuscates the racism that truly drives these actors.
Likewise, after the 25-year-old bombed a fertility clinic in Palm Springs, the FBI described the act as nihilistic. Experts and the media cited the attack as evidence of a rising “wave” of nihilistic violence.
However, a deeper examination of the bomber’s ideology suggests the nihilistic label was misapplied. In online posts believed to have been written by the attacker, he derided nihilists as “sociopathic.” While he referred to himself as a “misandrist” and may have met the NVE criteria of harbouring hatred for “society at large,” his hatred – and resulting violence – stemmed from “pro-mortalist” beliefs.
A Hindrance for Law Enforcement and Prevention
Misunderstanding the drivers behind violence hinders prevention and enforcement efforts. Simultaneously, the misapplication of the NVE label to ideologically motivated acts of violence has caused some experts to reflexively dismiss the idea of nihilistic violence altogether. They dismiss it as a real threat despite the numerous deadly examples of mass violence in recent years that clearly lack overarching ideological motivation. Examples of nihilistic violence include school shootings committed by individuals linked to the True Crime Community (TCC), which glorifies ideologically and non-ideologically mass killers alike, and the activities of the 764 network, which extorts vulnerable individuals into acts of self-harm and promotes public acts of violence. In both TCC and 764 cases, ideology is not the primary driver.
A prime example of nihilistic violence is a school shooting that occurred last year. In December 2024, a 15-year-old girl shot multiple people at a school in Wisconsin, killing two before committing suicide. While she was obsessed with violence and participated in digital communities that glorified mass shooters, her manifesto contained no indication of political motivation. Instead, it described humanity as “filth” and focused almost entirely on her personal and emotional justifications for the shooting.
Components of the 764 network are also emblematic of nihilistic violence. Members advocate for acts of public violence, with some European affiliates committing serial stabbings, but a careful analysis suggests there is no overarching ideological framework underpinning their behavior. Despite the presence of some neo-Nazis and other extremists within 764’s ranks, genuine ideological discussion within this community is rare. Members largely view violence as a twisted form of entertainment rather than a means to a political end.
Government agencies and experts must be precise with the terms used to characterize acts of violence. Describing an act as nihilistic when there are clear-cut ideological motives is inaccurate and misleading. It is equally dangerous to assume an ideological motive in cases where none exists.
This is not merely an academic issue, but a practical one. In the United States, actual or disrupted attacks linked to subcultures of nihilistic violence occur nearly every week. Many of them target children or other vulnerable groups.
While law enforcement efforts to address this threat are commendable, arrests alone cannot solve the problem. Addressing the societal challenge of mass violence requires the development of tailored responses, including prevention programs, interventions for high-risk individuals, and intelligence-led policing. Mislabeling acts of mass violence can hinder these efforts by obfuscating the true motivations behind them. At best, confusing labels can lead to ineffective responses. At worst, it risks exacerbating the severe challenges posed by ideological and nihilistic violence alike.
