Digital Polarization and Hate Speech: A Philosophical–Methodological Analysis of the Limits of 'Causality' Between Extremist Content and Violence

Abstract

The proliferation of digital communication technologies has precipitated an epistemological challenge within political science regarding the etiology of violence. As algorithmic curation becomes the dominant mode of information distribution, a prevailing hypothesis posits a direct, deterministic causal link between online hate speech consumption and offline extremist violence. This study conducts a critical methodological review of high-impact sociology and political science literature (2019–2025) to interrogate the validity of this assumed causality. Utilizing the CARS (Create a Research Space) model, we deconstruct "hypodermic needle" theories of digital radicalization, demonstrating their methodological insufficiency under rigorous causal inference standards. The analysis identifies three pervasive methodological deficits: endogeneity (indistinguishability of algorithmic influence from user selection bias), the ecological fallacy (inference of individual risk from aggregate content volume), and selection bias (exclusion of non-violent consumers). Contra linear "radicalization pipeline" models, empirical evidence suggests the relationship between digital toxicity and physical violence is stochastic, configurational, and moderated by structural variables such as economic inequality and institutional trust. We propose shifting theoretical frameworks from "direct causality" to "stochastic terrorism," defined through probability density rather than deterministic incitement. Furthermore, we examine "concept creep" regarding violence, contrasting it with the legal thresholds of the UN’s Rabat Plan of Action. The paper concludes that policy interventions focused on content removal are prone to displacement effects, advocating instead for "algorithmic auditing" and "friction-based" design interventions targeting amplification velocity. 1. Introduction: The Crisis of Causal Inference in Sociotechnical Systems The structural transformation of the public sphere via digital architecture has outpaced theoretical models of human behavior, which often remain tethered to mid-20th-century mass media theories. A central inquiry in contemporary political science persists: Does the consumption of algorithmically curated hate speech cause political violence, or does the digital sphere merely reflect and accelerate fractures originating in material social conditions? Supranational policy frameworks, such as the European Commission’s Counter-Terrorism Agenda, operate on a presumption of causality, asserting that online propaganda accelerates the spread of radical ideologies (European Commission, 2020). This "viral" metaphor informs global content moderation legislation, including the Digital Services Act (DSA). Implicit in this regulatory approach is a resurrected "Hypodermic Needle" model, positing that media messages exert a direct, uniform influence on behavior (Wolfowicz et al., 2021). However, a critical review of empirical literature from 2019 to 2025 reveals a "causality gap." While online hate speech volume has increased, the incidence of offline violent extremism remains a statistically rare event relative to exposure rates. This divergence between billions of

digital "impressions" and the scarcity of physical violence challenges the validity of linear "viral" models (Bilewicz & Soral, 2020).