YOUTH 2020 - The position of young people in Slovenia

188 tions in general, young people in Slovenia are not in favour of violent ex- tremism. Among the claims of their social engagement, the allegations of ‘joining an extremist group’ and ‘presence at violent protests’ stood out. In a statement about ‘joining an extremist group’, only 10.5%of young people stated that they ‘probably would’ or that they had already participated in such a way. For ‘presence at violent protests’, 11.2% of young people stated that they probably would or that they already had been present at violent protests. The share of “positive” responses to both claims is markedly low compared to all other claims relating to political and social participation. These data on the low presence of violent extremism among young people in Slovenia are extremely important, as other indicators related to politi- cal culture and political activity in Slovenia are far from encouraging. Despite lower and lower electoral turnout, general disinterest in politics, and low level of trust in the political process, young people in Slovenia do not favour violent extremism. This is one of the reasons why the phenomenon of radicalisation and vi- olent extremismmust be noted, as this has changed the relationship be- tween security and respect for fundamental rights and freedoms over the last decade. The phenomenon of radicalisation and violent extrem- ism is only part of the problems associated with the polarization of mod- ern societies, as hate speech and xenophobia (and other manifestations of dystopian narratives) generally contribute significantly to social frag- mentation and conflict diversity and the related phenomenon of “hate culture”. Xenophobia, Islamophobia, and a host of other manifestations of discrimination, intolerance, and hatred are associated with attacks in many European cities, e.g. Madrid, Barcelona, ​Paris, Nice, London, Man- chester, Munich, Brussels, Amsterdam, and have received fresh “drive”. This is also why radicalisation and violent extremism must be thought of (andunderstood) in a geopolitical context.With the fall of the BerlinWall in 1989, the concepts of “coldwar” and “class struggle” landed in the dustbinof history or in its container ofmixedwaste. However, it seems that this is only temporary. But proponents of the “neoliberal” thesis of the “end of history”