Christian Militants Are Using Instagram to Recruit—and Becoming Influencers in the Process
In another post from earlier this year, one of the group's purported members shared a photo of a young man holding an assault weapon with a crucifix displayed over a plaid shirt and his face blurred out. The caption cites Psalm 19:1: 'The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim his handiwork." That quotation is followed by a series of hashtags, including '#militia,' '#wellregulated militia,' '#northeastguerillas,' and '#modernminutemen.'
This group is part of a new guard of paramilitary activists, whose youthful membership, edgy aesthetics, use of Instagram, and, in many cases, overt nods to religion points to a new brand of anti-government Christian nationalist militias.
Many of these new groups, whose follower counts range between dozens and thousands, began quietly setting up shop on Instagram over the last two years. The Tech Transparency Project, which monitors extremism online, identified nearly 200 Instagram accounts as 'militia related,' and categorized dozens of those as part of this new generation of Christian nationalist militias.
Over time, these groups have continued to grow their audience on Instagram, publishing slick propaganda imagery from IRL meet-ups that often shows groups of armed men with their faces covered or censored. Many of the Christian nationalist groups on Instagram try to hide behind what appear to be businesses—operating merch stores, for example, that are linked to their accounts, which they can use to fund themselves through sales of apparel, tactical gear, patches or even weapons training.
Experts say that this emergent movement draws on a number of trends in the modern extremist landscape, including that it establishes a paramilitary wing of surging Christian nationalism in the US, and reflects the sensibilities of a new generation of fitness-obsessed, 'Christ-pilled' young men, some of who call themselves tradcaths. (This is the name for the highly online, far-right community who churn out provocative memes promoting an idiosyncratic interpretation of what they claim to be traditional Catholicism.)
This movement is also growing at a time when the traditional militia movement has been left ageing, rudderless and paranoid since January 6, 2021. The fact that the movement is made up of small autonomous cells loosely connected online is also in keeping with the shift towards hyper-local extremist organizing seen in the last few years.
While the old guard of paramilitary groups looked to Facebook as fertile ground for reaching and radicalizing prospective recruits, this younger generation of wannabe militants use Instagram like any influencer would—commenting on each other's posts or tagging one another as a way to cross-promote, boost their own followings and strengthen their networks. 'It's basically turning ideology into influencer culture,' says Katie Paul, director of the Tech Transparency Project. 'Instagram is the best platform for that. It's one of the platforms that influencers have broadly flocked to because they can monetize it easily. It's very visual, and it's been increasingly incorporating features you have on Facebook, like private group messages.'
Meta does, however, have rules designed to curb alleged paramilitary organizing. According to its 'Dangerous Organizations and Individuals' policy, 'violence inducing entities' identified by Meta are not allowed to have a presence on any of its platforms. Such an entity is defined as a non-state actor that 'uses weapons as part of their training, communication, or presence; and are structured or operate as unofficial military or security forces' and either coordinates in preparation for violence or civil war, promotes violence against government officials, engages in crimes like theft or vandalism, engages in "mid-severity violence" at civic events, or promotes bringing weapons to places with the goal of intimidation. Paul says that many of these groups would likely meet the criteria—and Meta has already removed dozens of groups in this space over the years from Instagram.
But Meta has also been repeatedly criticized by extremism watchdogs, including the Tech Transparency Project, for failing to take enough of a proactive approach and enforce its own rules about dangerous organizations using its platforms. After retreating from public spaces in the wake of the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021, WIRED reported that the traditional militia movement began rebuilding on Facebook, in many cases flagrantly violating bans against specific organizations.
Meta did not respond to requests for comment.
Another advantage of Instagram for groups or accounts seeking to grow their influence is the ability to promote associated branded content. One brand that's particularly active in this community and regularly comments on posts is Kill Evil, an apparel store hosted by Shopify, with almost 30,000 followers on their verified Instagram account. (Shopify did not respond to a request for comment.)
'KILL EVIL® is for those who believe in the fight against evil,' reads their mission statement. 'It embodies the preservation of Christian values, rejection of degeneracy and resistance to the enemies of Christ.' Militia groups will seek to boost visibility by wearing Kill Evil apparel in photographs or videos of training sessions, and then tag the company in their posts.
Kill Evil launched early last year, with a video of a man wearing a balaclava and carrying a baseball bat, with the tag 'apparel for the revolutionary.' They've recently touted their 'Holy Warfare Collection,' which includes t-shirts featuring classical renderings of Biblical figures, including of Saint Michael the Archangel, along with the prayer, 'Defend us in battle, Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil.' Their linked Spotify playlist is full of tracks such as 'CHRIST IS KING' by Christian metal band Impending Doom, 'Kill em' All' by a Russian techno group, and 'Deprogam' by MAGA Rapper Bryson Gray.
Kill Evil tells WIRED that they dispute the idea that they were engaging with any paramilitary movement on Instagram. 'I'm an apparel company that follows Jesus Christ and values the 2nd amendment upon which our country was founded upon,' a representative of Kill Evil wrote in an email.
Similarly, a Minnesota-based militia-style group links itself directly to a company that sells, among other things, a long-range encrypted radio 'designed for off-grid communication,' and 'mission ready end user devices'—which are just regular smartphones that they pre-configure with apps. There's also the suggestively named 'Bloodline Apparel Co,' which has sold clothes and promotes them through images, for example, of heavily armed men with captions like 'this fit is sponsored by 9 failed relationships and 14 YouTube rabbit holes.' (Bloodline Apparel Co did not respond to a request for comment.)
Many of these Christian nationalist militia groups also call themselves 'guerillas' as opposed to militias, implying that their 'enemy' is the government rather than civilian population. While Jon Lewis, a research fellow at the program on extremism at George Washington University, is alarmed by the brandification of overtly accelerationist or Christian nationalist content on Instagram, he's skeptical that the armed groups pose a genuine threat. 'They do their off-the-grid guerilla training, they shoot their video for their Instagram account, and then they go back to their mom's basement,' he said. 'I'm not sure how many of these 16-year-olds are really prepared for a real guerilla warfare campaign against the US military.'
This new movement of Christian nationalist militias online sits at a growing crossover between gun culture and Christian nationalism, a union perhaps best exemplified by the popularity of Christian 'guntuber' Lucas Botkin and the company he founded, 'T-Rex Arms.' In this Venn diagram of subcultures, culture war rhetoric is paired with exhortations to take up arms to protect Christian and traditional family values.
'The guns help push the religion, and the religion helps push the guns,' says Lewis. 'You get these networks that are steeped in that kind of rhetoric, and when you combine that with offline mobilization and weapons training, it doesn't really bode well.'
Instagram is already home to a sprawling and well-established community of gun enthusiasts, tactical gear brands, and firearms influencers, and abounds with potential recruitment opportunities for this emergent paramilitary movement. It's not uncommon for groups of firearms enthusiasts to gather in the woods on the weekends to engage in airsoft training or hunting. What sets this movement apart from more legitimate 'sports' organizations is their emphasis on recruitment and the fact they conceal their faces in imagery, says Paul. 'And then there's the explicit Christian ideology they're trying to push.' (WIRED attempted to contact several accounts in this ecosystem; some initially agreed to be interviewed, before growing suspicious that this reporter was 'a fed.')
It's not exactly clear what this new crop of Bible-thumping paramilitary extremists thinks they're preparing or fighting for, given that President Donald Trump took office in January and stacked his administration with Christian nationalists.
Since the emergence of the modern militia movement in the late 1980s, paramilitary activity has typically waxed and waned according to whichever political party was in power. Higher levels of paramilitary activity were generally observed during Democratic administrations, as movement leaders could rabble rouse and recruit around perceptions of an overreaching government or looming gun control, as well as conspiracy theories about a coming 'New World Order.' (To that end, Kill Evil sells a t-shirt emblazoned with the slogan 'Christ World Order.') That pattern broke during the first Trump Administration, as militia activity surged, galvanized by the mainstreaming of conspiracy theories and anti-government sentiment.
Groups within this new guard make their political views known through the type of content they share to Instagram Stories, which delete after 24 hours: for example, screenshots of posts by white nationalist Jared Taylor about immigration, posts about declining birth rates, or anti-Muslim memes. As for their broader mission, these militant influencers are generally preparing for 'end times,' they tend to say, though it's not always clear what that means. Some take an accelerationist approach, preparing for a conflict that they see as an inevitable response to 'degeneracy' and political decay. 'There is no more political solution,' one account posted in July, along with a photograph of a Roman bust portraying the Greek god of war, Ares, in Tivoli, Italy. 'Some hills are worth dying on, if not for yourself, for your children.' For others, the mission may be more about a primordial battle between good and evil, and coming 'armageddon.'
'If you don't train, you'll die,' one account posted, along with a photograph of a man in a skull mask and a long gun. 'Get together with friends, family, or do it alone. Whatever you gotta do, make sure that YOU aren't a liability.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sean Kingston jailed
Sean Kingston has been sentenced to three-and-a-half years in prison. The Beautiful Girls hitmaker - whose real name is Kisean Paul Anderson - and his mother, Janice Turner, were found guilty of five counts of wire fraud in March following a federal trial and faced up to 20 years in jail for each charge. But on Friday (15.08.25), Sean apologised in front of Judge David Leibowitz and said he had learned a lesson, and though his attorney asked the 35-year-old star be allowed to leave and surrender at a later date for health reasons, the judge refused and he was immediately taken into custody. His attorney, Zeljka Bozanic, told Entertainment Weekly the musician is taking the situation "as a learning experience". The lawyer said in a statement: "We respect the Court's decision and the judicial process. We are content that the Court did not go with the government's request of five years and sentenced Sean below the sentencing guidelines instead. It is important to note that most of the restitution in this case was paid back, even before these charges were brought. "Sean is taking this as a learning experience and will continue moving forward in a positive direction. We are actively reviewing all available options, including potential appeals, to ensure his rights are fully protected." Janice - who had previously pleaded guilty to bank fraud for stealing $160,000 and served more than a year in prison - was sentenced to five years behind bars last month. The mother and son had denied allegations of falsely claiming they had sent bank transfers for luxury items worth more than $1 million but were found guilty in March. After the verdict was reached, Sean was placed on home detention, though he has to meet bond requirements, including a $200,000 surety bond in cash, as well as putting up a relative's $500,000 house. However, Janice was reminded into federal custody and was taken away by US Marshals as her son cried. He told them: "Protect my mother.' While Sean opted not to testify on his own behalf, his mother did, and the judge explained she was remanded as a flight risk in part due to her testimony. He said Janice - who has similar past convictions - had shown she was the "fixer, the nerve centre" and in control of the fraud scheme but her son's defence depicted him as "a child" with no knowledge of finances. Several alleged victims had claimed to have been swindled out of items including a bulletproof Cadillac, a huge TV and expensive watches, and all items had been seized in a raid on Sean's home. The United States Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida, previously explained the rapper and his mother's charges stemmed from their alleged involvement in "a scheme to defraud victim sellers of high-end specialty vehicles, jewellery, and other goods purchased by the defendants through the use of fraudulent documents." The office went on to state the pair "unjustly enriched themselves by falsely representing that they had executed bank wire or other monetary payment transfers as payment for vehicles, jewellery, and other goods purchased by the defendants, when in fact no such bank wire or other monetary payment transfers had been executed by the purported banks, and thereafter the defendants retained or attempted to retain the vehicles, jewellery and other goods despite non-payment. Through the execution of this scheme, the defendants obtained in excess of $1 million in property." The pair were accused of having stolen almost $500,000 in jewellery, more than $200,000 from Bank of America, more than $100,000 from First Republic Bank, $160,000 from a Cadillac Escalade dealer and $86,000 from a maker of customised beds. At the time of his arrest last year, the musician was serving two years probation for trafficking stolen property.
CNN
7 minutes ago
- CNN
How a unique California law puts the Menendez brothers' fate into the hands of one politician
After serving several decades in prison, Erik and Lyle Menendez are facing the possibility of freedom as the California Board of Parole Hearings this week considers whether they've adequately atoned for the 1989 murder of their parents. While this may seem like the final moment in the long and captivating saga, refueled by several attempts by the brothers' lawyers and the former district attorney to achieve what they say is a more modern version of justice, the brothers have one more potential roadblock – California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The governor holds an unusual power that allows him to 'affirm, modify, or reverse the decision of the parole authority on the basis of the same factors which the parole authority is required to consider' for someone convicted of murder and sentenced to an indeterminate term, according to state law. While the governor is required to follow certain parameters, he is given broad oversight on the decision. The little-known and rare ability, established in the 1980s, looms large over the brothers as they prepare to explain to a parole panel why they should be released. It's not clear how Newsom is leaning, and his office did not answer a question from CNN about his potential decision, but here's what we know about the power that gives him ultimate authority to decide on the brothers' freedom. The governor's ability to veto the parole board's decision dates to the 1980s, when public reaction toward a now-forgotten case grabbed headlines – as well as the attention of voters. William Archie Fain, convicted of the 1967 killing of a teenage boy and rape of two teenage girls, was released on parole in 1983 to much outrage from the public, according to the Los Angeles Times. After getting parole, he continued to be accused and found guilty of other crimes, ranging from assault to peeping. Then-Gov. George Deukmejian tried to prevent his release, but state courts ruled Fain had to be freed. In response, the California legislature passed Proposition 89, which gave voters the option to allow the governor power to modify the parole board's decision. While there were concerns it would unjustly give a politician too much power, many were more worried about the potential for violence during a tough-on-crime era. 'Proposition 89 will not politicize the parole process, but it will provide an extra measure of safety to law-abiding citizens by giving the Governor the authority to block the parole of criminals who still pose a significant threat to society,' Deukmejian and a state senator wrote in a 1988 voter information guide arguing for the proposition. 'Prop 89 will correct a weakness in the state's parole system and further strengthen California's system of justice.' The proposition ended up passing with 55% of the vote, according to the UC Law San Francisco Repository. The only other state that gives its governor the power to veto parole grants is Oklahoma, according to the American Civil Liberties Union. The proposition does limit the window of reversal to 30 days, meaning if the parole board votes to release the brothers, Newsom has 30 days from when the decision is released to change it. Since the proposition's passing, the power bestowed on the California governor has been curbed slightly by court rulings over the past two decades, said Christopher Hawthorne, clinical professor of law and director of the Juvenile Innocence & Fair Sentencing Clinic at Loyola Law School. In one, the California Supreme Court ruled the governor must reasonably assess the defendant's risk against public safety, Hawthorne said. Another ruling several years later allowed the governor to consider whether the defendant had insight into their crime, he added. While the power has been modified, the governor still has room to a make a decision in the Menendez case as long as it follows these guidelines. Since the proposition was added to the California state constitution, governors have often used it to deny parole in cases during the 1990s and early 2000s, when tough-on-crime policies were more popular, according to Hawthorne. 'In the mid-'80s, California passed law after law after law, frequently by initiative, that made it much harder to get anyone out of prison. And that flow only reversed in about 2012 or 2013 when Gov. (Jerry) Brown was in office,' he said. 'For a long, long time, it was almost impossible to get parole, get found suitable for parole, and if you did get found suitable, the governor reversed a lot of parole grants at that time.' Hawthorne cited the case of Leslie Van Houten, a former Charles Manson follower and convicted murderer, as an illustration of when governors repeatedly denied parole despite the board approving it. Newsom also denied parole for Sirhan Sirhan, who assassinated US Sen. Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, with the governor citing Sirhan's 'refusal to accept responsibility for his crime' and 'lack of insight and accountability,' among other reasons. 'He does not understand, let alone have the skills to manage, the complex risks of his self-created notoriety. He cannot be safely released from prison because he has not mitigated his risk of fomenting further political violence,' Newsom wrote in a 2022 Los Angeles Times op-ed explaining his decision. 'Every governor is fairly allergic to releasing high-profile defendants,' Hawthorne said, though 'California has done really well in the last 10 years or so' in increasing the availability of parole overall. 'It was something that was not available, essentially, during the (Pete) Wilson, (Gray) Davis or (Arnold) Schwarzenegger administration, with very, very few exceptions,' he said. The three governors served successively from 1991, but starting in 2011, 'Jerry Brown's administration and Gavin Newsom's administration have done infinitely better,' he said. While the Menendez brothers have some elements working in their favor, such as family and public support, as well as encouraging recommendations from prison and corrections officials, some have passionately argued against their release. Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman hotly contested their potential resentencing earlier this year, despite his predecessor, George Gascón, requesting it. The previous district attorney, Hochman said in a statement, 'did not examine or consider whether the Menendez brothers have exhibited full insight and taken complete responsibility for their crimes.' His statement also cites the two points Newsom can consider in a potential reversal of a parole board decision. To help make his case, Hochman created a chart comparing factors considered by the parole board for Sirhan and each Menendez brother. Some of the factors include time served in prison, their education level before and during incarceration, and the gravity of the offense. Since Newsom denied Sirhan's parole based on the factors laid out in the chart, Hochman argued, the Menendez brothers definitely don't qualify for release as the they have more prison rules violations and haven't exhibited full insight into their crimes. Hochman has said the brothers lied when they claimed the motive for killing their parents was due to abuse they faced from their father. He has previously said he believes evidence to corroborate the abuse allegations is 'extremely lacking;' earlier this year he said his review of the case showed the killings were premeditated and not the result of a threat from their parents. Although a judge ultimately ruled to resentence the brothers earlier this year – which is why they now have a parole hearing – the positions taken by Hochman's office could still factor into the governor's decision on parole. The situation is definitely a 'political hot potato,' Hawthorne said, though the overwhelming support for release from family members could heavily weigh the decision. More than 20 Menendez relatives have banded together over the past year to advocate for release, saying they believe the brothers' abuse claims and that society's understanding of childhood sexual abuse has changed dramatically since their conviction in 1996. They also say the brothers have grown and tried to help others through rehabilitative programs in prison. Anamaria Baralt, a cousin of the Menendez brothers and leader of the coalition, told reporters last October that 'If Lyle and Erik's case were heard today, with the understanding we now have about abuse and PTSD, there is no doubt in my mind that their sentencing would have been very different.' She also read a statement from Terry Baralt, Jose Menendez's sister: 'I implore the district attorney's office to end our prolonged suffering and release Lyle and Erik back to our family. Thirty-five years is such a long time. My prayer is that I live long enough to see my nephews again and to hug them once more.' Oftentimes, a victim's family opposes release, Hawthorne said, making this a unique situation. 'It's interesting in this case, given that Jose and Kitty Menendez's family are largely in favor of both Eric and Lyle getting out – those voices will matter, and they will be brought to bear in that 30-day window when the governor has the case,' he said. The family will be able to express their opinions to the governor's office through calls, letters and other documents, in an attempt to sway his opinion. 'I can't think of a governor who wouldn't be sensitive to that,' Hawthorne said.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
U-turn as Trump administration agrees to keep Washington police chief in place
The Trump administration has reversed course and agreed to leave the Washington DC police chief in control of the department. Meanwhile, attorney general Pam Bondi, in a new memo, directed the district's police to co-operate with federal immigration enforcement regardless of any city law. The order came after officials in the nation's capital sued on Friday to block President Donald Trump's takeover of the capital's police. The night before, his administration had escalated its intervention into the city's law enforcement by naming a federal official as the new emergency head of the department, essentially placing the police force under full control of the federal government. The attorney general's new order represents a partial retreat for the Trump administration in the face of intense scepticism from a judge over the legality of Ms Bondi's earlier directive, but she also signalled the administration would continue to pressure DC leaders to help federal authorities aggressively pursue immigrants in the country illegally, despite city laws that limit co-operation between police and immigration authorities. In a social media post on Friday evening, Ms Bondi criticised DC attorney general Brian Schwalb, saying he 'continues to oppose our efforts to improve public safety', but she added: 'We remain committed to working closely with Mayor Bowser.' Mayor Muriel Bowser's office said late on Friday that it was still evaluating how it can comply with the new Bondi order on immigration enforcement operations. The police department had already eased some restrictions on co-operating with federal officials facilitating Mr Trump's mass deportation campaign but reaffirmed that it would follow the district's sanctuary city laws. In a letter sent on Friday night to DC citizens, Ms Bowser wrote: 'It has been an unsettling and unprecedented week in our city. Over the course of a week, the surge in federal law enforcement across DC has created waves of anxiety.' She added that 'our limited self-government has never faced the type of test we are facing right now', but added that if Washingtonians stick together, 'we will show the entire nation what it looks like to fight for American democracy – even when we don't have full access to it'. The legal battle was the latest evidence of the escalating tensions in a mostly Democratic city that now has its police department largely under the control of the Republican president's administration. Mr Trump's takeover is historic, yet it had played out with a slow ramp-up in federal law enforcement officials and National Guard troops to start the week. As the weekend approached, signs across the city — from the streets to the legal system — suggested a deepening crisis over who controls the city's immigration and policing policies, the district's right to govern itself and daily life for the millions of people who live and work in the metro area. The two sides sparred in court for hours Friday before US District Judge Ana Reyes, who is overseeing the district's lawsuit. She indicated the law is not likely to grant the Trump administration power to fully take over city police, but it probably gives the president more power than the city might like. 'The way I read the statute, the president can ask, the mayor must provide, but the president can't control,' said Judge Reyes, who was nominated to the bench by Joe Biden. The judge pushed the two sides to make a compromise. A lawyer for the Trump administration, Yaakov Roth, said the move to sideline Metropolitan Police Department Chief Pamela Smith came after an immigration order that still held back some aid to federal authorities. He argued that the president has broad authority to determine what kind of help police in Washington must provide. The police takeover is the latest move by Trump to test the limits of his legal authorities to carry out his agenda, relying on obscure statutes and a supposed state of emergency to bolster his tough-on-crime message and his plans to speed up the mass deportation of people in the United States illegally. It also marks one of the most sweeping assertions of federal authority over a local government in modern times. While Washington has grappled with spikes in violence and visible homelessness, the city's homicide rate ranks below those of several other major US cities, and the capital is not in the throes of the public safety collapse the Trump administration has portrayed. The president has more power over the nation's capital than other cities, but DC has elected its own mayor and city council since the Home Rule Act was signed in 1973. Mr Trump is the first president to exert control over the city's police force since it was passed. The law limits that control to 30 days without congressional approval, though Mr Trump has suggested he would seek to extend it. Ms Bondi's Thursday night directive to place the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Terry Cole, in charge of the police department came after Ms Smith had told officers to share information with immigration agencies regarding people not in custody, such as someone involved in a traffic stop. The Justice Department said Ms Bondi disagreed with the police chief's instructions because they allowed for continued practice of 'sanctuary policies', which generally limit co-operation by local law enforcement with federal immigration officers.
