Subcultures of nihilistic violence have emerged as a central threat, targeting and manipulating young people online. ISD defines nihilistic violence as violent acts lacking an ideological motivation and driven by a misanthropic worldview. These communities form a decentralised web of chats, forums and channels characterised by support for violence for violence’s sake, but with no specific political, ideological or religious goal. Their tactics and resultant harms often mirror those of ideologically motivated extremist networks (such as an increasing number of community-linked mass casualty attacks), and there is some overlap between the two phenomena’s digital ecosystems, activities and cultural references. However there are also important distinctions which have considerable implications for designing effective policy and platform responses.  

This Dispatch is an excerpt of ISD, GNET and GIFCT’s policy paper on the online landscape of subcultures of nihilistic violence and platform responses to protect vulnerable users. This article summarises the key trends in platform use, including worldviews and narrative strategies, aesthetics, and platform usage and strategies, including ban evasion. The full report – which includes practical policy strategies to effectively prevent and disrupt subcultures of nihilistic violence – is available here. 

Key Findings

• While occupying parallel digital spaces and producing similar types of harm, online subcultures of nihilistic violence are distinct from ideologically motivated extremism. This unique threat requires bespoke platform interventions rather than expansions and adaptations of existing terrorism- and violent extremism-focused frameworks. 
• Nihilistic violence ecosystems are decentralised, cross-platform and highly agile, leveraging mainstream and fringe platforms for grooming, propaganda and operational coordination. Platform strategies should not look to respond to the threat as new forms of dangerous organisations, but rather to understand this phenomenon as a more dynamic threat from nihilistic violent subcultures, of which ‘groups’ like 764 and the True Crime Community are just the latest manifestation. 
• Nihilistic violent communities produce a much broader range of harms than ideologically motivated extremist networks, spanning sexual exploitation, cyber crime and various forms of real-world targeted violence, including self-harm, animal abuse, interpersonal violence and mass casualty attacks such as school shootings. 

Introduction

Subcultures of nihilistic violence comprise loosely connected webs of networks, communities and individuals.  

The Com network is a set of decentralised online ecosystems which encourage and engage in cyber crime, extortion and swatting, and increasingly, acts of violence. The Com often targets vulnerable children and young people, coercing victims to conduct self-harm, serious violence and other forms of extreme criminality. 

Some elements of nihilistic violence subcultures are more formally organised. 764 is an organised network of online groups that engage in sextortion and violence glorification. Emerging from the Com network in 2021, it comprises a constantly shifting set of chats, groups and forums across multiple platforms. Some groups remain focused on coercing minors to produce child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and self-harm content. However, ISD analysts assess that following three European stabbing sprees carried out by the 764-affiliated group No Lives Matter, prominent 764 affiliates are increasingly mobilising users towards real-world violence, with four recent mass-violence plots and attacks across the US. 764 is active globally; from 2020–2025, more than 200 individuals were arrested in 28 different countries for sextortion, CSAM possession or violence linked to the network.  

True Crime Community (TCC) is a loosely connected online fandom which venerates mass violence and its perpetrators regardless of ideology. Its users memorialise and lionise serial killers, terrorists and mass murderers, encouraging others to conduct similar acts of violence. TCC does overlap with adjacent ecosystems such as gore communities and extreme-right Saints Culture aesthetics, but is motivated by misanthropy and violence fixation rather than supremacist worldviews. ISD has assessed that TCC is a central driver of violence across nihilistic networks, with analysts identifying at least 15 school shooting attacks or disputed plots linked to TCC since January 2024, including high-profile attacks in Minneapolis, Minnesota and Graz, Austria. TCC is active across a range of platforms, including Tumblr, TikTok, Discord and Telegram. 

Beyond these more coordinated or community-focused elements of online nihilistic violence, there exists a diffuse web of individuals with a nexus to communities that glorify and aestheticise violence. Axel Rudakubana, who killed three young girls at a Southport dance class in July 2024, was obsessed with violence both online and offline. For example, he was fascinated by genocide and consumed gore content, including footage from the stabbing of a bishop in a Sydney church, before committing his own attack. Two young people have subsequently been arrested in separate cases of allegedly planning to emulate Rudakubana, including planning an attack at a similar dance class and mirroring his aesthetic by wearing a similar green hoodie. Their activities demonstrate a spectrum of influence from such subcultures of nihilistic violence, with some violence more community-driven and others individualised. This shows the need for responses to focus on specific harmful behaviours rather than identify violent ‘groups’. 

Worldviews and Narrative Strategies

Unlike extremist narratives that are rooted in supremacist worldviews, subcultures of nihilistic violence promote the use of violence to fulfil a fundamentally misanthropic end or to gain status within a community. However, while united by this shared ‘goal’, different online subcultures have distinct narrative patterns. The 764 network and TCC are the most well-defined subcultures of nihilistic violence but display polar-opposite narrative strategies.  

The Com network and its constituent nihilistic communities advocate for acts of cruelty, violence and depravity for their own sake, rather than in the service of any coherent ideological or moral objective. In contrast to conventional extremist movements, the aim of these networks is to be provocative rather than to achieve a political goal. They intentionally engage in depraved acts and behaviours to attract attention, notoriety and online clout, rather than to pursue a perceived moral good. 

When these networks do promote certain narratives that could be construed as ideological, they are often retrofitted to rationalise their acts of violence and cruelty. However, these narratives may not be genuine drivers of behaviour as ideological discussion in private spaces and group chats is extremely sparse. Narratives espoused by these groups – typically through their manifestoes and publications – centre around themes of misanthropy and hatred for the world, the pursuit of evil as a path towards a ‘pure’ social order (in what is often a nod to themes contained in Order of Nine Angles literature), and indiscriminate annihilation and destruction as ends in themselves.  

The expression ‘No Lives Matter’ is both the name of a constituent group within the Com network and a mantra meant to communicate the ethos of its adherents. The expression suggests a sense of nihilism and the rejection of conventional morality. However, these narratives should not be taken at face value, as they are just as likely integrated into their propaganda for branding purposes than as a reflection of a genuine worldview.  

The 764 network’s propaganda features overt calls for violence, and individual groups require prospective members to carry out acts of violence, property destruction or extortion to join. Members who have carried out attacks are glorified in stylised graphics and videos which make up an important part of the network’s mythos and culture, and many members include calls to free their imprisoned comrades in their social media biographies. Even the usernames of many 764 members explicitly reflect specific forms of extreme violence. 

Conversely, those affiliated with TCC (often referred to as TCCers or TCC fans) rarely, if ever, directly encourage the use of violence. TCC is best understood as a fandom: it lacks the structured hierarchy of the 764 network and has no unified messaging strategy. However, TCCers produce a large volume of content which either explicitly or implicitly glorifies the use of violence and has the potential to mobilise others to violence. This often takes the form of fan fiction, art or writing, featuring extensive research into mass killers – including terrorists – as part of a celebration of any form of mass violence regardless of target.  

Despite the diverse worldviews which exist across the network, the common thread of behaviour which glorifies and encourages violence should form the basis of platform-enforcement approaches. The complex web of narrative strategies across the network demands a more agile approach to moderation; one that is able to quickly adapt to rapidly evolving network dynamics, violent reference points and coded language. 

Aesthetics

Broader nihilistic violence communities can be identified primarily by behaviours and aesthetics, rather than through the promotion of specific narratives that can be tracked and mitigated. Aesthetics, in-group language and memes are important cultural touchpoints for subcultures of nihilistic violence, with users promoting transgressive or extremist iconography from across the ideological spectrum, such as swastikas, symbols associated with the Order of Nine Angles and Tempel ov Blood, and imagery referencing serial killers and sadistic rapists. This imagery is typically used to form a hyperviolent and unsettling stereotypically ‘evil’ aesthetic rather than to communicate genuine ideological beliefs. Importantly, this does not mean that individual members of these networks lack ideological beliefs, but that ideology is not an overarching motive for the network as a whole. 

TCC narratives are much more focused on the aesthetics and the personal struggles of mass killers. Dylan Roof – who killed nine people in a 2015 attack on a Black church – is a popular figure within the community, yet conversations and narratives about him more commonly highlight aesthetic features such as his haircut than sympathise with or justify his neo-Nazi worldview. 

The experience of engaging with TCC narratives is often deeply emotional for online users. In some cases, individuals will form parasocial relationships with deceased or imprisoned mass killers and paint them in a highly sympathetic light. For example, an early debate among Columbiners (a subset of TCC entirely focused on the Columbine attackers) was known as “15 not 13”. In the debate, users discussed whether only the 13 people who died in the attack were the victims, or whether the shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold should also be considered victims of the shooting. A significant number of community members identify themselves as non-condoning of violence, using the label “Does Not Condone (DNC)” on their profiles. These users claim that they do not glorify the killers; however, they still play a role in enabling violence, producing content and research that drive TCC discussions.  

The strong emphasis on aesthetics across subcultures of nihilistic violence demands a much more nuanced approach to identification and moderation. Keyword-based moderation will struggle to identify and respond to the aesthetics of violence, which include inferred meanings and multi-modal content. Rather than simply identifying specific symbols – such as runes or logos – associated with listed groups, moderation approaches must integrate a more holistic understanding of the overarching aesthetics which provide a common visual frame, binding together nihilistic violent communities online.  

Platform Usage and Strategies

ISD’s ethnographic monitoring of nihilistic violence communities has shown how different networks leverage distinct platforms for varied purposes. The Com network, and in particular its sextortion elements, operates across a broad swathe of social media platforms and online games, tailoring its usage to the specific functionality, user dynamics and social architecture of each platform. Generally, the network uses large, mainstream social networking platforms such as X and Reddit to identify targets for grooming and exploitation, casting a wide net for potentially vulnerable users with whom they can initiate contact. Members of sextortion networks regularly canvas these large online ecosystems using targeted profile and hashtag searches to identify suitable candidates for victimisation. 

After establishing initial contact, extorters often attempt to move their interactions to more niche platforms that are conducive to secure one-on-one messaging, such as Discord and Telegram, where they engage in grooming, exploitation and extortion. Analysts have identified that, among members of sextortion communities, Telegram is the most important platform for coordinating activities and exchanging sexploitation material. However, analysts’ ethnographic monitoring shows how Discord stands apart from other platforms given its multipurpose nature, which includes serving as an environment where members of the network can identify potential victims, groom them and ultimately broadcast their abuse.  

Beyond these more functional layers, the 764 network also uses platforms for aesthetic purposes, branding and cultural signaling. Platforms can be mainstream, such as TikTok, or more niche environments like SoundCloud and specific message boards. By establishing a distinguished aesthetic and distributing its propaganda across these spaces, the 764 network entrenches its group identity and attracts new recruits who may be drawn to its extreme aesthetics. 

Of note, the 764 network does not treat any particular platform as a rigid, single-purpose environment. Members of these networks constantly adjust their use of various platforms according to their specific needs at the time (such as identifying victims, grooming and exploiting them, broadcasting their abuse or disseminating propaganda). However, this dynamic is often fluid. For example, although Roblox is primarily used to identify potential victims due to its young user base, the platform has also been used for grooming purposes and to engage in sexual roleplay.  

Overall, members of sextortion networks take a layered, cross-platform approach to their online operations – large social media platforms are used as hunting grounds, private messaging applications are used for grooming and control, and more niche platforms are used for branding and propaganda. This enables the network to evade platform-specific moderation efforts and to move freely between various online environments to perpetrate a variety of harms. 

 TCC users can be found on nearly every mainstream social media platform; however, they are most prominent on Tumblr, TikTok, Discord, Telegram and Pinterest. Tumblr is the main platform for TCC narratives and the short-form writing features of the platform lend themselves well to the research and engagement users desire. Similarly, the features of TikTok and Pinterest are leveraged to share and discuss TCC media.  

Ban Evasion Methodologies

Some areas of nihilistic communities have developed particular resilience to moderation practices. The 764 network uses a variety of operational security techniques to evade both platform moderation and law enforcement scrutiny. Notably, some members maintain a rigorous identity management regimen comprising the creation of dozens if not hundreds of sockpuppet (fake online identity) email addresses, burner phone numbers and social media profiles. Many community members are disciplined in employing this identity management routine, making attribution of their activities difficult. Responding to platform detection and moderation, such individuals are able to easily re-establish their presence using backup accounts. Members may also rapidly delete accounts and switch their monikers across platforms, which further challenges detection and enforcement. 

Beyond the operational security of individual users, the network as a whole also employs numerous techniques to avoid coordinated moderation. For example, sextortion-related group chats may include rules and guidelines which claim to prohibit extreme material such as CSAM, gore or animal abuse material. However, such guidelines appear to be largely superficial, with violative content going unmoderated within the chats themselves.  

Techniques can also be more sophisticated – for example, these networks use a nested structure in which access to sensitive discussions is heavily gated, often requiring members to demonstrate their loyalty by engaging in depraved acts of violence and cruelty before gaining access. Furthermore, these networks often set up backup channels or group chats so that if their core channels are disrupted, they can regroup and plan their next steps. This bolsters the resilience of the network in the event of a platform takedown or arrest. 

Conclusions

As online subcultures of nihilistic violence continue to evolve in scale, sophistication and generated harms, the urgency of tailored, behaviour‑led responses becomes ever clearer. 

The specific ways in which this growing set of online subcultures leverage nihilistic narratives, violent aesthetics and diverse platforms to reach vulnerable young users has significant implications for platform safety policies and prevention approaches. Effective intervention will therefore require platforms to adopt a more adaptive, collaborative and prevention‑oriented posture. Strengthening these approaches is essential not only to disrupt current networks of harm but to build long‑term resilience against the next generation of threats. 

This Dispatch is an excerpt of the paper “Beyond Extremism: Platform Responses to Online Subcultures of Nihilistic Violence”, co-published by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT) and the Global Network on Extremism & Technology (GNET).  

The full report, including policy analysis and practical recommendations for response, is available here.