Matt Schissler Epistemic seclusion, or the echo chamber, does not exist in a vacuum; these concepts do not explain the origins of a given discourse that, directly or indirectly, helps to justify atrocity. However, they are useful to explain how such discourses can grow, in persuasive power, in reach, and in the directness and explicitness with and for which violence is called. They are particularly useful concepts in the Myanmar context because such discourses already exist, both in the virulently hateful speeches of the extremists that attract media attention and in the conversations that make up quotidian life. I ground this conclusion on my own observations as I have resided in a working class neighbourhood along the edge of a riverside industrial area in western Yangon. My observations are not part of any formal ethnography – I am not a trained anthropologist. But over the last 18 months, I have spent at least a few nights a week sitting on the street corner, eating, drinking rough tea or beer, and discussing a variety of issues. I have similar discussions in the local teashops, where I sit nearly every morning, and in other regular interactions with friends and neighbours. Religion, politics, and history are not uncommon topics. My conclusion stems from a kind of accidental ethnography, and I have noted a variety of discourses that all, ultimately, illustrate and justify misperceptions about Islam and fear of – and bias against – Muslim communities.28 Sometimes, these are everyday disputes, misunderstandings, or economic grievances. Other times, they are earnestly held beliefs about Islam as inherently violent, and the risk Myanmar as a Buddhist country faces from a takeover by a global Muslim threat.29 My observations are primarily from just one neighbourhood in one part of Myanmar, of course, but there is nothing in particular about this neighbourhood that indicates it should be considered unique. Suggesting their wider application is the fact that one can see the same arguments and discussions replicated on social media, and in the widespread popularity of the religious figures, organizations, and political figures repeating similar messages. That there exists a kind of “siege mentality” has also been remarked upon by others, who note the developing strength of feeling in Myanmar that it is under grave threat as a Buddhist nation.30 I have not yet heard many serious, explicit justifications for violence. Indeed, some of the friends with whom I have had debates on religious tolerance have been no less happy to support campaigns to prevent further religious violence. Nonetheless, such fears and misperceptions are a piece of the foundation on which such a violent edifice can be built. ----In a context like Myanmar, then, how might the concerns described by Sunstein, Pariser and others apply? Will increasing access to social media in Myanmar promote group polarization and increase extremism? Will this strengthen the ideological justifications necessary for mass violence and tip Myanmar over that indefinable ledge and into the abyss? The beginnings of a modest answer to these questions can be developed by exploring alignments between established methods of communication in Myanmar and those new ones that will become available. This will not provide any definitive predictions, but it will indicate potential tendencies sufficiently to present a basic hypothesis, and thus necessitate discussion of the potential consequences and necessity for response. 28 I have chronicled some of these notes, discourses, and experiences in infrequent posts kindly hosted on the Australian National University blog New Mandala. See, <http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/author/matt/> accessed 17 March 2014. 29 Matt Schissler, “Everyday Ethnic Tensions in Myanmar,” New Mandala, March 27, 2013, asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2013/03/27/everyday-ethnic-tensions-in-myanmar/. Further analysis of these observations was presented in the paper, Matt Schissler, “Whither the Moderate Mainstream? Religious Violence and Myanmar’s Changing Information Environment” (presented at the Islam, Law and the State in Myanmar, Centre for Asian Legal Studies, National University Singapore, 2014). 30 Kyaw San Wai, “Myanmar’s Religious Violence: A Buddhist ‘Siege Mentality” at Work,” S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Commentaries No. 037/2014 (February 20, 2014); Nyi Nyi Kyaw, “Securitization and Islamophobia Analysis of the 969 Movement in Myanmar” (presented at the Islam, Law and the State in Myanmar, Centre for Asian Legal Studies, National University Singapore, 2014). 7/13