The definition of radicalisation is a subject of ongoing debate, but generally refers to the process whereby an individual supports radical ideas that oppose current socio-political or religious realities. Individuals either support or strongly oppose progressive changes in society and take both violent and non-violent forms, even going as far as terrorism. We live in a globalised society where everyone can express their views online. Whereas before we had access to a limited group of people where the statistics on radical views were not on our side, now it is very easy to identify like-minded people and justify our sometimes absurd ideas by the simple fact that there are a few thousand or a few hundred thousand people in the world who think like us. This leads to digital radicalisation, the process whereby individuals, through their online presence, begin to perceive violence as a legitimate way of resolving socio-political conflicts. Moreover, we have often observed in our circles of friends, acquaintances, social media, that we tend to stop using logic, stop analyzing information and expressing opinions supported by facts, but tend to seek and accept only the confirmation of the opinions we already have, which makes us close ourselves in a bubble of information that only supports and feeds our opinions, good or bad. This leads to absurd situations - e.g. only 66% of young people are sure that the earth is spherical. On the other hand, if we look at it from the opposite direction, of people promoting an idea that is perceived by the majority as positive, is a radical stance effective? Take the environmental issue, for example. Although it addresses the real issue of climate change, Greta Thunberg's ideas are discredited by a large number of people, mainly because of the radical attitude with which they are presented. Is the radical attitude effective in really raising public awareness of environmental issues or, on the contrary, does it attract public hatred, leading to denial and even stereotypes, prejudice and extremism? Through this project, we aim to understand the discrepancy between radicals and reformers and to realize the importance of moderate views, as long as we do not go beyond a thorough understanding of the sensitive issues facing society. We want to understand the concept of radicalism and bring to the fore the difference between it and the concepts of justice, equality and privilege, to cultivate objective, moderate critical thinking based on reality and not on extreme views, which are easily accessible due to digital radicalism. Society is certainly not perfect. There are numerous laws that discriminate against non-citizens, programs and policies that do not meet the needs of the vulnerable, economic and social inequalities, etc. that fuel youth rebellion and radicalization. It is difficult for us young people to move directly from ignorance to critical awareness and action. We all have ideas and opinions about the issues and topics that affect our daily lives, which we acquire through various means that form a kind of filter through which we see 'reality'. Obviously, no one has the absolute truth, and these social problems cannot be portrayed in black and white. Their solutions are sketched more in shades of grey, i.e. in a moderate attitude. Objective: to reduce radicalism and extremism among young people. Objectives: To cultivate objective, moderate and informed critical thinking for 22 young people throughout the programme. To raise awareness of the social, economic, cultural and educational mechanisms behind radicalism and extremism among 22 young people during the project. Increased motivation of 22 young people to get involved in promoting the reduction of extremism and radicalism in society during the project.