Introduction
A United States citizen turning against one’s own government and embracing an ideology to kill another citizen or commit an act of violence is a growing phenomenon commonly known as homegrown terrorism. This transition or radicalization process that transforms an individual into an adversary has intensified since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The problem continues to persist in other parts of the world such as Canada, United Kingdom and even in Saudi Arabia, a Non-Western country. This form of extremism has shown its propensity in the United States since the turn of the century when Muslim extremism had its early beginnings as a venue to support a black separatist movement. Today, the threat emerges more rampantly with the accessibility and excess of information technology; as well as the political and socio-economic environment influencing many spectrums of perception and intent.
Brian Jenkins a senior advisor to the Rand Corporation, a policy research think-tank organization, defines radicalization as the “process of adopting one’s self or inculcating in others a commitment not only to a system of beliefs, but to their imposition on the rest of society” (Gartenstein-Ross and Grossman, 2009, p. 7). McCauley and Moskalenko (2008) describe radicalization as “changes in beliefs, feelings and behaviors in directions that increasingly justify inter group violence and demand sacrifice in defense of the in-group” (p.416). As part of radicalization, an individual discovers a new revelation on how he or she perceives the world. Radicalization does not occur suddenly but is a complicated process influenced by personal experiences, the environment, personality character...
... middle of paper ...
...ion associated with peace and tranquility has a long history of violence.
Mark Juergensmeyer in his book, Terror in the Mind of God, stated that religion provides the ideological resources for an alternative view of public order (Juergensmeyer, 2003). This supports the previous definition stated earlier by Brian Jenkins who pointed out that radicalization is imposing one’s beliefs on society (Gartenstein-Ross and Grossman, 2009). Juergensmeyer further stated that all religions are inherently revolutionary and have elements of public violence to support their justification in the name of God and a higher being (Jergenmeyer, 2003). Understanding motivations, reasoning and influences of the radicalization process will help contribute to mitigate religious violence along with identifying a proactive approach to prevent conversion to terrorism in the homeland.
Religion is a part of society that is so closely bound to the rest of one’s life it becomes hard to distinguish what part of religion is actually being portrayed through themselves, or what is being portrayed through their culture and the rest of their society. In Holy Terrors, Bruce Lincoln states that religion is used as a justifiable mean of supporting violence and war throughout time (Lincoln 2). This becomes truly visible in times such as the practice of Jihad, the Reformation, and 9/11. The purpose of this essay is to show that as long as religion is bound to a political and cultural aspect of a community, religious war and destruction will always occur throughout the world. A historical methodology will be deployed in order to gain
The horror of domestic terrorism is a problem all Americans should be concerned with, especially since there is a violent subculture in this nation which seeks out and indoctrinates people into their way of life. The crime that I will be focusing on during the course of this paper will be domestic terrorism, specifically hate groups such as the KKK, and various other white supremacy groups. The theory that I will be using to try and explain these crimes will be subcultural theory, but more especially the Subculture of Violence theory provided to us by Marvin Wolfgang and Franco Ferracutti. The reason I will be using his specific subcultural theory is because I feel that it bests describes how the people in these situations are desensitized to the evils they do and then begin to believe that the acts and beliefs are normal, or superior to all other views.
These days, America is filled with those people who disagree with our system of government. Most times, these people suffer silently, expressing their opinions through their votes, or within the discussions that they hold in their own private homes. When these people act upon this anger, and their disagreement, the feelings are brought beyond the point of normal behavior to vigilantism and violence. This animosity, when pushed to these limits, often results in tragedy, a tragedy that we call domestic terrorism.
The terrorist attacks of September 11 led to a lot of pressure from the public to find those responsible and bring them to “justice”. In order to do so, President Bush declared a war on terrorism just a few days after the attacks, but little did he know that this very decision would also bring devastating consequences to many countries. Over time, people have been losing faith in the war and in its purpose. Consequently, countries whose economies have fallen under the Military Industrial Complex have manufactured a societal fear against Muslims and jihadists. As a result, they are now being stigmatized and portrayed as the enemies of democracy, and of the United States in particular. To make matter worse, it has driven western countries to implement many extreme security measures that undermine the democratic principles they are attempting to spread over the world. The war on terrorism has had many negative consequences on modern society, which include a legitimization crisis of democracy, mainly in the U.S, and the manufacturing of moral panics over security risks that have led to the criminalization and stigmatization of the Arab world.
More and more in the world today, circumstances have brought about changes in how members have used radical protesting. One way used to protest a situation is through terrorism, and the people who exercise violence in the pursuit of what they hold to be just causes are alternately known as terrorists. This movement, although viewed as barbaric, requires a person to view the needs and goals of a particular cause to be greater than that of the well being of others. There are certain characteristic traits that can be found in the majority of terrorism, which can identify a profile of a terrorist’s mind. A terrorist is not just an insane person, but also possibly a person that has been forced either by personal decision or by situations beyond control to choose an “insane” method to achieve an unachievable goal.
The religion of Islam garners large amounts attention. Many believe it is a violent and backwards religion. Since 9/11, "Islamic reform" has become an all-purpose phrase: equally a western impulse to protect itself from Muslim violence and a humanist notion aimed at assisting voiceless Muslims (Eteraz1). Extreme displays of Islamic faith such as the attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11 have generated negative stereotypes about Islam as a religion. These stereotypes of violence and backwards thinking have been further perpetuated by even more recent examples of extremism by Muslim terrorists. Although most Muslims are peaceful and do not endorse the violence of their Muslim brethren, there are some who believe it is their responsibility to punish those who do not adhere to Islam. This religion is no stranger to divinely motivated warfare. Islam was founded on the belief that it is excusable to harm others in the name of Allah. The terrorist group, Al-Qaeda, holds many of these beliefs. Al Qaeda's modern origins go back to Wahhabism, named after the revivalist movement founded by Muhammad Ibn'Abd al-Wahhab in 1744. Wahhab called for a return to a pure and unadulterated form of Islam closer to the ideals of the Prophet (Blond 3). Recently a movement is being made to reform and reinterpret Islam not just as a religion, but also as a culture. The reformation of Islam by its religious authorities and will yield a more passive interpretation of Islam, therefor deterring Islamic extremism and producing a more diplomatic faith.
In Module one, I learned that terrorism is a result of physical harm or deadly acts of force with the intent of a political outcome by the use of terror for coercion. There are various types of terrorism such as international terrorism and domestic terrorism. International terrorism occurs outside of the United States with a purpose to influence the policy of a government by intimidation. International and Domestic terrorism both involve violent acts dangerous to human life that violate federal and state laws. Domestic terrorism occurs within the United States with the intention of coercion or intimidation by way of mass destruction, etc. Some forms of terrorism include Improvised explosive devices (IED), kidnappings, suicide bombings and
As David Canter stated in his book, The Faces of Terrorism: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, “Terrorism is multifaceted and, as a consequence, no one explanation, theory or discipline will ever fully account for all terrorist activities. However, the psychological and social psychological processes that lead any given person to commit a terrorist act tend to have been under-represented in the terrorist literature. This is doubtless in part due to the difficulty of conducting studies that engage directly with those individuals who carry out terrorist acts.” (Canter 1) Basically, Canter discusses how terrorism, as discussed before, is not a one-sided act.
Terrorism has been around for centuries and religion-based violence has been around just as long. (Hoffman, 2). The violence was never referred to as terrorism though. Only up to the nineteenth century has religion been able to justify terrorism (Hoffman, 2). Since then, religious terrorism became motivated and inspired by the ideological view (Hoffman, 3). Therefore, it has turned against the main focus of religion and more towards the views of the extremist and what is happening politically (Winchester, 4).
Every state, culture, and society in the world has some form of religion. The most popular religions in the world today are Christianity, Buddhism, and the Muslim religions. Members of every religion follow some form of philosophy or ideology that shape their thinking and behaviors. One common thing about the existing religions is the presence of a supreme being. People misinterpret existing religious ideologies serving their personal interests that at times turn out to cause war. Religious ideologies brainwash populations who end up acting violently in different deviant forms (Richardson, 518). Religions use specific ideologies to make people living in a society violent to peaceful members who may fight back in self-defense.
In discussions of whether the world would be a more peaceful place without religions, one controversial issue has been placing blame on one’s own religion when wars or conflict ending in violence has occurred. The question is asked,. Does religion play a role in the violence going on around the world? On the one hand, many people may agree with this belief and argue that religion in a way has always played a role in the amount of violence in our society. On the other hand, the public contends that as humans we know what we are doing and our religion has nothing to do with the violence that we create.
Religious Fundamentalism is not a modern phenomenon, although, it has received a rise in the late twentieth century. It occurs differently in different parts of the world but arises in societies that are deeply troubled or going through a crisis (Heywood, 2012, p. 282). The rise in Religious Fundamentalism can be linked to the secularization thesis, which implies that victory of reason over religion follows modernization. Also, the moral protest of faiths such as Islam and Christianity can be linked to the rise of Religious Fundamentalism, as they protest the influence of corruption and pretence that infiltrate their beliefs from the spread of secularization (Heywood, 2012, p. 283). Religious Fundamentalists have followed a traditional political thought process, yet, have embraced a militant style of activity which often can turn violent (Heywood, 2012, p. 291).
“The trauma of the attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., which were quickly interpreted as religious as well as political phenomena, provoked yet another body of studies. On the other hand, general studies of the relationship between religion and violence are rare, and they often appear to be somewhat one-sided...
Political violence is the leading cause of wars today. Personal agendas have led to many of the political objectives that cause violence today this has caused many problems throughout the world and will continue to do so until a solution to this issue is found. Political objectives have been advanced involuntarily dependent upon the kind of government a nation exercises. For instance, in a democratic nation political groups must worry about convincing the majority in order to advance ethically. Those who try to influence the majority through acts of violence are considered today as “terror” organizations. Though perhaps if it were not because of the recent 9/11 terror attacks that maybe such warrants would not be seen as terror attacks, but instead the result of partisan advancement. Acts of terrorism have been around throughout the evolution of mankind. Terror attacks have even been traced back as far as the religious roots of an ancient middle east (Ross, Will Terrorism End?, 2006). However as man evolved, so did terrorism. Today’s extremism involves some of the main characteristics of ancient terrorism, but much more developed. Political advancement is no longer the root cause of terrorism acts. Instead influxes of “holy” wars have been appended the prior definition of terrorism. Mistakably modern terrorism has been confused for Political violence with political objectives, but research will establish that the nature of terrorism is fundamentally different from other forms of political violence.
Terrorism is one of the most extensively discussed issues of our time and at the same time it is also one of the least understood. The term itself “terrorism” means many different things to different people, cultures, and races. As a result, trying to define or classify terrorism with one universal definition is nearly impossible. The definition of terrorism used in this research is a reflection of much of the Western and American way of defining it. The definition of terrorism is,