Les fous de Dieu sont-ils des “fous” ?
2014/10/24 Leave a comment
Some interesting articles on the psychology of radicalization, starting with French psychologist Jean-Michel Hirt:
Leur idéal mortifère a pris toute la place dans leur personnalité. Comme tous les passages à lacte, les crimes que les jihadistes commettent se font dans une sorte daveuglement, de sidération de la conscience. La plupart des individus qui se retrouvent en prison pour avoir tué ont du mal à reconnaître ce quils ont fait.
Mais on sait, parce que la guerre nest pas une affaire nouvelle, combien les traumatismes peuvent se révéler considérables, quand les individus en reviennent. Certains ne peuvent plus continuer à vivre normalement et tombent malades. Tuer, ce nest jamais quelque chose qui se fait comme on avale un verre deau. Aucun criminel nest à laise dans sa culture et bien dans sa peau. Ce sont des individus qui souffrent de profonds troubles psychiques quils narrivent pas à résoudre et qu’ils projettent violemment sur autrui.
Les fous de Dieu sont-ils des “fous” ?.
An interesting take on the motivation for radicalization and suggested strategy to combat it by Arie W. Kruglansk:
The appeal to one’s trampled identity, combined with the depiction of one’s group’s degradation, can have a profound visceral effect, incensing and redirecting individuals who are otherwise well-adjusted and on their way to a seemingly bright personal future.
According to reports, Nasser Muthana, a 20-year-old volunteer in Islamic State, had acceptance offers from four medical schools. Muhammad Hamidur Rahman, who died in August while fighting in Syria, was employed at a Primark store in the coastal city of Portsmouth, United Kingdom, and had a father who owned a restaurant. His personal future thus appeared assured and yet it could not undo the pain and humiliation he saw his Muslim community facing.
Extremist ideology is effective in such circumstances because it offers a quick-fix remedy to a perceived loss of significance and an assured way to regain it. It accomplishes this by exploiting humans’ primordial instincts for aggression and sex.
Consider the latter. Sex is the most primitive assertion of one’s significance; it’s a means to perpetuate one’s name — and genes — into the future. Islamic State strategically uses it as a reward for aggression.
The militant group has set up marriage centers where women register to be wed to its fighters. Captured Iraqi women and girls are forced into sex slavery, living in brothels run by female jihadists. Rape of non-believers is considered legitimate, while fatwas proclaiming a “sexual jihad” encourage brutality against females. Lastly, martyrdom is associated with sexual bliss in paradise.
Understanding the magnetic appeal of Islamic State’s extremism is a prerequisite to developing a suitable, psychologically sensitive counter narrative. For example, an appeal to moderation and a life of patient struggle seems ill-suited to win over the hearts and minds of jihadists. Instead, the glamour of jihad must be countered by an alternative glamour; the charisma of martyrdom pitted against a different kind of charisma, the appeal to primitive drives redirected, jiu jitsu style, against the brutality of the enemy, turning the psychological tables on Islamic State as it were.
For example, young men vulnerable to the appeal of extremist ideology might be persuaded to fight the desecration of their religion and promised a place in history by defeating the satanic evil that soils their faith. Social media may need to be turned abuzz with the glory of standing up to evil, encouraging the bravery needed to undertake personal risks for “breaking bad.” This message should not be presented in faint pastels but in bright, bold colors.
Measured arguments against Islamic State wouldn’t do the job. Countering it requires fiery, impassioned appeals.
Joining Islamic State is about ‘sex and aggression,’ not religion
