Radicalization Models of Terrorist
Instructions
A fundamental issue established at the outset of this course is the fact that becoming involved in terrorist activities is a process, where numerous factors can affect the mindset and actions of an individual. We have covered many of these issues and influences, so concerning this matter, compare and contrast at least two different radicalization models that explain terrorist motivations. In this research paper also summarize behavioral and psychological factors associated with disengaging from terrorism and describe what efforts or programs are most effective in countering radicalization and why.
Assignment Specifics:
The body of your report is to be at least FOUR FULL pages in length (not counting title page and references) and is to contain the following:
A brief introduction, with the topic and your thesis
A main body, containing the "meat" of the paper, where you provide the requested information supported by class readings and with your analysis
A conclusion, summarizing your information clearly and concisely
Technical Requirements
Your paper must be at a minimum of 4-6 pages (the Title and Reference pages do not count towards the minimum limit).
Scholarly and credible references should be used. A good rule of thumb is at least 2 scholarly sources per page of content.
Type in Times New Roman, 12 point and double space.
Students will follow the current APA Style as the sole citation and reference style used in written work submitted as part of coursework.
Points will be deducted for the use of Wikipedia or encyclopedic type sources. It is highly advised to utilize books, peer-reviewed journals, articles, archived documents, etc.
All submissions will be graded using the assignment rubric.
Radicalization Models of Terrorist
Student Name
Department, University
Course Code: Course Name
Professor’s Name
Due Date
Radicalization Models of Terrorist
Radicalization can be conceptualized as the process where different actors, such as individuals and groups, adopt extremist ideologies and engage in violent acts. In this regard, the radical group or individual may choose to support terrorism as well as participate in violent activity in society. Radicalization is a complex field of study, and many theories vary on the number of steps individuals take to engage in a violent act. The report compares and contrasts social movement and cognitive approaches detailing how they explain the motivations for individuals to join violent extremist groups. In addition, the report summarizes the behavioral as well as psychological factors associated with disengaging from terrorism. Lastly, the paper incorporates a description of the most effective programs to counter radicalization and their rationales.
Comparing and Contrasting Social Movement and Cognitive Radicalization Models
There exist tremendous differences between the social movement and cognitive radicalization theories in explaining terrorists’ motivations. The cognitive radicalization model emphasizes extremist ideologies to explain why an individual would join a terrorist organization. The proponents of cognitive radicalization theory support the view that individuals’ intrinsic forces motivate them to engage in violent or extremist activities. In addition, the cognitive radicalization model also argues that violent extremist organizations such as Al-Qaeda legitimize their violence on other individuals or communities based on fundamentalist and mistaken interpretations of Islamic religious doctrines against people with different belief systems or faiths. In this context, false interpretations constitute increasingly specific ideals, including believing that the Western world is morally corrupted. The extremist terrorist groups believe that such corruption and moral decay offer an impetus for Christians in Western countries to oppose Islam and its related cultural beliefs. Therefore, violent Islamic extremist groups support jihad as well as martyrdom as legitimate causes via which they can protect their beliefs from Western and Christian influence (Hardy, 2018).
On the other hand, the Social Movement Theory views social networks and the linked emotional connections, socialization, and political identities as crucial in motivating terrorists to engage in radicalization. It provides an approach to evaluate the feedback techniques in the community, including media coverage and government countermeasures on the radicalization process. It provides an approach to understanding violent radicalization with a more precise dimension anchored on the comprehensive political mobilization processes and dynamics. Accordingly, solidarity among group partnerships is reinforced explicitly by the risk conditions to which persons belong and harmonizes with a developing sense of responsibility among participants of a particular group in a social setting. Furthermore, group memberships can lead to motivation radicalization by making it difficult to return once the person has joined the social group (Pisoiu et al., 2020). Even if the person does not believe in the group ideology, they cannot easily leave since they will feel guilty about returning to normal life.
Whereas cognitive theory emphasizes the group or the individual dynamics, the social movement model focuses on the more significant groups as well as the relationships between the group, the individual, as well as the broader community. Whereas the social movement model understands social movements and their violent groups are rational players motivated by political goals and agendas, the cognitive model argues that terrorists are motivated by psychological needs and benefits in the radicalization process (Hardy, 2018; Pisoui et al., 2020).
Specific similarities can be derived from Social Movement and Cognitive models of radicalization. The similarities can inform policymakers in explaining the factors that motivate terrorist military groups to participate in violent acts and embrace extremist ideologies in the contemporary world. One of the prominent similarities between the Social Movement and Cognitive theories is that both are in consensus that radicalization entails extremist ideologists, particularly those excluded by the mainstream community, and deems legitimate application of violence as an approach to influence political or social transformation. Lastly, both theories recognize radicalization’s complexity, which lacks a single profile to classify individuals who are likely to commit a violent crime in the society where they live (Malthane, 2017).
Behavioral and Psychological Factors Associated with Disengaging from Terrorism
Disillusionment as a psychological factor involves feeling confused and disconnected from the social surroundings that radicalized people experience. People who engage in radicalization activities in society encounter disillusionment in areas such as family, leadership, and tasks. It is increasingly challenging to achieve radicalization without detaching an indivi...