ISLAMIC EXTREMISM

Islamic Extremism

ISLAMIC EXTREMISM

Introduction

The criminological study of Islamic extremism is often put off by many scholars out of charitable deference to multicultural sensitivities or a desire to leave well enough alone. Stereotyping is, of course, always avoided, as are ethnic profiles or falsehoods that every Muslim is a degree or two separations from a terrorist (Atkins, 1992). Not every Muslim is an extremist or terrorist, and not every terrorist is a Muslim. It is often the case that revivalist movements of all sorts contain militant elements, and militancy is a different phenomenon than terrorism (Atkins, 2000). The term "militancy" describes a psychologically aggressive state or combative character. Militancy is behavior-oriented, and extremism is thought-oriented. Both are somewhat tolerated, but it is a matter of opinion as to which is more dangerous, just as criminal justice is divided over whether action or intent is more significant. "Extremism" typically connotes beliefs which are irrational, counterproductive, unjustifiable, and unacceptable to any civil society. It is more accurate to say that varying degrees of militancy and extremism can be found among Muslims than to say varying degrees of terrorism can be found among Muslims (Brachman, 2008). It is likely only at certain levels of "jihadism" (see levels below) that one can begin to think in terms of terrorism connections.

Discussion

Why have the last few decades have seen a surge in terrorism inspired by Islamic extremism. While many scholars have traced the historical and doctrinal roots of this ideology of violence and intolerance, there is less understanding of why this ideology is especially resonant over the last several decades (Catherwood, 2003). The answer proposed here is that the standard discourse has failed to explain this phenomenon because it looks primarily at the grievances that motivate political violence, and these grievances only tell part of the story. In fact, not only is there a “demand” for ideas (or ideologies) to motivate violence, there is also a “supply” side of these ideas (Cook, 2005). While much of the scholarly literature focuses on the demand side of ideological extremism by looking at the grievances (globalization, poverty, American imperialism, political repression, etc.) that lead individuals to resort to terrorism, it misses how the supply side of the equation can be, and has been, manipulated(Cooper, 2004). This paper focuses on this supply side and argues that several events in the late 1970s (the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the attack on the Grand Mosque in Mecca, and the Iranian revolution) were the catalysts that led Saudi Arabia, the United States, Pakistan, and Iran to increase their funding and support for various strains of Islamic extremist ideology. With more people learning the ideology of Islamic extremism (because of the increase in its supply), it is not all that surprising that this ideology has increasingly been the justification for recent terrorism (DeMause, 2006). By focusing on the supply side of Islamic extremism (of how people learn and internalize the teachings of this ideology), this paper will develop policies that might mitigate the ...