|
Abstract
|
Background
The problem, condition or issue
Since the start of the 21st century, academics and counter-terrorism practitioners have increasingly sought to better understand the process(es) through which individuals transition from non-violence into terrorism (Dawson, 2017; Europol, 2016; Horgan, 2008; European Parliament, 2017). This progression, believed to be characterised by the movement from an unfocused state of uncertainty towards a narrower, unambiguous state of clarity (Horgan, 2008), is often referred to as 'violent radicalisation'. At least in part, research into violent radicalisation has been motivated by a desire to identify 'phase specific intervention strategies' in the radicalisation process (Horgan, Gill, Bouhana, James Silver, & Corner, 2016).; Identification of these "pinch-points" may provide opportunity for intervention, helping redirect individuals onto a trajectory towards non-violence (p. 53).
One core focus of enquiry by social scientists has been the role of narratives in the process of violent radicalisation (e.g. terrorist organisations' use of narratives for propagandistic purposes (Braddock, 2015)). Narratives here refer to recollections of events which happen in sequence (Barthes &Duisit, 1975; Genette, 1982) with characters that can cause changes (Richardson, 2002), neatly contained within an identifiable beginning, middle and end (Hinyard&Kreuter, 2007, p. 778). The following is a popular religious narrative found in numerous religious texts (including the Qur'an and The Torah);
Moses, having pleaded with The Pharaoh of Egypt to release the Hebrews and accept the One True God, threatened Pharaoh with divine retribution. The Pharaoh was arrogant and ignored Moses' warning. As promised God punished Pharaoh with several disasters such as drought, famine, disease, locusts, lice and frogs brought upon his own people.
The objectives of such narratives are to present a social construction of the world which serves the interest of those legitimizing violence. In this instance, one can justify the murder of innocent civilians as retribution for not accepting a particular worldview.
Language: en |