the psychology of terrorism

... is this something we need to understand ?

http://www.loserturdmafia.com/
from JoeUser Forums

Can psychology tell us what motivates terrorists and how they differ from you and me?. How do we get inside the mind of a killer ?. Most of us find terrorism acts alien to our thinking. We simply cannot ever hope to understand.

Yet maybe for our own sakes we should understand something of what fuels the violent reality of todays' world. Scientifically, it's a tough task, since terrorists generally don't volunteer for psychological studies. At any rate, terrorism experts tend to differ greatly in their understanding of the motivation behind these acts.

Three opinions from specialists in this field are reproduced below, without my pretending to say which is most compelling, or whether other answers would be more convincing.


Expert 1: “Anger without guilt”

For 30 years, Rona Fields, a Washington, D.C. psychologist, has been psychologically testing terrorists and paramilitaries from Northern Ireland, Israel, the West Bank, Lebanon, Southeast Asia, and Africa.

She thinks today's suicide terrorists share the still-born moral and emotional development she saw in the Khmer Rouge, who created a bloodbath in Cambodia during the late 1970s. "Their definition of right and wrong is very black-and-white, and is directed by an authoritative director," says Fields.

"There's a total limitation of the capacity to think for themselves, and a terrorist develops gradually from a young age" Fields says. The boys (typically aged 10 to 16) who are easiest to recruit for suicide terrorism are "at the stage of development of moral judgment called retributive justice or vendetta."

This "an eye for an eye" stage of emotional development was described by the Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget, she adds.

In "societies where there's been intergenerational, intercommoned war," Fields says, many adults never outgrow the vendetta, and are trapped in righteous indignation, which Fields found among "all the members of all paramilitary organizations I examined”.

These true believers, she adds, "do know that there's a difference between right and wrong, but when they do something in the name of the cause, it's justified. They are angry, but they don't feel guilty about their anger."



Expert 2: “Highly rational ?”

In contrast to the popular sense that suicidal terrorists are sociopathic whackos, many experts argue that they are effectively pursuing their goals.

"They are rational, they are not insane," says Richard Pearlstein, associate professor of political science at Southeastern Oklahoma State University. "They have goals and they are moving towards those goals."



Expert 3: “No Set Psychological Model”

Not only are terrorists not crazy, but they don't share a personality type, wrote David Long, former assistant director of the State Department's Office of Counter Terrorism. "No comparative work on terrorist psychology has ever succeeded in revealing a particular psychological type or uniform terrorist mindset."

Still, Long wrote that terrorists tend to have low self-esteem, are attracted to groups with charismatic leaders, and, not surprisingly, enjoy risk. Oddly, Long concluded that many terrorists are ambivalent about violence and guns.

Long wrote just before the ongoing wave of suicide attacks, where a focus on raising the death toll has superseded the desire to score a political point or free imprisoned comrades.


All original quotes are from: Link

Note: These are presented purely for information and comparsion purposes, and in no way represent my personal views, or imply in any way that I am sympathetic to the perpetrators of acts of terror. Discussion is welcomed. Thanks.


"
4,389 views 27 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
I would agree with the third explanation...

Interesting blog - I myself try my darndest to get inside the mind of terrorists, and I beleive I know what it is that sparks their hatred and outrage, my ability to point this out has me labelled as a terrorist sympathyser, when it's really as simple as saying dont fuel the fire with more hate.

Terrorists are an unknown quantity, and we have no way of telling which way they are going to react in any situation, we have to understand where this inner hatred comes from, and do anything within our power to negate that hate that we possibly can.

Sometimes, when you talk to people about terrorism, it's like banging your head against a brick wall, they are set in their ways, and are un-willing to entertain other ideas, if you are not one of these people, you are labled a hippy, kook, or a terrorist sympathyser, and that is a damn shame. Luckily that brick wall doesn't worry me too much - it's good for conditioning my head

BAM!!!
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
I remember reading somewhere about a captured terrorist from the 70s who said the key to doing that sort of thing was to think of the victims as things. If you don't consider the target a person, then really there's no limits to what you can do. Who cares what happens to a half-brick? When that thought process is applied to people, then you get true evil.
Star Control: Origins
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
If you don't consider the target a person, then really there's no limits to what you can do.


It's all about trivialising death... I have an interesting article in preperation how the US tank operators just crank some really loud death metal to get them pumped for death and destruction...

BAM!!!
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Terrorists are an unknown quantity, and we have no way of telling which way they are going to react in any situation, we have to understand where this inner hatred comes from, and do anything within our power to negate that hate that we possibly can


i'm glad you added this, muggaz, as this is something i feel strongly about. the sheer inability of most decent people to comprehend such acts compromises our ability to protect ourselves from them.

Sometimes, when you talk to people about terrorism, it's like banging your head against a brick wall, they are set in their ways, and are un-willing to entertain other ideas, if you are not one of these people, you are labled a hippy, kook, or a terrorist sympathyser, and that is a damn shame


this can be true, mug. i think it's a natural part of being a decent person to feel confused outrage when terrorists commit acts that go against all that we know to be good. the very word strikes fear into my soul. and for this reason i'm vulnerable to such things. i will never agree with acts of terrorism. i will never support acts of terrorism. but i will say that our ignorance of WHY and how they happen will continue to cost this world dearly.



If you don't consider the target a person, then really there's no limits to what you can do. Who cares what happens to a half-brick? When that thought process is applied to people, then you get true evil.


thanks for adding this, cactoblaster. this is another fact that most us find incomprehensible. we need to be afraid. we need to be wary. we should never sympathise or agree with terrorism. but we should arm oursleves with the knowledge about it that might help us combat it ultimately.


thaks for the comments.

vanessa/mig XX
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
"These true believers, she adds, "do know that there's a difference between right and wrong, but when they do something in the name of the cause, it's justified. They are angry, but they don't feel guilty about their anger."  Unless they are caught.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
“Highly rational ?” Hmm, rather Maxwellian. The frightening pretense of a superior race that answers to no one.  
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Unless they are caught.


a very good point, stevendedalus. in reference to repentance, this can de displayed on occasion. although many terrorists die during their 'campaigns', those that do survive and are brought to 'justice' may feel/display remorse over their anger, whilst still making no apology for it's source or it's motivations.

“Highly rational ?” Hmm, rather Maxwellian.


am i allowed to admit that that comment elicited a big laugh from me ?

The frightening pretense of a superior race that answers to no one.


i agree wholeheartedly, stevendedalus. the concept of such things are so alien to our natures that we put ourselves at a psychological disadvantage through sheer decency of spirit in these instances.

thanks for this insightful comment.

vanessa/mig XX
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
I just read an article in the Bangkok Post about a Muslim kid who was arrested for (what else?) bombing a market. He gave a lengthy and frank interview on how he was recruited and why he did it. The religious nutcases get the kids when they are young, brainwash them, etc., pretty much what you'd expect.

When traveling in third world countires I am often reminded of the line in Platoon that "Hell is the absence of reason". Common sense isn't so common outside of the G8. I think the only thing that can save us is health and education. A hungry man is an angry man; an ignorant man is a belligerent man.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Mig: Interesting post. I like the new, bold miggy.

David:

A hungry man is an angry man; an ignorant man is a belligerent man.


I find so much truth in that statement. Very well said.

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
I just read an article in the Bangkok Post about a Muslim kid who was arrested for (what else?) bombing a market. He gave a lengthy and frank interview on how he was recruited and why he did it. The religious nutcases get the kids when they are young, brainwash them, etc., pretty much what you'd expect.


hi david. that sounds like a very interesting piece, i'm glad you mentioned it. it is true that children are 'recruited' whilst they are still young. i believed what my elders told me as a child, too. i was merely luckier geographically, and with a much different result.

"Hell is the absence of reason".


it is true. we fear most that we don't understand. and it is therein that our vulnerabilities lie.

I think the only thing that can save us is health and education. A hungry man is an angry man; an ignorant man is a belligerent man.


i very much agree, david. fear and misunderstanding make us prime targets. what we need to fight terrorism is not empathy, and never sympathy or support, but educated insight in how to prevent the self-perpetuating cycle. thanks for your comment.

vanessa/mig XX
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Mig: Interesting post. I like the new, bold miggy.


thankyou very much, texas wahine

I find so much truth in that statement. Very well said.


i second that, texas wahine. and thankyou for commenting.

vanessa/mig XX
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
what we need to fight terrorism is not empathy, and never sympathy or support, but educated insight in how to prevent the self-perpetuating cycle.


Wow. I think what you've just said, mig, is so very insightful. I agree completely.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
Wow. I think what you've just said, mig, is so very insightful. I agree completely.


thanks so much again, texas wahine. i must say, we do seem to have a lot of similar views, and i very much appreciate your comments .

vanessa/mig XX
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Their definition of right and wrong is very black-and-white, and is directed by an authoritative director,"

we have to understand where this inner hatred comes from, and do anything within our power to negate that hate that we possibly can.


According to the expert, the hatred comes basically via brainwashing from their culture and/or leader. Three basic steps to negate that hate:
1) remove them from their culture.
2) remove their leader from them.
3) de-program them.

Anything else (e.g. appeasement, reparations, etc.) isn't going to cut it.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
1) remove them from their culture.
2) remove their leader from them.
3) de-program them.


4) don't incite further hatred by refering to ALL Muslims as Pigs, Murderers, Misogynist's, Rapist's etc.

BAM!!!
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
very much agree, fear and misunderstanding make us prime targets. what we need to fight terrorism is not empathy, and never sympathy or support, but educated insight in how to prevent the self-perpetuating cycle. thanks for your comment.
Well spoken and profound: that is why it is so important not to sell our way, but to make inroads into awakening the Muslim world to return to their learned philosophers of the past--many of whom contributed to western thinking.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
According to the expert, the hatred comes basically via brainwashing from their culture and/or leader


yes, citahellion, that is what 'they' say.

Three basic steps to negate that hate:1) remove them from their culture.2) remove their leader from them.3) de-program them.


citahellion, i think that the above may work work if applied to children to prevent them growing up to become another generation that justifies violence with 'beliefs', yet the application of such an idea would be foreign to human rights as we know them. have we really come this far ?. it saddens me.


that is why it is so important not to sell our way


stevendedalus, this is a very important point. our 'answer' does not work for everyone, nor should it.

but to make inroads into awakening the Muslim world to return to their learned philosophers of the past--many of whom contributed to western thinking


the worlds spiritual riches come from so many unlikely places. i too have wondered at the physical defence of beliefs being transformed into an actuality more commonly. it is the escalation of these and other negative aspects that have eroded any chance of a positive world view. an insightful comment, thankyou.

vanessa/mig XX
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
citahellion, i think that the above may work work if applied to children to prevent them growing up to become another generation that justifies violence with 'beliefs', yet the application of such an idea would be foreign to human rights as we know them.


That is one reason why I think terrorism is essentially an intractable problem.
I also have to disagree with Muggaz to a certain extent; his post of
don't incite further hatred...


implies that the victims of terrorism can somehow change their ways to eliminate the hatred. Call me cynical if you must, but I don't think the hatred is that easily turned aside.

The source of the terrorism is not the people who blow themselves up, but the people who convince people to blow themselves up. I think that it's a very rare individual who wakes up one day and decides on their own "I've had enough of X, I'm going to blow myself and a boatload of other people up in protest." The leader, who convinces people that "The Koran says this, it means you must blow yourself up and take as many infidels with you as possible, and you will reap rewards in the afterlife", is the truly dangerous one. THIS person is, to be sure, hateful and vicious, but more to the point they are hateful and vicious BECAUSE IT BENEFITS THEM TO BE SO. They gain adherents, they have stature, they build an organization, all of which validates their hate and their destruction. It is, essentially, a cult; they're like David Koresh or Jim Jones, partying and having sex with the 13-year-olds while their minions go out and do dangerous and destructive things in their name, or the name of their religion.

If we could somehow make it detrimental to them to be a terrorist cult leader, terrorism would largely dry up and blow away, leaving only the rare, uncoordinated individual activity. Unfortunately that's a very difficult thing to do.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
The source of the terrorism is not the people who blow themselves up, but the people who convince people to blow themselves up


articles like this make it VERY easy for people to convince other people to blow themselves up.

I can identify with that fact - but that makes me the bad guy.



BAM!!!
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
That is one reason why I think terrorism is essentially an intractable problem.


agreed, citahellion.

The source of the terrorism is not the people who blow themselves up, but the people who convince people to blow themselves up.


indeed. these people are trained and lead in this way.

The leader, who convinces people that "The Koran says this, it means you must blow yourself up and take as many infidels with you as possible, and you will reap rewards in the afterlife", is the truly dangerous one.


as was mentioned in another blog of mine, citahellion, this literal translation of 'repent or death' seems to have become more common these days.

If we could somehow make it detrimental to them to be a terrorist cult leader, terrorism would largely dry up and blow away, leaving only the rare, uncoordinated individual activity. Unfortunately that's a very difficult thing to do


citahellion, this is another good point. removal of a guiding force would almost certainly cause dissolution and confusion, which in itself could present more desperate action, but with a much decreased chance of effectivness and access to less 'rescources'.


btw, muggaz, thanks for your comments. i appreciate your contribution. i think what you're implying is that you in no way support or encourage terrorism, and i'm certain that all involved agree on this point.


vanessa/mig XX
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think sometimes the answer is easy but unknowable, at least to us that grapple with the problem from a distance.

I was watching Four Corners and an Iraqi man was telling the reporter how he had lost three sons during the regime of Saddam Hussein. All three had been missing for 18 years and it was only after Iraq's "liberation" that this man found neat records of how all three had been executed along with other members of his family.

It is very hard for us in the developed nations to understand the psychology produced by such massive and senseless loss. It is very hard for us to understand the importance of family in the absence of material wealth. When love becomes all, when it is lost, so will grief and rage become all.

In Chechnya there has been comment on the high percentage of female suicide bombers. They call them the Black Widows. The hypothesis is that these "terrorists" are females grieving the loss of a loved one or loved ones (as is so often, so heart wrenchingly, the case)

Excellent post Mig, but when isn't it

Marco XX
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
as a note: as well as political ideology showing no hesitation in targeting children and the impressionable as recruits for a war of hatred, neither do bombs, missiles, gunships, wayward gunfire, poverty and the political machinations of men (mostly) who are so far removed as to be spared the need for remorse or true understanding. If anything makes recruitment possible, it is this indiscriminate distribution of suffering.

Marco
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
Muggaz wrote:
articles like this [Greywar's "5 pillars of Islam are Hate, intolerance, etc"] make it VERY easy for people to convince other people to blow themselves up


Again, I disagree. Articles like that are completely irrelevant to people blowing things up.

Muggaz, you appear to be arguing with the underlying idea that Islamics are inherently hyper-sensitive and violence-prone. Any old thing could set an Islamic off and make him literally blow up. I don't think that's the impression you actually have about Islam, but that's what it sounds like a lot of the time. And as I believe I pointed out elsewhere, your choices of phrasing in general make it sound not just like "Muggaz comprehends their thought processes" but "Muggaz agrees with what they think." Even here, saying "I can identify with that" carries the implication that if you were in their position, you would be just as willing to blow people up.

Anyway, to the point: Terrorist leaders will use whatever material is at hand and spin it as necessary. Sure, if they saw something like that they could say "Look how they hate us! We must destroy them to survive!" But if they saw something like "We should all become Islamic in order to avoid being blown up" they would say "Look, our methods are working! We must redouble our efforts!" And if they saw a world leader saying "We must reach out and achieve a lasting peace with these noble freedom fighters" they could say "They seek to undermine our resolve and sway us from our path! We will not be so easily turned aside from our holy undertaking!" or they could say "See, our methods are legitimate. Those who say otherwise are fools who deserve to be destroyed."

It doesn't matter what gets said, a skilled leader will take the words and use them to promote his own goals regardless. We, as non-followers, might disagree, debate, argue, etc. if we were to hear his rhetoric, but his minions will be all the more encouraged to do whatever his plan requires of them.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
Very interesting article Mig.

what we need to fight terrorism is not empathy, and never sympathy or support, but educated insight in how to prevent the self-perpetuating cycle


I find this topic to be very difficult to discuss--it is so flamable that even one slightly misplaced word has you labeled as a terrorist sympathizer. When I first came to JU, I wrote an article called, "Is one man's freedom fighter another man's terrorist" and was told that I was encouraging a new fleet of up and coming suicide bombers. So, everything that follows is written with much hestitation.

I think you are right that education and insight are needed to end the cycle of terrorism, but I think empathy to a certain degree is needed as well. You need to understand what motivates the terrorist before you will have the insight to do anything about it. Terrorism doesn't come out of thin air--it's politically motivated. If it wasn't, it would simply be called mass murder. By calling it an act of "terrorism" you have already acknowledge that there is a political message that the perpetrator wants people to hear.

I would add a forth motivation: It's War.
We do not question what motivates a soldier to fire on his enemy, nor do we question why a bomber pilot drops bombs, sometimes on civilian populations. If you look at the language used by terrorist groups, you will find that it is the language of a declared war. The IRA (note the word Army in their name), though on ceasefire for ten years, will not say that "the war" is over. Islamic Jihad and militant Hamas are fighting an occupying army with the only weapons they have--their bodies. Eta plans attacks against the government that usurped their land. The motivation of terrorist are no different than the motivations of others who have declared war; howwever, without the mechanisms of a state behind them, their methods are different. War makes humans do unhuman things--it's ugly and disgusting, but those engaged believe that the war is worth fighting because it will change the way they live for the better.
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
Again, I disagree. Articles like that are completely irrelevant to people blowing things up.


If you beleive that, than I will have to leave it at that, and agree to disagree... Dont give the extremist's bullets, and then they can't shoot at you.

BAM!!!