TEXT:
Reading
1. Moral Psychology of Terrorism (2013) Introduction
2. Horgan, J. G. (2017). Psychology of terrorism: Introduction to the special issue. American Psychologist, 72(3), 199-204. doi:10.1037/amp0000148
Original Question:
For this week’s Forum, respond to the following: This week, we investigate the recruitment methods used by terrorist organizations to attract members to carry out their goals. The methods used have been compared to those used by traditional organizations, enacting organizational and managerial processes familiar to most.
· After reviewing the course materials for the week, discuss the aspects of recruitment and membership in terrorist organizations as they compare to that of the traditional organization.
Reply to the following response with 200 words minimum. (please make response as if having a conversation, respond directly to some of the statements in below post. This is not providing an analysis of the original post. Respectfully address it and even ask clarifying or additional questions.)
1.
Before participating in this week’s discussion, review Mina Cikara’s TEDx Talk When ‘I’ Becomes ‘We’.
First of all, this video was for me personally exceptional. It answered some questions I have pondered for some time as to why people act certain ways when in a group setting. I thought the video made a valid point that people are influenced by a group to do things they may not necessarily do on their own. Human nature may draw boundaries between “us” and “them” and was demonstrated by comparing how people may react to other groups at a baseball game. Basically education and awareness may reduce the potential of a person to react violently. Our behavior changes when we shift our thoughts from “me” and “you” to “us” and “them.” There are benefits of being a part of a group like pooled resources, protection, a psychological benefit of a sense of belonging. Group living does produce negatives like a sense of the individual to conform, to do and say things we may not agree with on our own, and group-on-group interactions are more aggressive than one-on-one interactions.
Considering the perspectives introduced in the course materials for the week, discuss the role of group psychological principles in providing rationalizations for terrorist behavior. Are these rationalizations valid explanations of the violent acts carried out; provide adequate details to substantiate the position you present.
Our textbook brings up a point that as a nation we currently to not have a satisfactory profile of who is likely to commit terrorist activities and that through the study of group psychology may lead to a more successful understanding of the dynamics of terrorists and terrorist organizations. The goals of individual terrorists begin to align with organizational goals and become indistinguishable between the individual and the group—the individual’s ability keep their identity or make individual decisions are diminished within a terrorist organization (Roshandel & Lean, 2013). I personally agree that the group-mentality plays a large part to explain some of the violence that is carried out by these terrorist organizations. In some sense group psychology may explain how people are brainwashed and acceptance to cult-like thinking and behaviors. Perhaps as an individual a person may be less likely to accept certain perspectives or beliefs, but as a group they may be more easily convinced.
Respectfully,
John
Resources
Roshandel, J., & Lean, N. (Eds.). (2013). The moral psychology of terrorism : implications for security. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy2.apus.edu
2.
The role of group psychological principles in providing rationalizations for terrorist behavior is a disconnection with the induvial self, where that person will then adopt the values of the terrorist group (Roshandel & Lean, 2013). For example, a person who is by themselves is less likely to harm another individual because they are connected to their emotions, feelings, and thoughts; whereas, in a group setting, an individual will conform to the values and thoughts of their group and are more likely to harm another person because it occurred within that group. When committing an act within a group, the individual has no connection to their inner self, and will not feel as if they themselves committed the act of violence. Emotion plays a major role in terrorist groups and acts of violence. Violent acts carried out by terrorist groups follow psychological principles because emotions are high, and the group is committed to their beliefs.
As stated by Bellamy (2008), people act more aggressively when in groups, as opposed to those who act alone; thus, the pressure an individual may feel to conform to the group is a source of intractable conflict among different groups. This is something that is not only seen in terrorist groups, but all groups among society. For example, a teenager plays on a local hockey team (Capitals), and they have a friend who plays on the rival team(Flyers). When alone the two teenagers get along fine when they are not with their teams, although when they are with their team, they get into bad fist fights. This all has to do with perception and how each group will view one another. Bellamy (2008) also makes a valid point when she states that groups can also be a good thing, as long as they form a constructive goal.
References:
Bellamy, A. J. (2008). Fighting Terror: Ethical Dilemmas. New York: Zed Books.
Roshandel, J., & Lean, N. (2013). The moral psychology of terrorism: Implications for security (1st ed.). Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
3.
Good Day All,
For whatever reason individuals assume the role of terrorists, their transformation into terrorists with a political or religious agenda takes places within the structure of the terrorist group. This group provides a sense of belonging, a feeling of self-importance, and a new belief system that defines the terrorist act as morally acceptable and the group’s goals as of paramount importance. Apparently, membership in a terrorist group often provides a solution to the pressing personal needs of which the inability to achieve a desired niche in traditional society. The terrorist identity offers the individual a role in society, albeit a negative one, which is commensurate with his or her prior expectations and sufficient to compensate for past losses. Group membership provides a sense of potency, an intense and close interpersonal environment, social status, potential access to wealth and a share in what may be a grandiose but noble social design. The powerful psychological forces of conversion in the
group are sufficient to offset traditional social sanctions against violence. Terrorist groups are similar to religious sects or cults. They require total commitment by members; they often prohibit relations with outsiders, although this may not be the case with ethnic or separatist terrorist groups whose members are well integrated into the community; they regulate and sometimes ban sexual relations; they impose conformity; they seek cohesiveness throughinterdependence and mutual trust; and they attempt to brainwash individual members with their particular ideology. It appears that, as radicalization deepens, the collective group identity takes over much of the individual identity of the members; and, at the terrorist stage, the group identity reaches its peak. This group identity becomes of paramount importance. Terrorists whose only sense of significance comes from being terrorists cannot be forced to give up terrorism, for to do so would be to lose their very reason for being.
Bennie
** Please don’t just rephrase their info, but respond to it. Remember to answer question at the end if there is one. **
2
