1 / 11

Hitting the Target in the “War on Terrorism”

Hitting the Target in the “War on Terrorism”. The case for introducing the term “RIF” into modern vocabulary. Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D. Department of Psychology State University of New York Buffalo, New York 14260-4110 www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com. The Problem.

daniel_millan
Download Presentation

Hitting the Target in the “War on Terrorism”

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Hitting the Target in the “War on Terrorism” The case for introducing the term “RIF” into modern vocabulary Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D.Department of PsychologyState University of New YorkBuffalo, New York 14260-4110www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com

  2. The Problem • Radical Islamic fundamentalist terrorists are constantly in the media undeniably posing one of the greatest threats to world peace and stability • Reference to this type of terrorist is usually shorted to “Muslim terrorist” or “Islamic terrorist” rather than using the full, more accurate descriptor • This promotes inappropriate generalization that has adverse consequences for Muslims and for non-Muslims alike Copyright 2008 Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D. www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com

  3. Identifying the Real Target Muslims active and tacit supporters of terrorist activities Conservative Muslims Islamic Fundamentalists Radical Islamic Fundamentalists Radical Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorists Copyright 2008 Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D. www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com

  4. Radical Islamic Fundamentalists willing to use terrorism to achieve their goals represent a very small portion of the Muslim population • Muslims ≈ 1.6 billion worldwide • Conservative Muslims ≈ 70% • Islamic Fundamentalists ≈ 1/3 or < 25% • Radical Islamic Fundamentalists ≈ 1/3 or < 10% • Radical Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorists ≈ 1/3 or < 3% That’s still 48 million possible Muslim terrorists! But that leaves 1,552,000,000 non-terrorist Muslims!!! Copyright 2008 Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D. www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com

  5. It is important to maintain the distinction between the religion of Islam and the relatively few whose radical interpretation of their religion leads to terrorist activities • Obvious parallels exists with various “Christian” groups • KKK “defending the Christian way of life” • violent antiabortionists “saving the souls of the unborn” • these terrorist groups represent a very small proportion of those claiming to be “Christian” • the vast majority view their actions as non-Christian Copyright 2008 Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D. www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com

  6. What’s in a word? • Words have very powerful symbolic meaning • not only cognitive meaning • but also emotional meaning and impact • Conditioning effects can lead to inappropriate generalization at an emotional level even when the cognitive level maintains the appropriate distinction Muslim Terrorists = Terrorists = Muslims Copyright 2008 Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D. www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com

  7. Simple Associative Conditioning • Muslim terrorist – boom! • Muslim terrorist – boom! • Muslim terrorist – boom! • Terrorist = boom! • Muslim = boom! media reports private discussions nightmares Conditioned Emotional Response (CER) CERs change reactivity, e.g., increase tendency to overreact CERs change reactions, e.g., increase tendency to react aversely CERs generate motivation, e.g., act to terminate or reduce the anxiety Copyright 2008 Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D. www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com

  8. The terrorists would like to blur the distinction between Muslims and extremists • it helps alienate Muslims from the West • But many Muslims resent this prejudice • and it is counterproductive in fighting terrorism • it reinforces the notion of a Western anti-Muslim bias thereby ‘recruiting’ more terrorists and terrorist sympathizers • it dilutes the impact of counter-terrorism efforts “Kill them all and let Allah sort them out!” Copyright 2008 Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D. www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com

  9. To help maintain this distinction requires a new way of describing the problem Copyright 2008 Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D. www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com

  10. A New Word • Perhaps one of the most important words added to the English vocabulary in the New Millennium • RIF: Radical Islamic Fundamentalist • Communication often demands a succinct method of describing relationships and events • Rather than use the term “Muslim terrorist,” the term “RIF terrorist” is preferable to minimize inappropriate conditioning and the development of counterproductive CERs RIF terrorist = boom! Muslim boom! Copyright 2008 Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D. www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com

  11. Non-RIF Islamic Terrorists? • A few other exclusively or near-exclusively Muslim terrorist groups exist who are not fundamentalists or who have geopolitical rather than socio-religious goals • Hamas for the “liberation of Palestine” • Chechen separatists for “homeland independence” • Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) for an independent “Kurdish state” • Because these groups have primarily secular objectives with limited geographic impact, the use of the term “Islamic terrorists” to describe them adds little to an understanding of the nature or motives of their terrorist activities • Therefore, the term “RIF terrorists” remains descriptive of the predominant group-profile threatening peace and stability worldwide Copyright 2008 Michael A. Bozarth, Ph.D. www.PsychologyofTerrorism.com

More Related