Belief systems and action inferences as a source of violence in the name of Islam

Abstract

I draw on the belief system literature and use a cognitive mapping methodology to compare Islamists from the nonviolent Muslim Brotherhood and from the formerly violent groups al-Jihad and al-Jama'a al-Islamiyya in Egypt. Using data from in-depth interviews conducted in Egypt, I identify seven combinations of beliefs antecedent to decisions for and against violence and make three main claims. First, decisions for or against violence towards the state are only made if an individual believes that the state is violent. Second, decisions against violence are logically preceded by beliefs about the superiority of state structures to the chaos of violence, the negative consequences of revenge, the potential success of peaceful action, and the impossibility of reaching goals through violence. Third, decisions in favor of violence are logically preceded by beliefs about transformatory goals, support for violence in the local environment, and ignorance of the state's reaction to violent resistance. I conclude with brief suggestions of how the kinds of belief-chains identified may be useful for understanding and responding to narratives supporting violence in the name of Islam.

Psychological Vulnerabilities and Propensities for Involvement in Violent Extremism

“…Perceptions of injustice or humiliation create a third area of psychological vulnerability (Brown & Abernethy, ). Social scientists have long recognized perceived injustice and humiliation as central factors in understanding violence generally (van den Bos, ) and terrorism specifically (Deutsch, ; Dornschneider, ; Jurgensmeyer, 2000; Pargament, Magyar, Benore, & Mahoney, ). In the mid‐1970s, Hacker () concluded that “remediable injustice is the basic motivation for terrorism”.…”

Does Non-violent Repression Have Stronger Dampening Effects than State Violence? Insight from an Emotion-Based Model of Non-violent Dissent

“…State violence is associated with negative effects, including dampening (Davenport 2015; Lichbach 1987; Moore 1998; Zhukov and Talibova 2018) and pre-empting (Beiser-McGrath 2019; Danneman and Ritter 2014; De Jaegher and Hoyer 2019; Dragu and Przeworski 2019; Regan and Henderson 2002; Ritter and Conrad 2016; Sullivan 2016), as well as positive spurring (Dornschneider 2010; Finkel 2015; Francisco 2004) or ‘vengeance’ effects (Jaeger and Siddique 2018). Positive effects have been related to low or medium levels of state violence targeting early stage protest, whereas dampening effects have been related to increasing state violence against continued protest (Bell and Murdie 2018; Gurr 1970; Lichbach 1987; Lichbach and Gurr 1981; Muller and Weede 1990).…”

Promoting Qur'anic Verses That Reject Violence

“…Rather, studies have fallen into two main categories. First, various acts of violence are linked with their perpetrators' Muslim faith (Chapman, 2017;Dornschneider, 2010;Spruyt & Elchardus, 2012;Steven Fish et al, 2010;Venkatraman, 2007). Following Venkatraman (2007), discussion of Muslims' involvement in terrorism and conflict have produced heated academic debate.…”