Fighting the Jihad of the Pen: Countering Revolutionary Islam's Ideology

Gregg, Heather S.

doi:10.1080/09546551003597584

Cited by 22 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Al Qaeda and the Islamic Brotherhood have primarily positioned themselves on the basis of a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam and a desire to extend and expand a religious rule of law and social order. Indeed, the ideology of both Al Qaeda and the Islamic Brotherhood includes explicitly endorsing violence against religious outsiders (in part because of their religious and cultural differences) in order to “restore” Arab civilization and cultural standing in the face of religious and cultural corruption by nonbelievers (e.g., Gregg, 2010; Turner, 2010).…”

Section: A Comparison Of the Three Narrativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Support for asymmetric violence among Arab populations: The clash of cultures, social identity, or counterdominance?

Sidanius

Kteily

Levin

et al. 2015

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a random sample of 383 Muslims and Christians in Lebanon and Syria, we explored the degree of public support for two distinct kinds of asymmetric violence—“fundamentalist violence” and “resistance violence”—against the United States as a function of three explanatory narratives: a clash of cultures narrative, social identity/self-categorization theory, and a counterdominance perspective. Multiple regression analyses showed that the factors most closely associated with support of asymmetric violence among Arab populations was very much dependent upon the type of asymmetric violence. Among both Christians and Muslims, the results showed that perceived incompatibility between Arab and American cultures was the best predictor of support for fundamentalist violence, while perceived American domination of the Arab world was the distinctly strongest predictor of support for resistance violence. The theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

show abstract

Section: A Comparison Of the Three Narrativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Support for asymmetric violence among Arab populations: The clash of cultures, social identity, or counterdominance?

Sidanius

Kteily

Levin

et al. 2015

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hoffman thus presciently predicted that groups with millennialist orientations or apocalyptic beliefs would become the preeminent terrorist threat. The perpetrators of the most lethal forms of indiscriminate violence in recent years have been radical Islamist terror groups such as Al Qaeda and the Islamic State (Gregg 2010;START 2018). Furthermore, one can apply the logic of Henriques (2011) 'justification hypothesis' to groups built upon exclusionary principles that define themselves in relation to the existence of a demonized or evil 'other' .…”

Section: Justifications and Cultural Polarizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Terrorism and lethal moralism in the United States and United Kingdom, 1970–2017

Michalski¹

2019

British Journal of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current paper examines terrorism as a special form of moralistic violence, with several key features that distinguish such behaviour from other types of violence. The theory of lethal moralism highlights the importance of social polarization, characterized by vast differences in social space and inequality between adversaries as crucial to explaining deadly terrorist attacks. Where the differences are more permanent or chronic – and the groups in question define and justify their existence specifically in contradistinction to ‘other’ groups – then the polarization intensifies and attacks tend to be more lethal. In contrast, groups that appeal to broader audiences or the general public as potential allies more often use non‐lethal terrorism to their strategic advantage. The study examines the United States and the United Kingdom to classify each of more than 8,000 attacks between 1970 and 2017 in terms of their ideological orientations. The evidence highlights the arc of terrorism in relation to different types of groups, as well as confirms the more lethal nature of terrorism linked especially to radical Islam, right‐wing religious extremists, hate groups, ethno‐nationalist sectarian violence, and anti‐government anarchists. Yet apart from the extensive use of terrorism associated with ‘The Troubles’ in Northern Ireland, the majority of terrorist attacks in the US and the UK have not produced deaths. Most terrorism instead has been perpetrated by groups aiming to rally support for a general cause and has been far less deadly on balance. The implications of these findings are discussed with a view toward developing more powerful explanatory models that focus on the socio‐cultural contexts and justification frameworks that inspire extremism and the use of lethal moralism to settle disputes.

show abstract

“…Over the past few years, the literature on terrorism and counterterrorism has seen an increased focus on the concept of counter-narratives, designed to weaken the terrorist message by highlighting inconsistencies, tensions, fabrications and other aspects of this narrative that can be refuted (see, for example, Benjamin, 2008; Cilluffo and Kimmage, 2009; Gregg, 2010; National Coordinator for Counterterrorism (NCTB), 2010; Quiggin, 2009; Ramsay, 2012).…”

Section: Pr and The Content Of Terrorist Discoursementioning

confidence: 99%

“…These three ideational components constitute the essence of what the social movement literature refers to as collective action frames designed to support particular movements. In this sense, leaders of movements seek to generate support for their cause by formulating a ‘mobilizing ideology’ (Snow and Marshall, 1984: 5) where they identify specific socio-political problems that have to be addressed, propose solutions to these problems and urge constituents to respond to these calls (Gregg, 2010; Snow and Benford, 1988; Tololyan, 2006; Wiktorowicz, 2004). Snow and Benford (1988) referred to these ‘framing tasks’ as diagnostic, prognostic and motivational framing.…”

Section: Conclusion and Theoretical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaching terrorist public relations initiatives

Holbrook

2014

Public Relations Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this article is to further our understanding of terrorist public relations initiatives through exploring communicative efforts that are inherent in terrorist activities and associated with terrorist actors and by scrutinising discourse emanating from terrorist movements and perpetrators. By analysing this content and output, the article identifies three core and interrelated components of terrorist public relations initiatives: (1) the communicative aspect of the terrorist act itself, (2) conveyance of ideological tenets and (3) counter-narrative work. The article concludes by considering some of the theoretical implications of the analysis and the relevance to different disciplines, highlighting the importance of understanding terrorist mobilisation efforts through public relations.

show abstract

Fighting the Jihad of the Pen: Countering Revolutionary Islam's Ideology

Cited by 22 publications

References 0 publications

Support for asymmetric violence among Arab populations: The clash of cultures, social identity, or counterdominance?

Support for asymmetric violence among Arab populations: The clash of cultures, social identity, or counterdominance?

Terrorism and lethal moralism in the United States and United Kingdom, 1970–2017

Approaching terrorist public relations initiatives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About