Revisiting the Economics and Terrorism Nexus: Collective Deprivation, Ideology and Domestic Radicalization in the US (1948–2016)

Abstract

Objectives Studies generally find no relationship between economic deprivation and terrorist activities, leading to the conclusion that economic conditions have no role in the emergence of terrorist movements. The present paper challenges this conclusion. It argues that collective deprivation affects participation into terrorism, but in different directions depending on the ideology of terrorist movements: far-right terrorism should mobilize more under times of collective deprivation while far-left terrorism should mobilize more under times of collective improvement. Methods I tested this hypothesis on the PIRUS database about domestic terrorists (N = 1295) in the United States from 1948 to 2016. I analysed whether the proportion of far-right (versus far-left) terrorists in a given year depends on collective deprivation in the US, operationalized through long-term recession of the income and long-term growth of inequality. Results Hierarchical logistic regression analyses confirmed that far-right terrorism mobilizes more under periods of long-term economic deprivation, while far-left terrorism mobilizes more under improving economic conditions. Besides, the effect of collective deprivation appears to be of socio-tropic nature: it is especially determinant at the national level, rather than at the state or individual level. In contrast, results do not support the view that Islamist terrorism is affected by collective deprivation. Conclusions The study challenges the view that economic conditions have no role in triggering terrorist mobilization. The differential effect of collective deprivation on farright and far-left terrorism is compatible with system-justification and backlash theories. Besides, the findings suggest that collective deprivation affects radicalization at an early phase rather than the offending phase.

Polarization under rising inequality and economic decline

“…While most findings indicate that individual terrorists are unlikely to be drawn from the most economically deprived sectors, poor economic conditions are often correlated with higher rates of political violence (49)(50)(51)(52). Moreover, our model may help explain recent work showing that right-wing terrorism associated with group-based grievances is more sensitive to economic conditions and inequality than violence from left-wing groups promoting more universalistic ideologies (53). Fourth, our model may contribute to ongoing debates about the origins and nature of social identity.…”

Terrorist campaigns and the growth of the Muslim population: a reply

“…3 Other confounding factors, such as inequality or discrimination are neither included nor discussed despite how useful they can be. In particular, increasing inequalities have been found to be associated with both terrorist attacks (Varaine, 2020a;Varaine et al, 2021) and an increase of (low-skilled) Muslim populations (Gould, 2019). Similarly, as already pointed, discrimination impacts both fertility and terrorism.…”

Attacking the Weak or the Strong? An Experiment on the Targets of Parochial Altruism

“…In the current context of increasing inequalities, rightwing violence seems again to gain prevalence over left-wing violence. Recent empirical studies on French radical movements (Varaine, 2018) and US terrorists (Varaine, 2019) statistically confirm this trend: the higher the increase in inequality the more right-wing the orientation of political violence.…”

“…The literature gives limited clues to understand why parochial altruists target certain groups instead of others. On the one hand, macro-level studies reveal that terrorist attacks targeting distinct out-groups emerge in very different socio-economic contexts (Kis-Katos et al, 2014, Brockoff et al, 2016, Varaine, 2019). Yet, macro analyses do not allow to identify the underlying mechanism.…”