The problem must be confronted and solved or ultimately we slide down the road to enforced general solutions that will surely toss out the baby with the bath water. This could well involve enforced conversion to any non proscribed 'religion' such as Islam or Fascism or Marxism for that matter.
Alternately we do proscribe both Fascism and Marxism anyway as they have a proven track record while we merely insist that Islamic literature be edited to conform to Christian precepts and that non christian behavior be actively discouraged by all Islamic teachers. Goodbye Sharia which has no place whatsoever in any society not specifically dedicated to the big man acting as a serial rapist.
All this places the state in the position of direct intervention and that never ends well and is naturally messy.
This item at least reminds us that ninety nine percent of immigrants at least will try to keep their bargain with their new society. We really do not need to beat them up. However we do need to insist that they become proactive in sorting out the one percent who are susceptible to the haters who want to induce violence.
Recall that one percent of a million folks works out to ten thousand problems who are completely invisible until they respond to a call to action..
A warmer embrace of Muslims could stop homegrown terrorism
The discovery that several of the Paris attackers were European
nationals has fueled concern about Muslim immigrants becoming
radicalized in the West.
Some politicians have expressed views that the best way to avoid homegrown terrorists is to shut the door.
The refugee migration debate turned even more contentious after
authorities found a Syrian passport at the scene of the attack. Poland
is now turning back refugees, more than half of American governors have vowed to refuse Middle Easterners seeking a new beginning, and US House Speaker Ryan has asked for a “pause” on the federal Syrian refugee program.
Fearful reactions to terrorist violence are nothing new. Incidents of
extremist activity are often followed by anti-Islam protests or hate crimes. Reports of ISIS luring Western Muslims abroad are followed by a tightening
of homeland security policy. Just after the attacks in Paris,
presidential hopeful Donald Trump said that he would be willing to close mosques in the US.
Such displays of intolerance can make Muslims feel like they don’t belong in Europe or the United States.
[ It remains a one way street. Just when can i open a nunnery in Kabul or any Muslim ghetto and expect good will to flow both ways? - arclein ]
[ It remains a one way street. Just when can i open a nunnery in Kabul or any Muslim ghetto and expect good will to flow both ways? - arclein ]
Our research, forthcoming in Behavioral Science and Policy,
shows that making Muslims feel this way can fuel support for radical
movements. In other words, many Western policies that aim to prevent
terrorism may actually be causing it.
Preventing radicalization
In our research, we asked hundreds of Muslims in Germany and the US
to tell us about their experiences as religious and cultural minorities,
including their feelings of being excluded or discriminated against on
the basis of their religion. We also asked how they balance their
heritage identities with their American or German identities. We wanted
to know if these kinds of experiences were related to their feelings
toward radical groups and causes.
There are a lot of practical and ethical barriers to studying what makes someone become a terrorist.
We normally don’t know who terrorists are until after they’ve
committed an attack. By then, we can only rely on after-the-fact
explanations as to what motivated them. We can’t perform a controlled
laboratory study to see who would participate in an act of terrorism. In
surveys, we can’t ask someone straightforwardly how much they would
like to join a radical movement, because most people who are becoming
radicalized would not answer honestly.
Instead, we measured a couple of indicators of support for
radicalism. We asked people how willing they would be to sacrifice
themselves for an important cause.
We also measured the extent to which participants held a radical
interpretation of Islam. For example, we asked whether it’s acceptable
to engage in violent jihad. Finally, we asked people to read a
description of a hypothetical radical group and tell us how much they
liked the group and how much they would want to support it. This
hypothetical group consisted of Muslims in the US (or Germany, in the
German study) who were upset about how Muslims were treated by society
and would stop at nothing to protect Islam.
Overall, support for these indicators of extremism was very low, which is a reminder that the vast majority of Muslims do not hold radical views.
But the responses of some people showed they felt marginalized and
identified with neither the culture of their heritage nor the culture of
their adopted country.
We described people as “culturally homeless” when they didn’t
practice the same customs or share the same values as others in their
adopted culture, but also felt different from other people of their
heritage.
We found that people who said they were torn between cultures also
reported feeling ashamed, meaningless and hopeless. They expressed an
overall lack of significance in their lives or a feeling that they don’t
really matter. The more people’s sense of self worth was threatened,
the more they expressed support for radicalism.
Our findings are consistent with a theory in psychology
that terrorists are looking for a way to find meaning in their lives.
When people experience a loss to their sense of personal significance –
for example, through being humiliated or disrespected – they seek out
other outlets for creating meaning.
Extremists know and exploit these vulnerabilities, targeting Muslims whose sense of significance is low or threatened. Radical religious groups give these culturally homeless Muslims a sense of certainty, purpose and structure.
For people who already feel culturally homeless, discrimination by
the adopted society can make matters worse. In our data, people who said
they had been excluded or discriminated against on the basis of their
religion experienced a threat to their self-esteem. The negative effects
of discrimination were the most damaging for people who already felt
culturally homeless.
Our results suggest that cultivating anti-immigrant or anti-Islamic
sentiment is deeply counterproductive. Anti-immigrant discourse is
likely to fuel support for extremism, rather than squelch it.
Integration the goal
To decrease the risk of homegrown radicalization, we should work to improve integration of Muslim immigrants, not further isolate them. This means welcoming Syrian refugees, not excluding them. It means redefining what it means to be American or German in a way that is inclusive and doesn’t represent only the majority culture. It means showing interest in and appreciation for other cultural and religious traditions, not fearing them.
According to our data, most Muslims in the United States and in Germany want to blend their two cultures. But it is difficult to do this if either side pressures them to choose.
We should not confuse integration with assimilation.
Integration means encouraging immigrants to call themselves American, German or French and to take pride in their own cultural and religious heritage.
Our data suggest that policies that pressure immigrants to conform to their adopted culture, like France’s ban on religious symbols in public institutions or the “burqa ban,” are likely to backfire, because such policies are disrespectful of their heritage.
In the United States, the pressure to conform comes in the implicit meaning of the “melting pot” metaphor that underlies our cultural ethos. This idea encourages newcomers to shed their cultural uniqueness in the interest of forging a homogeneous national identity. In comparison, the “mixed salad” or “cultural mosaic” metaphors often used in Canada communicate appreciation for cultural differences.
In Germany, immigrants without sufficient German language skills are required to complete an integration course, which is essentially a tutorial on how to be German. Interestingly, we found that the more German Muslim participants perceived that Germans wanted them to assimilate, the less desire they had to do so. We also see these identity struggles in Muslim communities in France, where “being French” and “being Muslim” are thought to be mutually exclusive.
Our findings point to a strategy for reducing homegrown radicalization: encouraging immigrants to participate in both of their cultures plus curbing discrimination against Muslims. This strategy is better for both immigrants’ well-being and adopted cultures’ political stability.
For an example of how this can be done successfully, look to a jihadist rehabilitation program in Aarhus, Denmark, where the police work with the Muslim community to help reintegrate foreign fighters and find ways for them to participate in Danish society without compromising their religious values.
Communities can make it harder for terrorists to recruit by helping the culturally homeless feel more at home.
No comments:
Post a Comment