Post No.: 0656
Furrywisepuppy says:
Young angry adolescents, in particular – who don’t feel accepted in wider society but feel disaffected, powerless, are perchance bullied and maybe come from dysfunctional families – are more vulnerable to joining extreme-view groups. Their feeling of being marginalised can make them feel that things are wrong in society and so they may direct their anger somewhere to ‘make things right’. And through social media, they may find like-minded people who’ll reinforce these views and offer a pre-packaged ideology that they can feel they belong to.
An ideology that supports their sense of justice, along with a group that gives them a sense of belonging, gives them a feeling of empowerment, purpose, significance, respect and a place in society. Being a ‘warrior’ or ‘champion’ for a cause and simply being accepted into a group boosts one’s self-esteem. These aren’t problems in themselves – the question is the cause and the group’s proposed methods of furthering it. If they’re considered good by the rest of society then we call them ‘activists’ or even freedom fighters – or if they’re considered bad then we call them ‘extremists’ or even terrorists. What’s considered ‘extreme’ is therefore relative to one’s perspective.
These factors aren’t the whole explanation but they add to the likelihood of joining such a group – and it’s a pattern regardless of whether someone joins one extreme-view side or another. Thus if someone holds extreme views, it might be wise to enquire about their history, upbringing experiences and present socio-economic circumstances rather than automatically reciprocate the anger.
Social exclusion can sometimes breed home-grown terrorists. If marginalised individuals, perhaps because of their ‘involuntary celibacy’ or faith, don’t feel accepted by one group then they may find acceptance by another. They’ll be more vulnerable to grooming by far-rightwing or terrorist groups. It’s therefore everybody’s responsibility in communities to never marginalise, ostracise or isolate anyone; (see Post No.: 0475) and to never join any group that isolates itself from regular society or from the daily lives or perspectives of any other persons or groups. Use social media responsibly – it can be used for spreading social unity, or lies and hate.
Sometimes, if a particular group is being marginalised, such as through racism, and one feels that one is a part of that group even though one isn’t directly personally being targeted by the discrimination or abuse – one can feel marginalised too for being associated with that group. It’s like siding with one’s brothers and sisters. Most of us feel that reaction when a feature of our identity is being undermined, even when an attack isn’t personally directed at us. This defensive feeling is probably amplified if one belongs to a minority group within one’s country because of one’s sense of vulnerability.
For instance, if a culture stereotypes ‘all Muslims as enemies of Western democracy’ then a Muslim who was born and bred in Britain might feel a connection with, and an empathy for, his/her fellow Muslims wherever they are in the world; and if felt pushed away and unwelcome in Britain, might rather join the fight on his/her brothers’ and sisters’ side wherever they are in the world, if it comes to a fight. But if people just believed that ‘terrorists are bad, whoever they are, whatever their colour, creed or religion’ without referencing and marginalising the faith of Islam, then British-born-and-bred Muslims wouldn’t feel like they’re being targeted by association, and so wouldn’t feel marginalised with other fellow Muslims. Foreign armed interventions that don’t feel like they’re about fighting terrorism but about Western imperialism, imposition or occupation don’t help either.
People can become associated with what other people did or said, as if ‘guilty by association’ because they’re friends, family or otherwise categorised in the same group as them. But friends or family don’t always agree with each other – never mind people who don’t even know each other on a personal level but are only grouped together because they share the same skin colour, religion or whatever. It’s the same with positive stereotypes, positive discriminations or ‘honour by association’, such as praising a regular citizen of a country whose team won the Davis Cup, as if they hit any balls in the tournament(!) Now feeling pride based on what fellow members of our own groups do isn’t the major issue – it’s mainly the other side of the same coin where members of other groups are considered homogeneous based on the actions of what a few individuals in those groups did.
Well sometimes it’s an individual erroneously believing that others are insinuating a guilty by association judgement on them when they’re not. But sometimes innocent individuals are being directly discriminated against, verbally abused and therefore dragged into the issue by others for simply believing in the same faith as a certain group; like when some people blame innocent Muslims for simply being Muslim, and vandalising local mosques rather than targeting the actual terrorists for being terrorists. Of course, marginalised groups mustn’t hypocritically stereotype ‘all of ‘the West’’ as their enemy either when only a minor percentage of such people are marginalising them.
So we shouldn’t be guilty for the things our ‘comrades’ do or say, even though we’re associated with them. In any crime, the individuals involved should be investigated and dealt with but we cannot implicate the rest of their associated group unless we find evidence to prove their involvement. We’ve got to take note of who exactly individually did what rather than assume they must’ve necessarily colluded together in a fuzzy conspiracy. (And it’s sometimes metaphorically like the ball hits you, rather than you hit the ball, and then goes into the net – when this happens, most people over-credit the player if it goes into the opponent’s goal or over-blame the player if it results in an own goal.)
The common denominator with terrorists isn’t that they’re Muslim but that they commit terror. It’s like many terrorists are male, but this doesn’t make all males terrorists. There are far more Muslims who aren’t terrorists, just like most males aren’t. And there are those who support terror who aren’t Muslim or male at all. So it’s wrong to assume that people from other groups who do or say disagreeable things are representative of everyone from that group. But the less we understand other groups, the more we homogenise their members; like assuming all Muslims believe in the same extreme doctrines. In oversimplifying our view of the world and of people, we end up making erroneous judgements.
And by over-generalising, stereotyping and discriminating whole swathes of people based on their associations – we can unwittingly cause a self-fulfilling prophecy which seems to vindicate our judgement against these people because, well, if you were a member of a minority group who was constantly being labelled and prejudiced against for something you’ve not personally done, then you might feel that the only group you belong to is a group who’ll accept you; who might be a militant group that opposes those who oppose people like you. ‘The enemy of my enemy is my friend.’
Push people and they’ll push back. If you push someone away – especially if another group will accept them (whether exploitatively or with genuine love), and especially if that person is adolescent and is looking for an identity – then don’t be surprised if you create an enemy! It’d be partly your own prejudice that pushed them away into the arms of another (perhaps to a group that tempts teenagers with the idea of playing with guns and grenades). So it could be your own over-generalised hate that’s contributing to your own, and your children’s, pain and misery down the line.
If innocent ‘foreign-looking’ people are marginalised, it’ll incentivise some of them to retaliate – thus bigots create, or at the very least escalate, the very problem they’re concerned about. Specifically profiling, surveilling and stopping-and-frisking certain people just because of their suspected association with a group will make them feel angry, marginalised and potentially vengeful against the system they’re in.
Most will silently put up with being marginalised but a small percentage will think they ‘might as well do the crime if they’re effectively already doing the time’ for having their liberties violated and reputations smeared with false accusations. They’ll side with a side that doesn’t reject or marginalise them, and it won’t have been totally their own fault; and from their personal perspective they didn’t start it.
When we spot on the news an adolescent who has committed a school shooting or became radicalised into a violent extremist sect – we may assume it was inherent in that person to do it. But that’s never the case. There are external push and pull factors, such as bullying in school pushing people away, and undesirable influences pulling young or vulnerable people in. Different people have different risk genetics but environmental factors play a pivotal role.
So ‘evil’ is, in key part, made rather than inborn – unless we want to say that we’re all born to be potentially evil. Genes related to psychopathy and perhaps vulnerability to being groomed matter, but you can turn an otherwise good person bad depending on their situational factors, and you can turn someone who could’ve been bad good. (Although psychopaths are disproportionately over-represented in prison – most psychopaths don’t ever end up there.) Thus we must investigate some of these possible environmental factors, which include someone’s upbringing (e.g. parenting), the culture (e.g. availability of guns, violent gangs), salient life events (e.g. personally unfortunate trauma events), and in particular their treatment (e.g. being bullied at school, being made a marginalised outcast in society).
We shouldn’t just focus on the perpetrators of such incidents but also on those around them and their behaviours towards a perpetrator-to-be too – what they did, or failed to do, that potentially contributed to pushing the (vulnerable) person away. However, in the aftermath of a terrible incident, anger is a common emotion, and affected communities are seldom ready to apportion any ounce of blame onto themselves because the perpetrator is ‘obviously’ clearly to blame. Or if it’s not the perpetrator then it’s their parents. But schools (who failed to tackle the bullying) and victims (who, some of them, may have bullied the perpetrator themselves) are never questioned. Hence communities don’t learn the lessons they need to learn to prevent these incidents from happening again.
The victims are still victims and the perpetrator should take responsibility, but not alone. Even those with the greatest risk alleles for violence can be prevented from committing serious crimes if they’re raised more lovingly and treated more inclusively by their peers, especially when young. Adolescence is a particularly sensitive time.
According to strain theory, society puts pressure on individuals to achieve socially-accepted goals even when they lack those means (e.g. to get rich, which may lead individuals to join gangs and commit crimes to earn wads of cash and status). According to social learning theory, people learn from each other via observation, imitation and modelling (e.g. when people see others get rewarded or punished for the things they do, hence witnessing gang members with bling motors can draw teenagers in). And according to control theory, the perception of the world, along with a motivated goal, leads to a resultant emotional state in an adapting feedback loop, to explain how one’s behaviour is guided by contexts/situational factors (e.g. teenagers might not want to join a gang but do because of the lack of protection if they don’t).
Woof. Making friends or enemies at home and across the world isn’t just down to politicians and foreign policies but down to each and every citizen and voter making every effort to include every neighbour and treating them as individuals and presuming them as innocent unless proven individually guilty. Peace rather than conflict across cultures and nations is down to each and every one of us doing our part to befriend rather than marginalise any strangers we meet.
Comment on this post by replying to this tweet:
