Radicalization to Violence: A View from Cultural Psychiatry

Abstract

This article introduces a thematic issue of Transcultural Psychiatry with selected papers from the McGill Advanced Study Institute in Cultural Psychiatry on “Pluralism and Polarization: Cultural Contexts and Dynamics of Radicalization,” which took place June 20–22, 2017. The ASI brought together an interdisciplinary group scholars to consider the role of social dynamics, cultural contexts and psychopathology in radicalization to violent extremism. Papers addressed four broad topics: (1) current meanings and uses of the term radicalization; (2) personal and social determinants of violent radicalization, including individual psychology, interpersonal dynamics, and wider social-historical, community and network processes; (3) social and cultural contexts and trajectories of radicalization including the impact of structural and historical forces associated with colonization and globalization as well as contemporary political, economic and security issues faced by youth and disaffected groups; and (4) approaches to community prevention and clinical intervention to reduce the risk of violent radicalization. In this introductory essay, we revisit these themes, define key terms, and outline some of the theoretical and empirical insights in the contributions to this issue. Efforts to prevent violent radicalization face challenges because social media and the Internet allow the rapid spread of polarizing images and ideas. The escalation of security measures and policies also serves to confirm the worldview of conspiracy theory adherents. In addition to addressing the structural inequities that fuel feelings of anger and resentment, we need to promote solidarity among diverse communities by building a pluralistic civil society that offers a meaningful alternative to the violent rhetorics of us and them.

Making Sense of Schizoposting

“…In particular, the “alt-right,” an abbreviation of “alternative right,” described by Rieger et al (2021) as a “loosely connected and largely online-based political movement, whose ideology centers around ideas of White-supremacy, anti-establishmentarianism, and anti-immigration” (p. 3) has been identified as a salient breeding ground of online radicalization (Mølmen & Ravndal, 2021; Munn, 2019). The candidacy and presidency of Donald Trump, as well as the global COVID-19 pandemic—and its myriad of associated conspiracy theories—have been linked to an acceleration of online engagement in these movements (Rieger et al, 2021; Rousseau et al, 2021). The “involuntary celibate” or “incel” movement is another realm in which such perspectives are prominent (Moskalenko et al, 2022).…”

“…In particular, much attention has shifted to so-called “homegrown terrorists,” predominantly young, White men who have engaged in hateful, violent discourses online before engaging in acts of mass violence (Schulze et al, 2022). Many scholars have identified the presidency of Donald Trump and the COVID-19 pandemic as accelerants to an already extant trend (Rieger et al, 2021; Rousseau et al, 2021; Schulze et al, 2022). Mental health concerns of those who display signs of online radicalization are identified as predominant and a potential contributing factor to this process.…”

Self‐representation and future perception of youth followed by a specialized intervention team in violent radicalization

“…Radicalization can be defined as shifting from a moderate point of view to an extreme, rigid, and uncompromising view that demands drastic societal changes, although not necessarily through violence (Schmid, 2013). As (Rousseau et al., 2021) mentioned, « radical thinkers may be vital to human inventiveness, the creation of culture, and the critique of hide‐bound institutions and oppressive structures. Radicalization to violence entails an acceptance of ‐ or commitment to ‐ violent means for achieving social change ».…”

“…Youth are particularly sensitive to these global tensions; they develop their individual and collective identity and awareness of the world (Harris-Hogan et al, 2016). Mental health disorders (i.e., symptoms with impairment and subsequent poor social integration) make youth further vulnerable to violent radicalization (Bhui et al, 2016(Bhui et al, , 2019Rousseau et al, 2021;Zainab, 2020). The literature highlights that mental health disorders are more present among the « lone actors.» These isolated perpetrators of violent acts, who often hold radical ideas, may suffer from a mood or a psychotic disorder or have experienced adverse events throughout childhood and adulthood (Cerfolio et al, 2022;Misiak et al, 2019).…”

Peace strategies and approaches for resolving the conflict of terrorism in Indonesia

“…In the last decade, acts of terrorism have been considered capable of hindering Indonesia from fulfilling its national interests, such as endangering the sovereignty of the state, the safety of the entire nation, and the territorial integrity of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI) (Pratiwi et al 2020). By leveraging information technology development, now violence extremism has become one of the central issues in national security because it can strengthen its global network (Coman et al, 2021) discusses the conflict, then there are at least two aspects of the spotlight, namely the perpetrators of war and conflict victims (Rousseau, Aggarwal, and Kirmayer 2021). Violent conflicts carried out by perpetrators of acts of terrorism can produce victims on a reasonably large scale.…”