Terrorism, Identity, and Conflict Management

Abstract

Social psychological research on the consequences and antecedents of terrorism are reviewed, and implications for conflict management are discussed. The research is theoretically and socially interesting because it deals with the intersection of identity and psychological threat with political choices in conflict. A model of identity politics and agentic normative influence is described which draws attention to the importance of stopping the spread of terrorist identity and norms as the key challenge in counter‐terrorism. An identity politics approach would argue that terrorists should be defined narrowly, while non‐violent leaders of the terrorists’ constituents should be recognized and rewarded as representatives of their constituents. As such, the analysis suggests a pessimistic prospect for terror in the 2010s.

Predicting aggressive collective action based on the efficacy of peaceful and aggressive actions

“…Hence, “the gun and the olive branch” interaction we found indicates we may need to qualify the claim that people resort to aggressive collective action only when peaceful means of change are perceived as ineffective (e.g., Bloom, ; Crenshaw, ; Louis, ; Pruitt & Gahagan, ). Our results suggest that in contexts where both peaceful and aggressive actions are in use, people resort to aggressive collective action as long as it seems efficacious, even if peaceful action also seems efficacious.…”

“…The perceived efficacy of peaceful collective action, however, is also likely to play a role in predicting aggressive collective action. Researchers have long theorized that people are more likely to resort to political violence when peaceful alternatives are seen as ineffective at addressing grievances (Bloom, ; Crenshaw, ; Louis, ; Pruitt & Gahagan, ), given that aggressive/violent collective action is typically riskier than peaceful collective action (e.g., Stephan & Chenoweth, ; Wright, ). Accordingly, increasing the perceived efficacy of peaceful forms of action is thought to help reduce or prevent political violence.…”

Doing Democracy: The Social Psychological Mobilization and Consequences of Collective Action

“…Even where (especially when) it is difficult or costly for individuals to act, it is meaningful and moral to sacrifice for the group. Sacrifice of individuals to benefit a wider group is widespread, not just in warrior contexts (e.g., Louis, 2009a, 2009b; Louis & Taylor, 2002) but among all groups, from academics reviewing journal articles to citizens taking the time to vote. This dynamic is highly important in any collective enterprise.…”

“…Recent work identifies a lack of efficacy in a routine “normative” political process as a determinant of support for more extreme or disruptive forms of action (e.g., Tausch et al, 2011; see also Louis, 2009b). Other research shows that after joint decision‐making, groups often shift further in the direction of individuals’ initial views: conventional groups may become more staid, but radical groups become more radical.…”

Are They Terrorist Sympathizers or do They Just Disagree with the War on Terror? A Comment on Testing Theories of Radicalization in Polls of U.S. Muslims

“…The War on Terror is a complex and pluralistic set of intergroup conflicts in which collective identity is paramount (Louis, ). There are many voices seeking to represent different groups.…”