CONVERTING TO VIOLENCE
The terms “Radical Islam” or “Islamic Terrorism” are political hot potatoes. There are endless cable news and social media “debates” on whether or not the terms should be used. In one corner is the “using the terms is offensive and cause more terrorism” camp and in the opposing corner is team “you can’t defeat an enemy you don’t name”. This debate is rooted in philosophy and neither side can probably be proven right. So let’s shift the focus of the debate, with some facts and numbers indicating there is a problem.
Studies have noted converts to Islam are overrepresented in extremist activities when compared to those raised in the religion, but research into what causes converts to radicalize at such a high rate is lacking. A paper published by George Washington University found 40% of those arrested for ISIL related activities, in the United States, were converts to Islam. Yet only 23% of the Islamic population in the United States are converts. Another study from the Naval Postgraduate School found 20% of the individuals who traveled from Germany to fight for ISIL were converts, yet shockingly only 0.3% — 4.5% of the Islamic population in Germany are converts. The disproportionate number of converts to Islam taking part in radical activities is alarming, and the cause should be explored.
Initially, some hypotheses come to mind:
- Conversion implies social disaffection, leading to search for radical social movements. In other words, a radical looking for a cause.
- Conversion to Islam leads to ostracism, leading some to radicalize.
- Individuals who convert are already susceptible to new ideas, and the cognitive opening leads to viewing extremism as acceptable.
Identifying a common trait in the conversion process (if there is one), which causes an individual to become an extremist, would be useful in learning to shape policy aimed at the prevention of extremism. The policy of how to “prevent” this last decade has been a little unclear from both sides of the aisle. Further, in this blogger’s opinion proactive prevention is always better policy than a reactive response. Let’s stop being zombies and chasing the shiny objects by having debates about whether or not we use certain terms. These debates can’t be won and serve no purpose. Think critically and be more concerned with what is clearly a problem. The disproportionate number of Islamic converts involved in radical activities is startling, and needs to be addressed. Researching why converts are more susceptible to radicalization is a tall order and would require graduate level thesis work. I might have an idea…
Please tell us your thoughts. We would love to carry the discussion further. The views in this post represent one member of the Zombie Breakdown team, and are not shared by the whole group.
**********
For more information on the numbers cited above please see:
George Washington University report:
https://cchs.gwu.edu/isis-in-america
Naval Postgraduate School report:
http://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/handle/10945/51939/Reynolds_Hafez_German%20fighters_Syria_2017.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Report on convert numbers:
https://www.icct.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/ICCT-Schuurman-Grol-Flower-Converts-June-2016.pdf
