YOUTH, IDEOLOGY, AND TERRORISM

Adolescent Psychiatry, 2003 by Flaherty, Lois T

Ye that tell us of harmony and reconciliation, can ye restore to us the time that is past? Can ye give to prostitution its former innocence? Neither can ye reconcile Britain and America. The last cord now is broken, the people of England are presenting addresses against us. There are injuries which nature cannot forgive; she would cease to be nature if she did. As well can the lover forgive the ravisher of his mistress, as the continent forgive the murders of Britain [pp. 41-42].

Destruction of the existing world order is seen as necessary. Fundamentalists maintain that modern society is degenerate and debased, the corruption of a golden age; the cure for this corruption is to return to the original state "before the fall." Marxists believe that society must progress toward an ideal state; they differ in whether this can occur in gradual fashion or must involve revolution. Racists maintain that racial purity must be restored through exclusion of undesirable groups from the gene pool. All of these groups focus on destroying what exists, often with little sense of what will take its place. They speak of an apocalypse that will involve destruction of the existing world order, whether this be Armageddon, a race war, or a jihad.

Compromise and power sharing are rejected. To compromise is seen as surrender, selling out, or allowing oneself to be corrupted. There is only good or evil, no in-between state. The struggle between good and evil is a zero-sum game-there can be only one winner. Thus, John Adams proclaimed, "The middle way is no way at all. If we finally fail in this great and glorious contest, it will be by bewildering ourselves in groping for the middle way" (quoted in McCullough, 2001, p. 101). Patrick Henry, in his famous give-me-liberty-or-give-me-death speech, pleaded, "Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years." He concluded, "There is no longer any room for hope. . . . We must fight! . . . An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!" (Vaughan, 1997, p. 83)

A new world order is envisioned. Thoreau, in advocating for civil disobedience, aligned himself with Christ, Copernicus, Luther, Washington, and Franklin (1849). Paine and many others saw the American colonies as linked historically to ancient Israel, and the new nation that would emerge from revolution as a "New Jerusalem," free of the corruption of Europe (indeed, the term New World reflects a similar connotation).

The end justifies the means. A corollary of absolute conviction of the righteousness of one's cause is that extreme measures are justified in bringing about what is envisioned as a new world order, whether this be justice for the oppressed, a Utopian society, a messianic age, or a theocracy. It is a short step to violence, if non-violent methods fail to work or work too slowly. Thoreau (1849), who never engaged in violent protest, saw opposition to unjust laws as necessary, "even if blood should flow" (p. 231). For the Taliban, the use of terror to enforce their interpretation of Islam is seen as necessary to free people from their addiction to sin (Maley, 1998).