Actions speak louder than.. ahem, narratives
by Charles Cameron | Jul 20, 2015 | Monitor |
[ by Charles Cameron — pondering the use of narratives to "counter violent extremism" ]
I'm pondering the use of narratives to "counter violent extremism", and have been thinking about letting this post consist of its title and the government-sponsored words:
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
I'm hoping this post will find its place in the comments section, in other words. If the opposing party — whether that means, effectively, IS, salafist-jihadis, the Ikhwan, or Islamists in general — pushes a narrative about US actions towards the Islamic world, can a narrative alone succeed at pushing back? What actions can we show that refute the simple form of that narrative? What actions might we take in future that would appear to affirm it? To refute it?
Are we so busy thinking about counter-narratives that we allow our actions to undercut our words?
Come to that, is the appeal of IS really its apocalyptic theology (which is what I mostly address), its success as a military force (which may be down to the presence of ex-Baathist military in high positions of command), its critique of US policy in respect of the Islamic world (dictatorships included), the prospect of adventure (and perhaps concubines?) in foreign lands, or, as Prof Andrew Silke would have it, altruism?
The key message is that you have got to see the terrorists as they see themselves if you genuinely want to understand why people are getting involved. If you talk to terrorist themselves, they portray themselves as altruists – they see themselves as fighting on behalf of others, whether it's the IRA fighting on behalf of the Catholic community in Northern Ireland, or if it's Islamic State fighting on behalf of the Muslim ummah.
I suspect there's a lot to be said here, and the floor is open. I'm eager to hear your voices..