Synopsis the Trouble With Radicalization

¶ … radicalization" is a feeble attempt at confusing the reader and providing a misguided and ambiguous approach to the term and conflates this idea with the problems of modern society and politics. The article still holds value however by exposing the true confusion the author readily admits to containing. The purpose of this essay is to review this article and its main arguments and its relevance to local transnational network of violent actors. Also, this essay will explore how radicalization is relevant to ethnic or sectarian conflict.

The author is clear in this article that confusion is abound when discussing radical movements and the term radical itself. The author begins his article by saying so: " radicalization is not a myth, but its meaning is ambiguous, and all the major controversies and debates that have sprung from it are linked to the same inherent ambiguity, " (p.873). To support this claim, the author divides the idea into two viewpoints: cognitive radicalization and behavioral radicalization.

The article continues by presenting both positive and negative connotations about each aspect of the argument. Here is where Neumann is most effective at pinpointing the inanity of even trying to transform an idea into a military/political weapon. For example, when discussing the radical movements of the late 18th century in America, a positive spin is placed on the idea of revolution and drifting away from the mainstream . However, this idea is short lived as this very same movement provides an inherent and historic fear of radical thought.

To help understand this idea better, the author presents two specific and narrow viewpoints to help grasp it. The first is the Anglo Saxon approach. This idea suggests that "from this perspective, freedom of speech is near absolute, and people's political views, however extreme, anti-democratic, offensive or divisive, are none of the government's business as long as they are expressed peacefully and do not inhibit others' right to do the same." The other viewpoint is the European approach: " The European approach aims to confront cognitive and behavioral radicalization, but places more emphasis on the former." In other words this is an exercise in mind reading and prophecy.

The author's premise that the attacks of 9-11 were committed by radical Islamist terrorists is quite laughable in today's world where it is obvious this staged attack was something quite different and even more radical than the author can imagine. Sectarian and ethnic conflicts rarely serve as a direct national or global threat, especially in a world where governments, mainstream and non-radical elements, are responsible for the lion's share of all mass murder, incarceration and general unease throughout.