Terrorism - Fueled by Poverty ?

[cardosino]

Not according to this guy, interesting article though.

http://www.memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SD85305

"These people who hold sway over the minds of the youth have deceived them into thinking that what they are doing is an act of Jihad that will bring them to paradise. These youth should ask themselves why it is that these people prefer them [i.e., the youth] to themselves, and give up for their sake [the merit of carrying out] the 'honorable' deed that would bring them to paradise.

 

[sharky]

I think poverty is part of the issue -- paying a family with a "martyr" -- but this is a valid point. Does bin Laden think he is so great that he can't die or his cause will die? and what does that say about the true point of his cause? Same with Arafat -- in the end, he never tried to stop the suicide bombers in Israel and yet died in a hospital in Paris for some undisclosed thing.

 

[Irvine511]

it's all about humiliation.

 

[nbcrusader]

Could it be spiritual poverty? The risk/reward picture painted by some of the extremists make life after death pretty damn appealing by worldly standards.

 

[melon]

Well, the biggest problem is that "poverty," in general, is highly politicized. Talk to groups that really support supply-side economics. They'll blame all the world's ills on everything *except* poverty.

However, it cannot be ignored. I think it is a part of the equation. People want one thing, really, and that's dignity. Most of these Arab governments, though, are barely functional. If the government cannot provide basic needs, such as education and employment, religion (and, by extension, terrorist groups that use religion) will take their place. Has anyone ever bothered to ask why Hamas is so powerful? It may be designated as a terrorist organization by Israel and the United States, but in the Arab world, it is highly respected even by the Palestinian Authority, because it, for years, has provided an infrastructure where government has failed. Of course, this is why Hamas is successful as a terrorist organization, and until the Palestinian Authority can provide stability, education, and jobs (for reference, something like 70% of Gaza/West Bank is unemployed), Hamas will remain respected. And I hate to say it, but the Bush Doctrine will do little to stop extremism in the long run. Iraq has devolved into extremism, because its infrastructure is demolished.

On the flip side, Iran, for all the bad press, is a relatively stable nation that happens to have horrid clerics running the show. For comparison, though, 70% of Iranians polled have a favorable view of Americans. I would strongly suggest that Bush not provoke a war with Iran lightly, because destroying their infrastructure to topple their government will breed extremism, and I tend to think that that 70% approval rating will drop immensely.

But, really, if the people of the Arab world have a reason to be alive, they will be less focused on the afterlife. As it stands, rampant unemployment and weak, corrupt governments do not make "being alive" seem that appealing.

Melon

 

[verte76]

He raises some really good points. Why do these kids from affluent families go off and become terrorists? It's obviously not a matter of poverty in this case. It's brainwashing with an extreme interpretation of Islam, as some big shots, like the guy who's in charge of the mosque in Mecca have pointed out.

 

[verte76]

Great post melon. 70% unemployment is not something anyone looks forward to. It's true, these leaders haven't really delivered for their people. This is so confusing and complex. There aren't any simple answers.

 

[strannix]

People resort to extremism when they have grievances that go unaddressed. It can be poverty, or it might be something else.

The thing is, extremists are typically pretty straightforward about their goals and their motivations. I've been a bit puzzled for some time as to all the head-scratching, by those throughout the political spectrum.

 

[Sherry Darling]

This was a great thread on the same issue. My thoughts are there, no need to bore folks by repeating myself.


http://forum.interference.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=101827


Melon, good to see you back 'round these parts.

Irvine, you'd enjoy a book called Violence by James Giligan--it contains quite a bit of proof that, indeed, shame is the trigger for violent acts. Right on.

SD

 

[U2Kitten]

No, I think it's caused by religious and cultural factors. Muhammad Atta was the son of a wealthy doctor. Osama Bin Laden's family are billionaires.

On the other side of the coin, how many terrorists do you see coming from subsaharan Africa, or the hillside slums of Mexico City, or the coal fields of Appalachia where poverty is very high? NONE! Why? Because they do not have that mentality in their culture and mindset. It's not the poverty, it's religion and culture.

 

[Irvine511]

sense of humiliation. sense of humiliation. senese of humiliation.

 

[U2Kitten]

If it were all about humiliation, everyone in my neighborhood would be suicide bombers.

 

[melon]

No, I think it's caused by religious and cultural factors. Muhammad Atta was the son of a wealthy doctor. Osama Bin Laden's family are billionaires.

But all leaders need followers; otherwise, there is no terrorist organization. Likewise, Bush is president, because we, as "followers," give him the authority. If we ignored him, he'd be nothing. In what I said, I was mostly focusing on the followers.

The leadership does tend to be the most ideologically driven, but they recruit followers by providing infrastructure and stability that their governments cannot provide. The principle is that "you don't bite the hand that feeds you."

On the other side of the coin, how many terrorists do you see coming from subsaharan Africa, or the hillside slums of Mexico City, or the coal fields of Appalachia where poverty is very high? NONE! Why? Because they do not have that mentality in their culture and mindset. It's not the poverty, it's religion and culture.

I think it's a logical stretch. There are terrorists in subsaharan Africa, actually. The illicit diamond trade is said to partly fund Al Qaeda. There have also been bombings on embassies in Africa, and Sudan was the target of a precision strike against terrorists during the Clinton Administration. So, yes, there are terrorism concerns in subsaharan Africa.

Using Mexico City and Appalachia as examples operates under the assumption that "poverty=crime." No, not all poor people are criminals, and we see that every day. But, conversely, a lot of criminals suffer from poverty; not all poor people are criminals, but a lot of criminals are poor and desperate. It is on such poverty and desperation that Al Qaeda feeds on. If we ignore this, then I believe we will miss a key tool in truly preventing terrorism.

Melon

 

[Irvine511]

but they live in the most optimistic society on earth.

i agree with you -- it's not about poverty, and religious/cultural factors play a large role.

but the most important factor is humiliation.

 

[melon]

World War II was said to come from the widespread humiliation thrust upon Germany after World War I. Hitler's rise to power was mainly based on him giving Germans pride and confidence.

At least following World War II, we learned our lesson. Rather than severely punishing Germany, Italy, and Japan, we rebuilt them. All three are stable now. Of course, I know this is why Bush is trying to rebuild Iraq, but he failed on one key point: he brought in all the American multinational corporations to rebuild Iraq, fuelling the perception that we invaded Iraq not to "liberate," but to make money off of Iraq. We should have tried to give Iraqis the tools to rebuild their nation themselves. Of course, I'm going to admit that Iraq is more complicated than that.

Melon

 

[U2Kitten]

Using Mexico City and Appalachia as examples operates under the assumption that "poverty=crime." No, not all poor people are criminals, and we see that every day. But, conversely, a lot of criminals suffer from poverty; not all poor people are criminals, but a lot of criminals are poor and desperate. It is on such poverty and desperation that Al Qaeda feeds on. If we ignore this, then I believe we will miss a key tool in truly preventing terrorism.

Melon

This is what I was trying to say, that NO poverty does not cause terrorism or why aren't all poor people, or at least all poor cultures, terrorists? The terrorism that threatens the world today is caused by the beliefs of some Muslim fundamentalists, and that is the root of the problem.

 

[melon]

The terrorism that threatens the world today is caused by the beliefs of some Muslim fundamentalists, and that is the root of the problem.

But if the governments they lived in were stable enough to provide secular education (or, at least, mainstream religious education), then the leadership would fail. Flat out.

We will never be able to eliminate Muslim fundamentalism. Period. You can kill people, but you cannot kill ideas. But you can create an environment where the fundamentalists are no longer the majority and are seen as nothing more than a bunch of fringe lunatics that no one takes seriously anymore.

Melon

 

[diamond]

i dont remember an epidemic of terrorism springing forward when the usa was in the depths of the great depreesion.

envy and hate cause terrorism
not economics.

db9

 

[U2Kitten]

We will never be able to eliminate Muslim fundamentalism. Period. You can kill people, but you cannot kill ideas.

True.

But if the governments they lived in were stable enough to provide secular education (or, at least, mainstream religious education), then the leadership would fail. Flat out.


But you can create an environment where the fundamentalists are no longer the majority and are seen as nothing more than a bunch of fringe lunatics that no one takes seriously anymore.

Melon

Hey, now you sound just like W! That's his plan!

 

[Irvine511]

Hey, now you sound just like W! That's his plan!

from my perspective, i have no problems with democracy in the Middle East; i do, however, have HUGE problems with the way W is going about realizing democracy in the Middle East.

what you speak of is not his plan, but W's goal. the goal is a good one. it's the plan that's completely FUBAR, imho.

 

[U2Kitten]

Democracy is not part of their culture, they don't want it and it's not our place to force it on them, but W's means or yours. That's one reason they hate us, it's arrogant and insulting really, we think our way is the best way and they want it, but they don't want to be like us!

 

[melon]

Hey, now you sound just like W! That's his plan!

I frankly doubt his sincerity, really. Bush cannot say "no" to the Christian fundamentalists in our midst, so why should I really believe he has a commitment to secularism? If I earnestly could trust a word he said, my attitude to this war on terrorism might be very different.

Words are meaningless, if we are constantly looking for Orwellian motivations behind them. Is "freedom" really about "freedom," or is it just about opening their economic markets for our consumption (i.e., Iraqi oil)?

Melon

 

[melon]

i dont remember an epidemic of terrorism springing forward when the usa was in the depths of the great depreesion.

envy and hate cause terrorism
not economics.

db9

The Great Depression had plenty of organized crime. Think Al Capone and John Dillinger.

"Envy and hate" are effects, not causes. People don't "envy and hate" for no reason.

Melon

 

[Scarletwine]

Great points Melon
and want my "It's great to have you back".

I agree w's goals are great it's the means that suck

 

[Ft. Worth Frog]

Capone made money off prohibition which was overturned in 1933. And one thing historians often are struck by is the lack of overwhelming violence during the Depression. This is not to say that there was a complete lack of violence because there were many cases, but it was not at the level to be expected. Americans proved to be very resilient and even hopeful for quite awhile. Believe me, American reactions could have been much worse.

 

[U2Kitten]

The Great Depression had plenty of organized crime. Think Al Capone and John Dillinger.


Melon

True, and the 'hood' has gangs and shootouts just like the days of prohibition. So poverty DOES certainly breed crime, but there is a difference between that and terrorism. Those poor who steal only want personal financial gain for themselves, while terrorists don't want money or anything for themselves and are even willing to die, they just want victory for their cause and defeat to the infidel!

 

[U2Kitten]

Capone made money off prohibition which was overturned in 1933. And one thing historians often are struck by is the lack of overwhelming violence during the Depression. This is not to say that there was a complete lack of violence because there were many cases, but it was not at the level to be expected. Americans proved to be very resilient and even hopeful for quite awhile. Believe me, American reactions could have been much worse.

That's another thing I want to bring up, that poverty not only breeds crime it breeds revolution. Hatred and resentment of the class system, and hopelessness of poverty led directly to the French and Russian Revolutions where the poor masses rose up to overthrow- and kill off- the rich ruling class. But again, this is not the same thing as terrorism. In crime, the criminals only want money for their own gain. In revolution, a group of people fight to change the system for (what they think at the time is but doesn't always work out to be) the good of the country. Terrorism is a completely different phenomenon, and I don't have to list the details, you all know how it works. All I'm saying is it's not the same thing as the violence in crime or revolution, both of which ARE direct results of poverty.

I believe that those whose plan it is to make the terrorists happy by giving them money and democracy (be it W or the liberals who hate him) are barking up the wrong tree because they don't want it, that's making them like us, and they don't want to be like us! Some of you think they're jealous of us and that's why they do it but it's not like that because jealousy means you envy what someone has and want it for yourself and that's not the case here.

 

[strannix]

I wish I knew what Bush was trying to do. I don't think anyone can say with a straight face that he's applied his "Democracy for all!" principles with any kind of consistent or meaningful basis. And thank God for that, because we'd all be dead.

It appears that he's just talking up democracy because it sounds good. The only accomplishments he talks about in this regard are Iraq and Afghanistan, although of course he gave different reasons for military action against those countries at the time. I can't think of any other actions we've taken to promote democracy, and Bush certainly doesn't give any to help me out.

All of this is kind of a roundabout way for me to say that I don't think his "democracy promotion" agenda has much to do with stopping terrorism. And even if it did, he's kinda barking up the wrong tree; think the ETA or the IRA, both organizations that operate in democratic societies. Or remember the OKC bombing.

 

[melon]

Those poor who steal only want personal financial gain for themselves, while terrorists don't want money or anything for themselves and are even willing to die, they just want victory for their cause and defeat to the infidel!

Again, in the scheme of "cause and effect," why do they have their "cause" and why do they want "defeat to the infidel"?

There is no such thing as unabated "pure evil." Even the most malicious of people think they are doing "good." So what is the problem and why are they using "terrorism" as the "solution"?

It is said that most people are complacent, as long as they are well fed and have their needs met. Guaranteed, if the U.S. became a dictatorship and had rampant unemployment, we would devolve into similar violence.

Melon

 

[U2Kitten]

It is said that most people are complacent, as long as they are well fed and have their needs met. Guaranteed, if the U.S. became a dictatorship and had rampant unemployment, we would devolve into similar violence.

Melon

No, we wouldn't. We might resort to crime to feed ourselves, or a revolution to oust the government, but we'd never become suicide bombers against some overseas nation we didn't like because we wanted them to die for not being like us. Not gonna happen. Never.