Альтруизм и терроризм

olga58

Сегодня, за обедом разговаривал с коллегой о альтруизме, религии и проч. И постпенно перешли к терроризму. У многих людей, альтруизм ассоциируется с чем-то хорошим. На мой взгляд, это нейтральное, как и почти все что есть в этом мире, свойство.
Основоной посыл статьи чуть ниже в том, что террористы взрывают себя из альтруистических побуждений.
 Я считаю, хоть возможно и есть более рациональные или "правильные" методы борьбы, но террористов все же надо уничтожать. Возможно, что искоренение общины, не обязательно через уничтожение, может уменьшить террористическую активность.
Статья: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/may/03/are-isla...
Are al-Qaida and the Taliban driven by the desire to help others?
It seems hard to countenance, but could academics be right in thinking that Islamist terrorists are driven by 'basically altruistic' thoughts?
Share
492
  
Comments (183)
 
Aditya Chakrabortty
The Guardian, Tuesday 3 May 2011
Article history
Osama bin Laden was the most famous terrorist in the world; he also served as the single biggest distraction from a serious analysis of the roots of terrorism. With his murderous version of Muslim piety and references to a 7th-century caliphate, the al-Qaida head helped define Islamist extremism as ideological, apocalyptic and imperialist. That story bore as much relation to the truth as a skinny man's reflection in a hall of mirrors – but it's the one that US and British politicians bought. Judging by yesterday's comments from US secretary of state Hillary Clinton and defence secretary Liam Fox, it's the version they still believe. Not only is that account wrong; some of the best academic research suggests that following it does little to tackle terrorism.
The conventional view of Islamist terrorism is the one set out by Clinton yesterday, of a "violent ideology that holds no value for human life": evil, inexplicable, and irreconcilable with any civilised values. Yet analysis from social scientists suggests the opposite.
However odd it may seem to use these terms of would-be jihadists and suicide bombers, some researchers describe Islamist terrorists as in the main rational, desperate figures operating in wrecked countries. Over the decades, two academics working in separate disciplines have come up with a particularly compelling, heavily researched account both of what Islamist terrorists are not, and of what drives them on.
The first is Ariel Merari, a psychologist who fought in the Arab-Israeli war of 1973 and has spent the past three decades studying the attitudes of terrorists. Some of his most notable work is on Palestinian suicide bombers. He has spoken to friends and families of suicide bombers, and even to would-be attackers who failed to detonate their explosive belts before being captured.
His first conclusion is that Palestinian suicide bombers are usually not suicidal. They aren't depressed, or otherwise mentally ill, nor do they tend to be drug or alcohol abusers. What's more, these supposed Islamic warriors aren't especially religious. By and large, they didn't suggest religion as their primary motivation, nor was there much hope of a glorious afterlife.
That fits with what we know of suicide bombers elsewhere. The organisation that carried out most suicide attacks in the late 20th century was the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka, nominally a neo-Marxist, atheist organisation. The PKK in Turkey is also secular and leftwing, but has encouraged members into suicide attacks.
What Merari's research shows is "a large pool of psychologically healthy, basically altruistic suicide attackers". That description comes from Eli Berman, at the University of California, San Diego. His use of the term "basically altruistic" is surely intended to be provocative, but what the economist means is that terrorists are often acting out of a desire to help others in their group. His work is full of other such terms that will raise hackles. But as someone who has spent years studying the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah and even the Mahdi Army in Iraq, he is someone you have to read to understand what drives terrorists.
A former Israeli soldier in the 1982 Lebanon war, what Berman stresses is that Islamic terrorist groups survive by providing vital infrastructure and social services. The breakthrough moment for the Taliban came in the mid-90s, when they were able to run a secure toll road from Kandahar in southern Afghanistan to Herat in the west of the country. In a notoriously unsafe country overrun by rival warlords, the Taliban showed they could provide a public utility, and that its militiamen could make a living from the tollroad business.
Berman's work is studded with similar examples. Hezbollah? It runs hospitals and schools, as well as provides a refuse collection service – and even manages an electricity grid. The academic describes these groups as economic clubs, whose members run these services, earning a living, preferential treatment, and popular support.
This is, of course, an economist's account: it is more concerned with incentives than mobilising ideologies and symbols. Berman is also more concerned with organisations than individuals. But if Bush and Obama – and Blair, Brown and Cameron – had followed his ideas they might have saved themselves a wasted decade in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Rather than winning hearts and minds, Berman suggests western powers should always have been focused on providing sewage and schools. Rather than occupying territory, the logical conclusion of his work is that foreign governments should have restricted themselves to supporting aid and development projects carried out by NGOs. The same principle would also apply to Israel's dealings with Hamas: Netanyahu would find it most productive to channel money and development projects into the Gaza Strip.
Some of the economist's prescriptions sound pedestrian and mechanical – do X and Y will happen. But they are no more simplistic than some of the actual policies followed in tackling Islamist extremism.
Towards the end of 2005, members of the Bush administration began making speeches on Osama's desire to establish an Islamic caliphate. One US general likened this supposed masterplan to the importance of Mein Kampf in setting out Hitler's worldview. Rubbish, warned experts – and they were right, of course. But it suited both Bush and Osama better to pretend such threats were in earnest.
The bottom line from reading Berman and Merari is this: Islamist terrorism is deadly and unjustifiable. But it is also, at its root, prosaic. Most of all, it is soluble.
____________________________________________________________________________________

olga58

ALTRUISTIC SUICIDE
According to Durkheim, altruistic suicide occurs when an individual is too highly integrated into
the collective. This individual understands himself solely in terms as a member of the group.
They are almost completely absorbed in the group and completely discard their individual
personalities for the idea that they have become servants (Durkheim 1951). Insufficient
individuation, as can be seen with terrorist suicide bombers, can make an individual feel it is
their duty to commit suicide for the betterment of the organization of a whole (Ritzer 1992).
Durkheim argues in effect that the relation of suicide rates to social regulation is curvilinear,
where high suicide rates are associated with both excessive individuation and excessive
regulation. Looking at excessive regulation, the demands of the organization are so great that
suicide varies directly rather than inversely with the degree of integration.
Hence an individual who strongly believes in a terrorist organization’s ideology and goals will
become a human-bomb and sacrifice himself for their cause. In the case of religious terrorist
organizations, “take an insane person obsessed by religious ideas who would be classified among
religious monomaniacs…He believes himself called upon to reform not only religion but also to
reform society; perhaps he will also imagine the highest sort of destiny reserved for himself”
(Durkheim 1951, p. 60-61). When an individual believes strongly enough in the collective, he
will do anything to help their cause.
__________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.ifpo.org/articlebank/Bakken_Suicide_Terrorism.pdf
Итак, если законодательно или как либо подргуому, уменьшить эту социальную связанность, то можно уменьшить тероризм. Например, можно раздавать маленькие квартиры, в которых не может поселяться целая община. Типа строить кучи однотипных много-этажек с однокомнатынми картирами в разных районах чечни, и всем подрят раздавать жилье. Причем эти дома ни вкоем случае не конгрегировать в одном месте. Еще, можно запретить одевать религиозные одежды, знаки в общественных местах.

MAKAR-61

Ну че логично, тоталитаризм как средство против терроризма. Не он первый это придумал.

olga58

терроризм идет от тоталиразима тоже. ведь чем менее индивидуален человек, чем больше он ассоциирует себя с общиной, тем легче ему пойти на альтруистический шаг терроризма. чем больше индивидуализма, тем меньше этого подобного терроризма.

MAKAR-61

Ну да наверное, готовность человека участвовать в какой-либо опасной деятельности, от взрыва в супермаркете до тушения пожара, зависит в том числе/иногда от его чувства сопричастности к своему обществу. Крайний индивидуалист, не верующий в Бога, не будет рвать за жопу, ни будет воевать, ни будет тушить, ни будет помогать другим.
Только я хотел сказать другое. Эффективно терроризм может быть побежден только в тоталитарном государстве. ИМХО к этому все и идет. На базе западной цивилизации строится на новом технологическом уровне тоталитарная структура, по сравнению с которым СССР с Рейхом покажутся детским садом. Делается это не то, чтобы специально, по логике вещей т.с., лозунг "борьбы с терроризмом" играет не последнюю роль в этой движухе.

olga58

нет, человеку свойственен альтруизм по его природе. поэтому, всегда будут люди прыгающие на гранаты, спасающие из под огня пожара. просто присутсвие религии уменьшает уровень принятия альтруистических решений, который и позволяет им взрывать людей.
Оставить комментарий
Имя или ник:
Комментарий: