 Green logo_transparent background_blackfont.webp)
MUIS Academy - Commentaries
Religious extremism, Islamophobia and reactive co-radicalisation: The circular problem by ISIS
12 April 2016
Society
The closed-door discussion on Reactive Coradicalisation was held on 12 April 2016. It was attended by about 40 participants from faith communities, academic institutions, public agencies, local NGOs and educational institutes.
The session explored the following questions – how does negative fear-based discourse about the “Other” lead to reactive co-radicalization? What is the impact of reactive co-radicalisation? And how can it be avoided effectively?
The session proposed that, the long-term exposure to extremely negative portrayals of Muslims and Islam, whether by the media or extreme forms of Islam, has led to an internalisation of a heightened and exaggerated fear of all Muslims and Islam based on the uncritical assumptions that they are an existentiallythreatening hostile homogeneous “Other.”
The planting of fear begins to change attitudes, where extremely negative and uncritical views of Muslims are gradually becoming accepted mainstream narratives. These are then at times translated into exclusionary and eliminative rhetoric, actions and policies.
This is particularly pronounced in the West, but it may also be observed in any society that operates with a model of secularism that tolerates the presence of “Others” and expects their conformation, without affirming the value of their uniqueness and particularities.
Dr Pratt argues that exclusionary and eliminative rhetoric, policies and actions are themselves an inadvertent form of radical thinking and extreme action, namely reactive co-radicalisation. There are far reaching ramifications that are born from co-radicalisation. Firstly, it is ineffective in engaging or restraining radicals. Instead, it victimises innocent parties. 7 Negative rhetoric, such as the counter-jihad movements, angry outlashes, such as the vandalization of mosques in the wake of terror attacks, and policies that are aimed at curtailing religious practise or excluding Muslims from various ranks only perpetuate mistrust, victimisation and marginalisation of wellmeaning Muslim citizens and tarnish the religion.
Furthermore, such forms of ‘anti-Other’ extremism give rise to critical intellectuals and activists who identify such trends, analyse, critique and challenge them. Failing to engage such thought leaders could aggravate social tension, deepen mutual mistrust, and leave the disenfranchised with little recourse save apathy, withdrawal, and isolation; or confrontation, revolt and rebellion, which may gradually become violent; or a nuanced middle path.
Participants from the different faith groups validated the session’s proposition that there can be a vicious cycle, where fear breeds fear. They proposed various ways to build and strengthen deep and meaningful social relations that plant love for, rather than fear of people who are different from us in our hearts. Significant among them are the need to advocate inclusive policies that promote diversity; cultivate social trust and cohesion, religious and cultural literacy, positive ethics, and common values; and sharpen critical thought and nuanced understanding.
The participants, who were inspired by Singapore’s experience, cited multiculturalism and people’s attitudes as primary pillars that maintain a positively inclusive society. Firstly, social, housing, educational and language policies ensured that Singaporeans today are a well-informed, educated, discerning and connected citizenry who value diversity.
Secondly, people’s attitude allowed them to willingly and meaningfully deepen and strengthen their multi-religious and multi-racial fabric; and to reconcile challenging issues with patience and wisdom. They also affirmed that Singaporeans will endure and rebuild stronger ties in the event that radicalism makes its mark here.
Nonetheless, this must not be taken for granted. Singaporeans must continue to nurture such a culture, uphold the ethos, and cherish the diversity. It is a journey and not a destination.