SummaryExtremism means, "driving (something) to the limit, to the extreme." Nowadays, the term is mostly being used in a political or religious sense, for an ideology that is considered (by the speaker) to be far outside the (acceptable) mainstream attitudes of society. Extremism is a complex phenomenon, although its complexity is often hard to see. Most simply, it can be defined as activities (beliefs, attitudes, feelings, actions, strategies) of a character far removed from the ordinary. In conflict settings it manifests as a severe form of conflict engagement. However, the labeling of activities, people, and groups as "extremist", and the defining of what is "ordinary" in any setting is always a subjective and political matter. Typically, any extremist act will be viewed by some as just and moral, and by others as unjust and immoral depending on the observer's values, politics, moral scope, and the nature of their relationship with the actor. In addition, one's sense of the moral or immoral nature of a given act of extremism may change as conditions (leadership, world opinion, crises, historical accounts, etc.) change. Thus, the current and historical context of extremist acts shapes our view of them. Power differences also matter when defining extremism. When in conflict, the activities of members of low power groups tend to be viewed as more extreme than similar activities committed by members of groups advocating the status quo. In addition, extreme acts are more likely to be employed by marginalized people and groups who view more normative forms of conflict engagement as blocked for them or biased. However, dominant groups also commonly employ extreme activities. Although extremist individuals and groups are often viewed as cohesive and consistently evil, it is important to recognize that they may be conflicted or ambivalent psychologically as individuals, or contain difference and conflict within their groups. Western observers agonize over the violence and extremism that so often characterizes the religious world today. Some try to explain the conflicts in terms of a troubled imperial past, while others, more sweepingly, blame rampant fanaticism on the faith of a religion, and even on their holy book itself. Both accounts, though, are short-sighted, lacking any serious historical perspective. Nor do they acknowledge the demographic factors that so powerfully shape religious change. Ultimately, we think the core problem that extremism presents in situations of protracted conflict is less the severity of the activities (although violence, trauma, and escalation are obvious concerns) but more so the closed, fixed, and intolerant nature of individual or small group extremist attitudes.
|
Religious Fundamentalism |
The drive to religious fundamentalism, or a return to the basics of the religion include:
|
Extremism |
|