by Jim Rose in applied price theory, economics of religion, human capital, occupational choice Tags: economics of oppositional identities, Jihadists, radical Islam

Each generation has its defining oppositional identity.

Radical Islam is the oppositional identity of choice for today’s angry young men and women. Mind you, they have to buy Islam for dummies to understand what they’re signing up for in the most crude way.

In previous generations, it was communism, the Red Brigade, weird religious sects, eco-terrorism, animal liberationist terrorism and a variety of domestic terrorists of the left and right with conspiratorial motivations. Look at the level of diversity of the angry young men and women on the domestic terrorists list of the FBI.

Plenty of young people were attracted to communism in previous generations as a way of sticking it to the man.

The appeal of radical Islam Islamic State rests on what psychologists call personal significance. The quest for personal significance by these angry young men and women is the desire to matter, to be respected, to be somebody in one’s own eyes and in the eyes of others.

A person’s sense of significance may be lost for many reasons, including economic conditions. The anger can grow out of a sense of disparagement and discrimination; it can come from a sense that one’s brethren in faith are being humiliated and disgraced around the world.

Extremist ideologies be they communism, fascism or extreme religions are effective in such circumstances because it offers a quick-fix remedy to a perceived loss of significance and an assured way to regain it. It accomplishes this by exploiting primordial instincts for aggression, sex and revenge.

The Islamic State is using a social-networking website to answer mundane questions from aspiring militants. They want answers on what to wear, how cold it gets, access to medical and dental services, if they have to buy their own weapons, whether there is wi-fi, and how soon they can capture women to rape. the answer to the last question is “Dawlah [ISIS] sorts that out”.

The two brothers responsible for the attacks in Paris were known to French intelligence but were not seen as not much of a threat because they were judged to be dope smoking, 30 something has been Jihadists. They were thought by the French intelligence services to have aged out of radical jihad.

The main difference between the two brothers in France and a common garden spree killer is their grievance was given a narrative of radical Islam rather than just the plain old hate that drives other spree killers.

Radical Islam is a magnet for wannabe spree killers who need a support network and a bit of rationalisation to pluck up the courage to kill unarmed people who can’t fight back.