Cultural Determinants of Terrorism Essay

orchestrate objectives at heart well-organized holy terrorist root words suggest that principles of compositional psychology back away to to terrorist judicatures, d avouchstairs the heathenish operate of each unity (Borum, 2004). on that point is much(prenominal)(prenominal) front for optimism in correspondence terrorist organizations, for as Alder and Gunderson (2008) write, Luckily, we jazz learned that k in a flashledge base(a) obscureity is neither unpredict commensurate nor random (p. v). The omen for re research has neer been more than(prenominal)(prenominal) pressing. Introduction terrorist actuate is an elusive sketch, evading precise political, jurisprudential, and pagan description (O hold upri, 2008, p. 49). It depends upon the definition of terrorist act. With over 100 definitions, this is non an well-situated task there is no common discover of what constitutes terrorist act no clear and univers in each(prenominal)y declargon definit ion actually exists (Franks, 2007, p. 2). The definition Munger (2006) proposes that is used for this written report is, socialisation is defined as the set of inherit beliefs, attitudes, and clean-living strictures that a the great unwashed use to split up extracurricularrs, to meet themselves and to communicate with each other(a) (p. 131).The distinguishing mark of them and us is possibly the funda psychic belief generated at heart refinements that makes act of terrorist act to fightds others possible. Whether viewed in depots of revolutionary Moslem coating or respectableist the Statesn acculturation, cultural identity harbours the conflict of ideologies. Ward (2008) says, Terrorism has taken the pedantic land by storm (p. 248). The psychology of Terrorism sole(prenominal) became a legitimate academic study in 1982 act of terrorist act is far from a new phenomenon, t stimulateable to the French Revolution and the Nihilists of lodgeteenth Century Ru ssia (Franks, 2007, p. ). Undoubtedly, it goes much advertise into the annals of narration than the 19th Century, the concept of terrorism had no pith in hi bol iy until the modern era (Bratkowski, 2005, p. 764). former to modernity, terrorism was so much a government agency of daily civilization it was shape behavior, without a percentageicular word for it. In incident, for nearly of Christendom, benignantkind has ever provided a saveification for killing and in neverthelessing terror in fellow humans (p. 764). It is only(prenominal) tardily that most subtletys take in placed a cross off of dissipatedity on selective murder to acquire political or cultural ends.Our species has a draw out history and prehistory of terrorism. virtuoso might marvel wherefore terrorism has taken the academic conception by storm. Insights from psychological science Terrorist violence most often is deliberate (not impulsive), strategic, and instrumental it is linked to and justif y by ideological (e. g. , political, sacred) objectives and usually involves a throng or multiple actors/ standers (Borum, 2004, p. 17). Since terrorist objectives originate within world-wide organizations, principles of organizational psychology apply to all terrorist organizations, under the cultural milieu of the organization in question.What is now certain is that terrorism is not a psychopathic aberration, as was primitively thought in psychoanalytical circles (Crenshaw, 1992). Terrorist organizations argon composed of clear-headed various(prenominal)s, often with advanced university ground levels. Merari (1991) tranquil empirical data on suicide bombers, and strand that psychopathology is almost never a figure in a terrorists profile. In fact, prevalence of mental illness among samples of incarcerated terrorists is as low as or lower than in the general race (Borum, 2004, p. 34).This is a clear indicator that we be relations with psychologies of organization, an d not groups of crazed sociopaths. Survival of the organization, a doctrine of organizational psychology, has clear implications for the terrorist mentality (Post, 1989), steady though research on the psychology of terrorism long-mouthedly overleaps substance and rigor. While cultural factors argon main(prenominal), much study remains. Future research should be in operation(p)ly-informed swear a behavior based focus and evoke interpretations from analyses of incident-related behaviors (Borum, 2004, p. 3).The main problem with much(prenominal) a gage might be that terrorists ar not bad interviews or victorious surveys. Borum points out that there is a broad spectrum of terrorist groups and organizations, each of which has a different psychology, motivation and decision making structure (p. 5). This further underscores the strike to be on guard over against the stereotypical terrorist organization there is n star. In a terrorist organization, some(prenominal) m ake narcissistic dynamics atomic number 18 a highfalutin sense of self and idealized p arental imago. If superstar privyt be perfect, at to the lowest degree one whoremaster be in a relationship with rough thing perfect (Borum, 2004, p. 9). Association with a be figure such as stack a modality withdraw satisfies this need this sack lead us support to US destination promulgation and amplifying oecumenic terrorism, via the countersign media. Bin Laden often makes the change surface news, and some(prenominal) time he does, his world stature is elevated, oddly in the minds of his go withers. It the name Bin Laden was unknown, how much less effective would al-Qaeda rick? Media has several(prenominal) degree of culp might, if not complicity in promulgating terrorism worldwide by providing free universality to organizations and their cause.According to capital of Minnesota Marsden (CPM, 2001, p. 1), the amount of media coverage devoted to these events, by video ne iirks and newspapers, correlates positively with the tog up in subsequent ape events. This is darkly consistent with the substantial body of take the stand for suicide contagion the idea that suicides beget suicide. If distraught teenagers copy Columbine style shootings, how much more are suicide attacks from terrorist cells encouraged by ceremonial occasion the evening news?Unintentionally barely efficaciously eulogizing angry teens and terrorists alike hold clean implications for the study news media, which need addressing by society. Organizational Psychology provides some sagacity if a finish perceives it is losing its ability to contri only whene its share to the world stage, conflict go out result (Rahim, 1986 Katz Kahn, 1978). Considering that spotless cultures whitethorn feel they are losing their ability to contribute because of intervention of extraneous cultures upon their own culture is likely one requisite to the humankind of worldwide terror organiza tion formation. pagan factors of revolutionary Moslem society While legion(predicate) in the West view extremist Muslim terrorism as irrational behavior by craze individuals, it is perfectly possible to understand terrorism as a rational decision problem, if we accept the trust that culture consequences (Munger, 2006, p. 132). Muslim societies, not exclusively, but by chance to a greater extent than most other nations, are committed to an idea of the perfectibility of humans in societies, through moral education and imposition and enforcement of moral fair play (Sharia) based on the ledger (p. 142).This religious adherence adds a great deal of apology to compromise from outside cultures, and bolsters the extremist elements within Islamic society. Much of the cultural al-Qaeda of extremist Muslim culture is their unique interpretation of the Quran The contemporaneous terrorist mentality and culture, which are grow in absolutist, either-or, adept-and- poisonous world v iews, resist groundss to negotiate. Accommodation, bargaining, and mutually acceptable compromise are not envisioned as possibilities within umpteen terrorists mental framework (Smelser Mitchell, 2002, p. 1). It appears that once a terrorist organization is complete, the only focuss to eliminate it is either when they execute their objectives, to set down them, or to take away their curtilage to exist, which pass oning allow Skinnerian extinction to follow over time. The destroy method is problematic and dearly-won how does one destroy an ideology? Islamic terrorists are well-connected utilize technology their geographic neck of the woods is literally everywhere and nowhere. heathenly-attuned uses of information technology are a major source of cross-cultural influences in the creation and sustaining of terrorist organizations (Bailey Grimaila, 2006, p. 534). Terrorist organizations are expert in spreading and sustaining their ideology around the world. Once indoctr inated into a group, spate will generally follow roves, no matter how extreme or untrained, as long as the individual perceives that the order was get byd from the appropriate authority (Milgram, 1965).Cultural influences caused normal students at Stanford to transform into merciless prison house guards once given the role and the authority, al-Qaeda recruits curve easily to orders from Bin Laden. Not only do they nonplus a physical authority, which relieves their individual conscience from objecting, but also they further believe that Allah Himself sanctions Bin Laden and themselves in their efforts to establish Sharia law throughout the world (Bailey Grimaila, 2006). There is substantial bargain that the psychology of terrorism cannot be considered apart from political, historical, familial, group dynamic, organic, and even purely accidental, coincidental factors (Borum, 2004, p. 22). Borum also states, probative differences exist both(prenominal) in, 1) the nature and level of aggression in different cultures, and 2) aggression can be environmentally manipulated both findings that argue against a universal human instinct of violence (p. 12). Diamond (2004) argues that environmental influences are rife in grounds why cultures are the way they are.The Fertile Crescent, once the cornerstone of agriculture, became radically neutered once all the forests were clear-cut, leaving mostly a barren desert environment. It is interesting to note that the foundation cultures which harbored the seeds of al-Qaeda all succeed from this former environmental paradise. Therefore, while culture believably has the most influence on the creation of terrorist organizations in the laconic term immediately, environment certainly has a full-grown degree of impact over the long term, and might slang a declamatory impact in the short term via militaristic or political manipulation. For m any(prenominal) critics, global or hyper terrorism has become an final expre ssion of acutely depressed geopolitical nuthouse (Ward, 2008, p. 252). Geopolitical chaos produces environments ripe with opportunity for recruiters to fightd the cause of terrorism. Without addressing and rectifying the chaotic areas of the world, it is highly doubtful, that global terrorism will end. market-gardenings that feel oppressed or depraved on the world stage whitethorn rise in rebellion against the oppressing culture(s), with or without religious dictate.Muslim culture is producing the lions share of high-visibility terrorists in the world today (Borum, 2004). virtuoso way to understand Muslim culture as it relates to the creation of terrorism is to behavior at Hofstedes dimensions. Generally, Islamic countries have large inequalities of status, forming a small ruling group, and a large ruled group with limited power. Hofstede (2001) shows, those Arab cultures have large Power Distance (PDI) (80) and Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI) (68). When these two Dimensions are comb ined, it creates a situation where leaders have virtually ultimate power and authority. It is not curious for new leadership to arise from armed confusion the ultimate power, rather than from diplomatic or elective potpourri (Borum, 2004, p. 44). Virtually the only method functional for the downtrodden in Arab society to express their need for change is by armed insurrection. This is a valuable insight into the cultural creation of Arab-based terrorism, possibly the most serious one.Naturally, from the terrorists point of view they are not terrorists at all but freedom fighters, fighting with their only getable designates to enact positive change. Does this mean efforts at establishing democracy in Muslim states are likely to fail? Cultural roots menstruate deep, and are resistant to change by outside cultures (Weiten, 2004), so the question of democracy introduced and established by Westerners is a highly speculative venture. Finally, take the racing shell of a female su icide bomber.It was originally fictive that the young woman who committed this act was innocent, ignorant, and of obscure morality (Brunner, 2007, p. 961). It is difficult for Westerners to imagine otherwise. Subsequent interviews revealed that she was educated, showed no signs of emotional disturbance, and was as highly intelligent and more independent than other girls in her society, but still fully within the ordinate of normal (p. 961). The pick up point is that she was fully within the range of normal, according to the culture that she grew up within.By not judgment her culture, Western culture had labeled her innocent, ignorant, and immoral, overlooking key factors with which to fully understand why a mentally stable young woman would commit such an act, and more importantly, to be able to deal realistically with the rise of extremist terrorism through a lack of cultural understanding. Cultural factors of the United States There is a cultural antecedency of mightily na tions to label other nations as evil a nemesis to civilization (Ivie, 2005).In the U. S. , this is a very old cultural theme, deeply inbred into the political psyche (p. 56). This cross-cultural mindset of powerful nations is one part in the creation of terrorists in weaker cultures, a type of self-fulfilling prophecy the call to destroy the barbarians that threaten democracy is an ancient one Greece and capital of Italy had similar on loss open-ended campaigns against terrorists, as does the U. S. today (p. 55).The main trouble with an open-ended campaign is that it never ends another cultural perception that needs adaption on the world stage in order to arrive at peace in the world. tone at the cultural history of the US, the savage has eternally been the object of distain and genocide, in order to make way for civilization (Ivie, 2005). The genocide of endemic peoples of the North American continent is well documented, even using biologic terrorist tactics of germ warfare g iving gifts of small-pox adulterate blankets to Indians without acquired immunity against de largeating disease (Diamond, 1997).Oliverio (2008) writes, It was also a matter of common sense that the Aryan race was superior. This taken-for-granted reality of Aryan superiority led to the elimination of millions of American Indians, millions of African slaves bound for America, and countless indigenous cultures throughout the world (p. 21). Powerful cultures that label weaker cultures as savages are a powerful impetus to the creation of terrorism. It is a recent habit of the American skilful to wage war against abstractions (Comaroff, 2007, p. 381).The line amidst metaphoric and real war, blurred beyond recognition, gives rise to such cultural terms as the war against drugs, the war against poverty, the war against illegal immigration (Sherry, 1995), and has become the standard of cultural mind-set in America today. Again, the US has a militarised world-view extended to declaring n onliteral wars on disease, crime, engaging in trade wars with remote competitors, and fighting culture wars with one another (p. 58). Culture wars is the main point in question how can peace ever prevail if acts of war against culture prevail?Even the Olympic Games that followed 9/11 became a forum for the core bush dogma (Falcous Silk, 2005). How does the reduction of civil liberties fare with the response to terrorism? Not allowing college professors to speak out against governmental policies associated with the war on terror (Crowson DeBacker, 2008, p. 296) is one form of right-wing authoritarianism that many an(prenominal) Americans think needs implementation. A disturbing trend of loss of personal freedoms that some associate with fascism. Taken as a whole, US internal and foreign policy regarding oil consumption, and support for oppressive regimes, is set aside in respect to critical scrutiny of individual behavior and the forms of moral lassitude associated with a cultu re of dependency (Hay Andrejevic, 2006, p. 344). So at least part of the U. S. cultural mindset is close securing its own economic interests at the cost of decency and fairness on the world stage. Many people think that the U. S. would never have bothered with Iraq if they had no strategic oil supplies, especially in the put East and Europe. This belief can only exasperate world tensions further.Understanding cross-cultural inter-dependencies A strike interdependency, regards the Bush Administration itself. According to Kellner (2004), not only jehadists are accountable for spectacular acts of terror, but also both Bush administrations. They deployed Manichean discourses of good and evil which themselves fit into dominant allele media codes of popular culture that both deploy fundamentalist and absolutist discourses (p. 41). This is exceedingly similar to the contemporary terrorist mentality and culture, which are rooted in absolutist, either-or, good-and-evil world views, resist efforts to negotiate (Smelser Mitchell, 2002, p. 1). The Bush administration openly declares its refusal to communicate with terrorist organizations or states, which is absolutist. We know that incentives flourish within such organizations (Munger, 2006). Incentives usually take two forms 1) recruit ingredients that are prone to go after and please within a cultural place (e. g. collectivist rather than individualist cultures), and 2) Create a set of incentives that reward loyalty, by giving assenting to excludable near-public (club) goods (p. 131).Mohammed Atta reportedly was at a comic strip club spending a lot of money, yelling anti-American slogans, and left a copy of the Quran originally he left (USA TODAY, 2001, p. 1). This incident seems to have fallen under club goods instead of operational funds, because it was the night before the hijackings, and such excessive exchange was no longer needed. This says nothing of the influence U. S. culture had on Atta, a de vout Muslim going to a strip club, one day before he meets Allah. There is no such thing as a terrorist state, in the commanding sense. Triandis,Bontempo, Villareal, Asai, and Lucca (1988) have shown that national cultures never equate to individual or subgroup cultures, so while a totalitarian governing body may indeed be a terrorist organization, the general populace can in no way be held accountable for the actions of a a few(prenominal)er. It is a stereotypical mistake to label an entire country as terrorist. It is important to realize that both differences and similarities in behavior occur across and within cultures psychological processes are characterized by both cultural variance and invariance (Weiten, 2006, p24).Regrettably, quite a few nations are culturally reasonably homogeneous (Hofstede, 1998, p180), and this may mean that a few nations may be mostly extremist in their outlook. Discourses from the Bush administrations paralleled intimately to speeches given by H itler, Pope Urban II, and others an solicitation to a legitimate power source external to the speaker an appeal to the importance of the national culture under attack the construction of an evil foeman and an appeal for unification (Graham, Keenan, Dowd, 2004, p. 213).Kellner (2004) feels that the disparity between the vast amount of information freely available to all through multimedia sources, and the narrow vision presented on the major news media via television is a trick, and a major cultural factor responsible for the deployments of the Bush administrations controlled mass media (p. 61). While arguments that freely available news sources from uncontrolled sources might suggest this no longer to be a cultural factor, culture by nature takes time to change, and most Americans probably place more credence in the evening news than the newer Internet sources (Kellner, 2003).Another example of how cross-cultural misunderstandings regularly occur between nations when one cultura l message sender transmits information to another culture, chances of precise transmission system are reduced (Alder Gunderson, 2008, p. 72), and when nations or organizations food waste to send information between cultures as both the Bush administration and the al-Qaeda organization soon do, virtually no chance of accurate transmission occurs. Stalemate results and wars go on, indefinitely clear contributors to terrorism. peradventure nowhere is the question of terrorism more complex than in the European Union European counterterrorism culture is a difficult concept due to the fact that the regional level of analysis encapsulates a range of different national cultures. Europe has always been a rich mixture of various cultures, and terrorism is a culturally charged term (Rees, 2007, p. 220), hence the encumbrance in consensus. Conversely, in China, we could expect to find a unified definition of terrorism under the change government (Diamond, 1997).While China is suspect of u sing the post-9/11 discourse of counterterrorism to cloak their own domestic priorities (Rees, 2007, p. 224), most of their counterterrorism efforts are likely to gain support with the Chinese public as macrocosm in the accord of the countries best interest China being a collectivistic nation. Terrorists focus their recruitment where sentiments about perceived deprivation are deepest and most distributive (Borum, 2004). This befriends us to understand why American link in Iraq actually dish outs create recruitment opportunities for al-Qaeda. sunk economies, infrastructure, and family support (via killed family members), create extreme deprivation, desperation to right cultural wrongs, and enrage cultural dictates for retribution (Borum, 2004). It even gives insight into where al-Qaeda might be concentrating recruitment efforts in America. For youth torn between two cultures in a foreign land, identity crisis may result from exposure to the foreign culture, and the chiasm betwe en their parents cultures radicalism offers simple answers to the big questions they are grappling with (Ongering, 2007, p. ). The human tendency to separate will easily adapt to simple answers rather than do it with difficult questions (Weiten, 2004). Extrapolated, it may be easier to recruit a terrorist, than to prevent a person from taking up the cause in the first place. Does cultural constrict on a subgroup help to create violent extremists? Muslim communities in America, Not only had their theology being presented incorrectly, but its adherents were being equated with terrorists (Baker, 2006, p. 302).Considering the degree that Muslim communities in the Western world are undefended to intensified scrutiny, and even unwarranted acts of violence against them by US citizenry (Ward, 2008), a good assumption is that many young Muslims will adapt an extremist ideology in response to cultural threat (Sirin exquisite, 2007), and some of those extremists will turn terrorist. It seems to be a never-ending spiral escalation of one cultural violation upon the other the Crusades continue It is a real Which came first, the chicken or the egg? question. Which side began this milieu of cultural attack and counterattack?Perceptions run the gamut The terrorist presents a story of heroism and necessary sacrifice. The counter-terrorist presents a counter-narrative of defiance and vengeance, renew the image of the martyr with that of inhumanity, even bestiality (Ward, 2008, p. 254). We reminded again of weaker cultures as savage, and as we have come to see, cross-culturally, nothing could be further from the truth from both extreme perspectives. Another cultural misunderstanding that may have helped to escalate tensions is the perception that the Muslim fraternity in America did not stand up in unison and denounce the acts of 9/11 as atrocious.This initial silent response interpret by many Americans as tantamount to condoning such acts of terrorism (Munro, 2006). Paradoxically, this lack of public outcry may have been the result of Muslim culture itself, with the volume of Muslims feeling that it was obvious that they had nothing to do with the attacks, and consequently no reason to take a public stand (Munro, 2006). A form of vigilante counter-terrorism develops in American culture, which gives rise to anti-Muslim sentiment and acts of violence (Johnson, 2003).One probable contributing factor is termed sudden Jihad Syndrome (Pipes, 2006). The perpetrator, for all outward appearances, a young Muslim man, well adjusted to Western society, considered friendly one day, without warning, he acted out an independent Jihad, which injured nine students (Pipes, 2006). Such unforeseeable and unpredictable behavior influences non-Muslims to stereotype many Muslims as having the same potential toward Sudden Jihad Syndrome. This of course creates an atmosphere of suspicion and surmise between cultures how can you tell who the enemy is just by looking at them?Discussion There is no cultural quick fix to this pervasive problem confronting the modern world. The general policy access code has to be adaptive, opportunistic, and multisided. The conventional problem-solving logic so irresistible in American culturefind a problem and then fix itis of limited utility, and a longer term, more contextualized approach is necessary (Smelser et al. , 2002, p. 4). For instance, the planetary War on Terror (GWOT) as espoused by the Bush Doctrine includes toppling rogue nations as part of the effort to thwart terrorism (Borum, 2004).Focusing on nation rebuilding of states, that are otherwise subject to deterrent, rather than on organizations that transcend geographic localities and are not subject to deterrent, is a lack of comme il faut cultural understanding of the issues, and will lead to further cultural misunderstandings. It makes sense that if powerful cultures do not make accusations against weaker cultures not understood, or interf ere in the sovereign rights of weaker nations, that a large amount of terrorism will fail to manifest by lack of unwanted cultural impetus from foreign powers.One of the biggest troubles seems to be, that powerful countries can arouse their masses which are easily pressed into service to rally the nation, persist dissent and effectively inoculate the public against any alternative perspective (Ivie, 2005, p. 56), the main point being to limit any alternative cultural perspectives as being legitimate relative to ones own superior cultural perspective. This is error. An increasingly militarized culture of fear (p. 9), such as is dominant in the US today, and which has been developing over many decades, cannot reduce the threat of terrorism in the world. Indeed, Muslim culture dictates that retribution be demanded when a family member is taken. Each errant US bomb necessarily creates more terrorists (Borum, 2004), cultural deviants are created that never would have existed otherwise. Rumors and hundreds of websites have sprung up claiming that FEMA has erected hundreds of internment camps on American soil is a disturbing part of the changing culture in America today.A Google search of American internment camps will pull up hundreds of unsubstantiated claims of such camps, including specific locations further highlighting the cultural atmosphere of increasing paranoia. Finally, what can help prevent Muslim youth in the U. S. from taking a violent path? According to Sirin and Fine (2007)Research that the successful integration of both ones own culture and the dominant culture, leads to more positive developmental outcomeswhereas marginalization, that is disengagement from both cultures, is associated with mental health problems for immigrant youth (p. 52). Society certainly would do well to address issues of marginalization, in order to help prevent emerging Sudden Jihad Syndrome (Pipes, 2006). ratiocination While this paper has focused mainly on US and Musli m extremist involvement, state and non-state respectively, it is important to remember that many other states and organizations exist which take out terror. Terror is a two way street, with few exceptions. Perhaps the ultimate defense against terrorism is to understand the cultural and cross-cultural causes of it, and with proper knowledge, address the issues at hand.We moldiness avoid stereotypes at all costs, because well all terrorists are extremists, but most extremists are not terrorists (Borum, 2004). Long-term penchant versus short-term orientation (Franke, Hofstede, Bond, 1991) may provide insights into which culture holds greater dexterity in the GWOT. U. S. culture demands immediate results, and has little margin for long term strategies, while extremist Islamic culture is bond by the vision of Mohammed, and is prepared to sacrifice for centuries if need be (Borum, 2004).Fortunately, unnecessary war-ridden between cultures may diminish substantially as one of the b iggest unmarried benefits of cross-cultural understanding and coating of organizational psychological research (Brislan, 1983). It is argued that we now live in an age of hyperterrorism, where the nature and scale of terrorism has reached a new level, and that the question of How to deal with international terrorism is quickly becoming the defining issue of our age (Ward, 2008, p. 248). It is imperative that we make every effort to understand the cross-cultural determinants of terrorism, regardless of cost.Additionally, terrorism is a discourse that affects all our lives, and the collateral argument that terrorism somehow vali interlockings the occasional abrogation of so many of our most cherished legal principles, is something that should concern all of us (p. 249). Hogan (2006) offers Due to the logistical and analytical challenges of cross-national comparisons, studies to date have concentrated largely on single nations (p. 64). While much work remains, understanding the vast scope of cultural interdependencies that help create terrorism is an extremely complex task yet must be undertaken if we are to come to terms with global terrorism.As Hostede (1998) states, constructs are products of the mind with which we attempt to understand and predict human behavior in an incessantly complex world, and all constructs are flawed to some degree. In an infinitely complex world, we will never entirely eradicate terrorism in its many manifestations. Our best hope to eradicate the deal of organized terrorism is through scientific understanding and conscientious application of rational solutions, freed from cultural bias. Culture lies entirely on the nurture side of the ledger, as against nature, or truly nherited traits (Munger, 2006, p. 134). Solutions to the specter of terrorism will manifest through understanding and responding to such cultural nurture. This paper has posited that understanding other cultures can help to reduce tensions between cultures, which give rise to terrorism and counterterrorism conflicts. As Munger (2006) points out, a shared understanding of something that identifies insiders, and excludes outsiders because they do not share this understanding (p. 133), is by chance the fundamental commonality between conflicting sides.If we can short-circuit this exclusionary identity concept, by education and predicate understanding by either, or both sides, and act upon it with responsible communication between parties, then perhaps modern terrorism as we know it will eventually end. It may take many years, because established terrorist organizations are not open to compromise (Smelser Mitchell, 2002), but such efforts may play a large part in helping to prevent future recruitment, and help eliminate the need for terrorist organizations within the cultures that originally spawned them losing their luster they slowly fade from existence.