Page 37 - Šolsko polje, XXIX, 2018, no. 5-6: Radicalization, Violent Extremism and Conflicting Diversity, eds. Mitja Sardoč and Tomaž Deželan
P. 37
d. gereluk and c.-a. titus ■ how schools can reduce youth radicalization
radicalization. In the first section, we define and distinguish between the
notions of youth radicalization, extremism and terrorism, and focus our
attention on the principles of youth radicalization. In the second section,
we examine what role educators may play to create a learning environ-
ment to reduce polarization, isolation, and marginalization. In so doing,
we contend that schools can play a partial role in how the formal curricu-
lum may better inform students about the broader political and social de-
terminants that lead to terrorism and extremism and reduce more funda-
mentalist and ideological stances.
Indicators of Youth Radicalization
Youth radicalization is an increasingly common rhetorical device that is
used in public media portrayals. Yet, little articulation is provided as to
what that means or how youth become radicalized in the first place. More
commonly, it is a term that is used in a reactive sense, when a public act
of violence or atrocity has been committed, to describe a youth as ‘oth-
er’ in light of what is perceived as within mainstream society. To start, I
draw upon David Mendel’s (2010) definition of youth radicalization as
the “increase in and/or reinforcing of extremism in the thinking senti-
ments, and/or behavior of individuals and/or groups of individuals” (p.
111). In this way, it is distinguished from extremism, which focuses pri-
marily on the nature of the principles, values, and beliefs that are limited
and constrained in options and choices, commonly fixated on a particu-
lar ideology or absolute truth. Youth radicalization emphasizes the pro-
cess by which an individual or group becomes more extremist in nature,
while extremism is on the current state of beliefs by an individual or group
“who has a particular perspective to the exclusion of other perspectives or
that it strays from the accepted norms and behaviors of mainstream soci-
ety” (Gereluk, 2012: p. 7). In both cases, neither refers to the act of com-
mitting an act of violence, nor does it refer to any particular political, so-
cial or religious movement. When such acts of violence are committed to
destabilize the citizens of society and to create fear, it is terrorism. In this
case, terrorism is the actual act against civilians to cause general instabili-
ty, often to disrupt the political, religious or social discourses that terror-
ists are trying to upend (Bonar, 2002). Radicalized youth and extremists
may or may not commit an act.
There is a futility in declaring definitive principles of what makes
youth become radicalized. Trying to pinpoint the motivational bases for
reasons why youth become radicalized is as frustrating as trying to deci-
pher why a person commits gun violence in schools. The reasons for why
individuals become radicalized are as vast and varied. As noted in the
35
radicalization. In the first section, we define and distinguish between the
notions of youth radicalization, extremism and terrorism, and focus our
attention on the principles of youth radicalization. In the second section,
we examine what role educators may play to create a learning environ-
ment to reduce polarization, isolation, and marginalization. In so doing,
we contend that schools can play a partial role in how the formal curricu-
lum may better inform students about the broader political and social de-
terminants that lead to terrorism and extremism and reduce more funda-
mentalist and ideological stances.
Indicators of Youth Radicalization
Youth radicalization is an increasingly common rhetorical device that is
used in public media portrayals. Yet, little articulation is provided as to
what that means or how youth become radicalized in the first place. More
commonly, it is a term that is used in a reactive sense, when a public act
of violence or atrocity has been committed, to describe a youth as ‘oth-
er’ in light of what is perceived as within mainstream society. To start, I
draw upon David Mendel’s (2010) definition of youth radicalization as
the “increase in and/or reinforcing of extremism in the thinking senti-
ments, and/or behavior of individuals and/or groups of individuals” (p.
111). In this way, it is distinguished from extremism, which focuses pri-
marily on the nature of the principles, values, and beliefs that are limited
and constrained in options and choices, commonly fixated on a particu-
lar ideology or absolute truth. Youth radicalization emphasizes the pro-
cess by which an individual or group becomes more extremist in nature,
while extremism is on the current state of beliefs by an individual or group
“who has a particular perspective to the exclusion of other perspectives or
that it strays from the accepted norms and behaviors of mainstream soci-
ety” (Gereluk, 2012: p. 7). In both cases, neither refers to the act of com-
mitting an act of violence, nor does it refer to any particular political, so-
cial or religious movement. When such acts of violence are committed to
destabilize the citizens of society and to create fear, it is terrorism. In this
case, terrorism is the actual act against civilians to cause general instabili-
ty, often to disrupt the political, religious or social discourses that terror-
ists are trying to upend (Bonar, 2002). Radicalized youth and extremists
may or may not commit an act.
There is a futility in declaring definitive principles of what makes
youth become radicalized. Trying to pinpoint the motivational bases for
reasons why youth become radicalized is as frustrating as trying to deci-
pher why a person commits gun violence in schools. The reasons for why
individuals become radicalized are as vast and varied. As noted in the
35
