Page 45 - Šolsko polje, XXIX, 2018, no. 5-6: Radicalization, Violent Extremism and Conflicting Diversity, eds. Mitja Sardoč and Tomaž Deželan
P. 45
d. gereluk and c.-a. titus ■ how schools can reduce youth radicalization
their views. Rapoport (1989) notes that “for most commentators terror-
ism has no history, or at least they would have us believe that the ’terror-
ist problem’ had no significance until the 1960s, when the full impact of
modern technology was felt, endowing most individuals as individuals or
as members of small groups, with capacities they never had before” (xii).
In this sense, the deep history of societies is critical to better understand-
ing the impetus for, and long-standing desperation of, particular individ-
uals and groups to become radicalized. If we turn to the United States, a
robust history of the country would include the precursors of the nation
built upon colonialism, genocide, revolution, racism, oppression, overlaid
upon the broader espoused civic dispositions of life, liberty and the pur-
suit of happiness from their Declaration of Independence. In this way,
Aislinn O’Donnell warns that “both schools and society more broadly
offer cultural scripts that privilege certain kinds of responses to violence,
which depend on the perceived identity of the perpetrator” (p. 480). In
disrupting the cultural scripts that represent a more accurate portrayal of
strife, the aim is to create an opening for more honest deliberation about
how to “imagine and practice another future, one that will move beyond
the current cycle of revenge” (Butler, 2004: p. 20).
In such instances when there has been such entangled injustices that
remain unresolved, there is a second educational response worth consid-
ering: that of restorative justice. For understanding the past atrocities
gives individuals better clarity of what is at stake when individuals be-
come more radical, yet it does little to create another space where individ-
uals can see beyond the one absolute truth told by radicalized groups. In
this case, restorative justice calls upon individuals, institutions and soci-
eties to formally recognize and acknowledge past atrocities, and call for
mechanisms for increased dialogue and reforms, to promote reconcilia-
tion and mitigate conflict over the past. O’Donnell contends that part of
uncovering the historical genealogies help to make visible those who have
been silenced. She states, “Renewed honest conversations and reimagined
curricula would ask how we can respond to, and talk about, violence in
the broader lived context of students. These conversations and curricu-
la would find ways of including the voices of those who are pushed out-
side and beyond political consideration” (2015: p. 477). Without naming
the historical legacy that informs and fuels contemporary radical move-
ments, the potential for groups to capitalize and draw upon an historical
narrative as evidence that they have been silenced, humiliated and shamed
throughout history is compelling for a radicalized group to recruit and
mobilize.
43
their views. Rapoport (1989) notes that “for most commentators terror-
ism has no history, or at least they would have us believe that the ’terror-
ist problem’ had no significance until the 1960s, when the full impact of
modern technology was felt, endowing most individuals as individuals or
as members of small groups, with capacities they never had before” (xii).
In this sense, the deep history of societies is critical to better understand-
ing the impetus for, and long-standing desperation of, particular individ-
uals and groups to become radicalized. If we turn to the United States, a
robust history of the country would include the precursors of the nation
built upon colonialism, genocide, revolution, racism, oppression, overlaid
upon the broader espoused civic dispositions of life, liberty and the pur-
suit of happiness from their Declaration of Independence. In this way,
Aislinn O’Donnell warns that “both schools and society more broadly
offer cultural scripts that privilege certain kinds of responses to violence,
which depend on the perceived identity of the perpetrator” (p. 480). In
disrupting the cultural scripts that represent a more accurate portrayal of
strife, the aim is to create an opening for more honest deliberation about
how to “imagine and practice another future, one that will move beyond
the current cycle of revenge” (Butler, 2004: p. 20).
In such instances when there has been such entangled injustices that
remain unresolved, there is a second educational response worth consid-
ering: that of restorative justice. For understanding the past atrocities
gives individuals better clarity of what is at stake when individuals be-
come more radical, yet it does little to create another space where individ-
uals can see beyond the one absolute truth told by radicalized groups. In
this case, restorative justice calls upon individuals, institutions and soci-
eties to formally recognize and acknowledge past atrocities, and call for
mechanisms for increased dialogue and reforms, to promote reconcilia-
tion and mitigate conflict over the past. O’Donnell contends that part of
uncovering the historical genealogies help to make visible those who have
been silenced. She states, “Renewed honest conversations and reimagined
curricula would ask how we can respond to, and talk about, violence in
the broader lived context of students. These conversations and curricu-
la would find ways of including the voices of those who are pushed out-
side and beyond political consideration” (2015: p. 477). Without naming
the historical legacy that informs and fuels contemporary radical move-
ments, the potential for groups to capitalize and draw upon an historical
narrative as evidence that they have been silenced, humiliated and shamed
throughout history is compelling for a radicalized group to recruit and
mobilize.
43
