Casting targeted actors as irrational masks their strategic rationality and motives

Evidence

While today such blatantly racist arguments as Cromer’s are advanced only by those on the Far Right, it isn’t hard to see how the overall logic of irrationality pervades many discussions. 
 Palestinian suicide bombers, Talal Asad notes, are presented as rabid lunatics rather than as people driven to extreme measures under conditions of occupation. We are asked to believe that terrorists are driven by irrational instincts rather than political motivations. 
 Little discussion is devoted to why Iran, as a rational political actor, might want to acquire nuclear weapons; it is, after all, surrounded by nuclear powers such as India, Pakistan, China, Russia, and Israel, and by US bases in Qatar, Iraq, Turkey, and Afghanistan, any of which might harbor nuclear weapons. — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 351

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to the reader’s MOC thread on how ‘irrationality’ frames function as the enemy-making mechanism that blocks structural explanation. — connects to: Prejudice targets act as strategic agents rather than passive victims — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years
, 931; Ideological malleability reflects strategic rationality rather than irrationality — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years
, 681; Prejudice mixes a rational kernel of role-fit perception with motivated irrationality — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of
, 208 (+2 more)
  • SEED: Angle: the Iran nuclear debate as a pure case of frame-driven irrationality attribution overriding an obvious rational-security explanation.

Broader Connections