Domestic terrorists across ideologies cast themselves as principled defenders with no remorse

Evidence

McVeigh, who was deeply involved in the white-supremacist militia gun culture, viewed himself not as a terrorist but as a principled warrior, defending freedom against governmental abuse of power. He felt no remorse over the massacre. Shahzad saw himself as only defending his religion: “We are only Muslims trying to defend our religion, people, honor, and land,” he announced at his sentencing (Shifrel & McShane, 2010). He took pride in doing so: “If you call us terrorists for doing that, then we are proud terrorists, and we will keep on terrorizing until you leave our land and people at peace” (Shifrel & McShane, 2010). In the note he wrote while hiding in a boat, the surviving Tsarnaev brother, Dzhokhar, called the Boston Marathon bombing retribution for the Muslims killed in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (Boston Marathon bombings, 2013). In the often-used military euphemism, he called the Boston victims “collateral damage” and referred to his brother, who died in a gun battle with the police, as a martyr. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 2252

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: The parallel framing across McVeigh (white supremacist) and Shahzad (Islamist) — both ‘proud warriors’ with zero remorse — demonstrates that the moral identity is structurally identical across opposing ideologies; a serious point for thinking about how both sides of a conflict can genuinely feel righteous.