Radicalization theory treats Islam as inherently violent like eugenics treated races

Evidence

In 2007, the NYPD produced a document titled Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat, in which it argues that there are four stages of radicalization: pre-radicalization, self-identification, indoctrination, and jihadization. According to this model, all young Muslim males from middle-class and immigrant families fall into the pre-radicalization stage. In short, simply being a member of this group places one on a conveyor belt aimed toward “radicalization.” Now if, by some chance, a member of this group should give up smoking, drinking, and gambling and start to grow a beard and wear traditional Islamic clothing, he is on the fast track toward acquiring “Jihadi-Salafist ideology,” which puts him squarely in the next stage: “self-identification.” Another characteristic of “self-identification” is political awareness and community activism. By the third stage, “indoctrination,” the NYPD tells us, the person has withdrawn from the mosque and has become politicized around a set of new beliefs leading to the fourth stage, “jihadization,” which is when he becomes ready to plan a terrorist attack. Signs of reaching this fourth stage include conducting research on the Internet, performing reconnaissance activity, and acquiring materials. While the report states that there is no profile for a potential terrorist, the thrust of its analysis is precisely about creating such a profile and predicting the activity of potential terrorists. Based on data from a grand total of ten cases, the report states that there is “remarkable consistency in the behaviors and trajectory of each of the plots across the stages” and that “this consistency provides a tool for predictability.” — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 486 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

Categorization

• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim
• XREF: connects to: Clash of civilizations framing located terrorism’s cause within Islam itself — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 266; Muslim male violence is framed as an innate Islamic or racial impulse; He then quotes a Palestinian fighter in Afghanistan to show his definition of jihad: holy war against the West and violence against ‘Jews and infidels.’ Such a simplistic and superficial definition of jihad causes him to blame all Muslims for the consequences of militant Islam. His book leaves readers with the idea that all Muslim immigrants are potential terrorists simply because they are Muslim. He completely ignores the identity of the American Muslim population, painting Islam as a ‘foreign’ and ‘terrorist’ ideology that has penetrated American society. In short, his book depicts any identification with Islam as a threat everyone, non-Muslims and Muslims alike because it cannot coexist with other religions due to its inherent nature of allowing Muslims to impose their faith on others. Furthermore, Emerson deliberately leaves the word ‘Allah’ untranslated in his book in order to give off the idea that the Muslims’ concept of God is different from the Judeo-Christian concept of God. He also uses terminology such as ‘holy jihad’ and ‘militant jihad’ in order to instill fear in his readers. (+10 more)

Related

• NYPD’s radicalization model makes Muslim identity itself a predictor of terrorism (similarity 0.91)
• Radicalization theories racialize Muslims by presuming Islam drives them to violence (similarity 0.88)
• Radicalization is theorized as an exclusively Muslim phenomenon (similarity 0.88)
• The NYPD radicalization theory equated growing piety with growing terrorist risk. (similarity 0.86)
• Radicalization theory reduces all Muslims to presumptive terrorists (similarity 0.86)
• Radicalization discourse was built to serve counterterrorism policy, not science. (similarity 0.85)
• The NYPD surveilled Muslim communities across a one-hundred-mile radius (similarity 0.84)
• Radicalization theory targets Muslims who have committed no crime (similarity 0.84)
• Radicalization theory was designed to serve counterterrorism policy, not truth (similarity 0.84)
• Counter-radicalization conflates perpetrators’ religion with causes of terrorism. (similarity 0.83)
• Radicalization theories justify treating Muslims as an imperial scapegoat class (similarity 0.83)
• Explaining radicalization, not just identifying terrorists, is the harder task (similarity 0.82)
• US security agencies split between Islam-centric and complexity-based radicalization models. (similarity 0.82)
• No radicalization model profiles white Christians, revealing the model’s racial double standard (similarity 0.82)
• White supremacist violence is analyzed without racial profiling theories. (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• NYPD’s radicalization model makes Muslim identity itself a predictor of terrorism #exemplifies (0.85) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 486