Terror groups must calibrate violence to retain sympathizer support

Evidence

Unless terrorist groups gain appreciable social support and build on it, they cannot survive for long. Potential supporters may sympathize with their cause but reject violent means of promoting it. Terrorists face the difficult task of calibrating the level of their violence so as not to alienate their sympathizers. This is not easy to do when terrorist activities raise moral qualms in partisans and can make their lives more miserable. The natural tendency in the face of failed attempts is to escalate the level of violence, which only makes it more socially alienating. However, a clever campaign in moral disengagement can get supporters to accept extreme terrorist acts as morally justified (Sarma, 2010). — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 2259

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: A genuine structural tension — escalation paradox, the counterintuitive claim that sympathy for a cause does not extend to its violent means, and that moral disengagement campaigns can override this. Dense with competing causal dynamics worth sitting with.
• XREF: Parallels the escalation-failure dynamics seen in protest movements and social movements; also connects to Milgrom’s institutional equilibria work on how punishment escalation can alienate rather than discipline.