NCJ Number
226183
Journal
Studies in Conflict & Terrorism Volume: 31 Issue: 10 Dated: October 2008 Pages: 903-923
Date Published
October 2008
Length
21 pages
Annotation
This article examines the history of late-19th-century Anarchists and compares it and its failure to the current jihadist commitment to transnational violence as a means of undermining targeted societies.
Abstract
Anarchism and jihadism are similar in being transnational, having global aspirations, and presenting an unprecedented degree of violence as the core of its strategy for change. Anarchism consists of a theory of the individual’s relation with society, a theory that not only criticizes the role of authority in current society, but also promotes social rebellion as the way to achieve a better future. Anarchism embraces a complex understanding of a nonauthoritarian society in which individuals acting freely reject all forms of structure designed to control and standardize human behavior to be replaced by some form of nongovernmental cooperation among free individuals. Anarchism ultimately failed because it offered few tangible benefits in the present that would make people’s lives better as they became enmeshed in a self-defeating commitment to bringing down the current structures upon which people depended for some form of socioeconomic security. The Anarchists were unable to agree on three essential philosophical debates that eroded the movement: concepts of autonomy, representation, and influence. Anarchists were unable to find meaningful consensus on how to ensure autonomy of choice and action while developing a means of propagating their ideology (representation), and organize to influence interactions and trends in communal life. In terms of ideology, the jihadists have an advantage over the Anarchists. Violent jihadists are highly dogmatic under an authoritarian interpretation of Islam, with roots in a historic religious value system that binds jihadist together for current action and a vision for the future. Armed with modern communications and the potential for advanced weaponry, jihadists pose a much more serious transnational threat that can be sustained and expanded globally. 50 notes