This youth, it bulges?

January 20, 2010 3:13 PM

More than 15 years again Robert Kaplan wrote in his occasionally prescient essay, "Though Islam is spreading in West Africa, it is being hobbled by syncretization with animism: this makes new converts less apt to become anti-Western extremists...." Glossing over the omission that Islam has been in West Africa for centuries, the recent exploding underpants incident has cemented the idea that a form of violent religious extremism has found root in West Africa, leaving many to wonder why and how. Some argue it's the inevitable result of dangerous demographics.
posted by Panjandrum (17 comments total)

Very interesting though increasingly weird and less credible as one nears the end of it. (Even in the middle, I started realizing how much the predicted world resembled the one in Blade Runner.)

I thought this whole quote was interesting though:

Beyond its stark, clearly articulated message, Islam's very militancy makes it attractive to the downtrodden. It is the one religion that is prepared to fight. A political era driven by environmental stress, increased cultural sensitivity, unregulated urbanization, and refugee migrations is an era divinely created for the spread and intensification of Islam, already the world's fastest-growing religion. (Though Islam is spreading in West Africa, it is being hobbled by syncretization with animism: this makes new converts less apt to become anti-Western extremists, but it also makes for a weakened version of the faith, which is less effective as an antidote to crime.)

However, obviously this is a very biased and skewed characterization of the religion. The vast majority of adherents of Islam are moderate -- this description seems to zero in on the most extreme versions of the religion. To plagiarize The West Wing, the fact that there is a KKK doesn't tell you much about Christianity or the overwhelming majority of its adherents.

Also, not only is this an extreme and exaggerated description of Islam, but there's a good argument to be made that even Islamic terrorism as expressed by Al Qaeda has lost a lot of its teeth lately (contrary to the article's suggestions. I just read this, arguing that point.
posted by bearwife at 3:54 PM on January 20, 2010 [3 favorites]

That's a lot to digest. I'm not sure that either of those last two links are arguing much about the youth bulge effect on religious extremism. In fact, Mark Weston's piece is just bizarre, dumping the only bits about religion under the heading of "Global Crime" without much in the way of context except to say that the US is concerned about it and that generally the civil unrest in the region has not been related to religion. The Council on Foreign Relations piece tries a little harder at demography->religious extremism analysis:

Does religion also play a contributing factor?

Yes. Young people “are often drawn to new ideas and heterodox relations, challenging older forms of authority,” writes Goldstone. But Gavin says “religion can provide an outlet that is constructive and allows youth to build social networks and find a sense of identity.” In the Muslim world, experts say large populations of idle youth are especially prone to virulent strands of Islam as an alternative force for social mobility. Of the twenty-seven largest youth-bulge societies in the world, thirteen are Muslim, according to Heinsohn.

Both seem to be assuming that (muslim) religious extremism is a symptom of the same demographic problems that cause other civil unrest in youth bulge countries but don't delve too deeply.
posted by GodricVT at 4:08 PM on January 20, 2010

Nice little post.

Mind you, it's kind of a shame you need a phd to confidently say that tonnes of young, poor, disenfranchised people will be attracted to violent, authoritarian funded forms of extremism. Twas ever the case.

When these people ask how Islam is spread in these developing countries, they need to go back into their history and ask how Christianity was spread, because the answers are surprisingly similar, namely - and probably in order -: education, aid, security.

My brother-in-law is just finishing his phd examining this very thing in regards to Papua New Guinea, and the parallels are surprisingly consistent. It's not an accident of history; countries like Saudi Arabia are making concerted and cohesive efforts to spread their religion into these countries via aid and most vitally schools (madrassas).

What's particular interesting is how China is trying to do a similar thing in these countries through a secular, governmental and commercial route, and engendering far less "hearts-and-minds" success and more resentment because of it. Is it the wrong approach, I wonder, a form of tacit, unacknowledged racism, or simply apathy, because what they really care about are the resources these countries hold, not the people?

It's interesting because that's how we're doing it as the west - from both ends - and we're arguably losing on both counts, because the Chinese are paying more and the Saudis (are pretending to?) give a shit about the people, offering education, food, and anti-authoritarian fire where we aren't/can't/won't.
posted by smoke at 4:30 PM on January 20, 2010 [3 favorites]

@bearwife

"The vast majority of adherents of Islam are moderate"
Could you please define "moderate"?
posted by yoyo_nyc at 4:46 PM on January 20, 2010

Neat post
posted by KokuRyu at 4:57 PM on January 20, 2010

When these people ask how Islam is spread in these developing countries, they need to go back into their history and ask how Christianity was spread, because the answers are surprisingly similar, namely - and probably in order -: education, aid, security.

I think that's kind of the connecting thread of these articles, that the scary suicide bomber type of Islamic thought that is so much the current bogeyman of the the US and Europe is not infecting West Africa like some sort of virulent disease, but it's building upon pre-established social and religious connections to present itself as a solution and an explanation of fundamental economics flaws in these countries. Like the Weston piece says, a country can either productively reap the energy of its own personal baby boom, or it can suffer the consequences of having a large population of young people with no jobs, no status, and no future, who are ready to embrace the latest apocalyptic ideology, be it revolutionary Marxism or Wahhabi martyrdom.
posted by Panjandrum at 5:22 PM on January 20, 2010

Yoyo, we when through your racist, xenophobic nonsense on the switzerland + steeple thread. Please don't derail this one with it.
posted by smoke at 5:28 PM on January 20, 2010 [2 favorites]

Could you please define "moderate"?

....."Not radical."
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:21 PM on January 20, 2010

@Smoke, honestly, I don't understand your first sentence grammatically but I am also not a native speaker. I will refrain from any further postings in this thread but I think the statement of "moderate" should be defined. Defined as "There should be a separation between religion and state" or "do not want sharia law" etc. Feel free to google, how many of the Moslem immigrants in the UK want sharia law.
posted by yoyo_nyc at 6:22 PM on January 20, 2010

Yoyo when=went, my mistake; your grammar is fine.

Fascinating piece from Wapo - 5 Myths About Who Becomes A Terrorist. T

It covers a lot of the things we're talking about here. The main argument is that terrorism - like lots of other crime - tends to attract young men involved with lots of other crime and an assortment of varied and inconsistent motivations.

Yoyo, you may find it particularly useful for questioning some of your assumptions (and confirming others, I'm sure, to be fair).
posted by smoke at 6:40 PM on January 20, 2010

It confuses me why people are so quick to take this guy as representing an increasing threat of extremism among African Muslims while seeming to ignore the fact that his own father--presumably also a Muslim--reported him to the CIA on Nov. 19th.
posted by carmen at 8:21 PM on January 20, 2010

Unfortunately there are more angry teenagers than wealthy bankers.
posted by rosswald at 8:38 PM on January 20, 2010

Beyond its stark, clearly articulated message, Islam's very militancy makes it attractive to the downtrodden. It is the one religion that is prepared to fight. A political era driven by environmental stress, increased cultural sensitivity, unregulated urbanization, and refugee migrations is an era divinely created for the spread and intensification of Islam, already the world's fastest-growing religion.

Replace "religion" with "network" and "Islam" with "Fox News".

Now read it again.
posted by rokusan at 9:13 PM on January 20, 2010

What are you basing that on? This wasn't about angry teenagers and wealthy bankers. The father did not report his son because he is a wealthy banker. He reported his son because he thought that the son had become a danger to himself and others.

Everything that I read about Farouk Abdulmutallab's life (which admittedly hasn't been much) points to him being a bit of a loner in terms of his extremism. For example, a former teacher says:

"In 2001 we had a number of class discussions about the Taliban. All the other Muslim kids in the class thought they were just a bunch of nutters, but Umar spoke in their defence," said Mr Rimmer.

But he assumed Mr Abdulmutallab was "just playing devil's advocate, trying to keep the discussion going".

Later in the same article, a friend suggests he was recruited after he left England--and Africa.

Framing this as the inevitable result of "dangerous demographics" misses the fact that Abdulmutallab is not part of the demographic described (in particular in the dangerous link). He was part of the elite, with an education, a passport and international visas, and the ability to seek work anywhere in the world. Furthermore, his actions were not just rejected by his community, they took action to stop him.

It does not make sense to me to ignore the fact that within any country unstable/extremist individuals can emerge without it being part of an encompassing movement. So far, there is little, if anything, to suggest that all of Nigeria's or West Africa's Muslims should be lumped together with Abdulmutallab. And I think his father's example suggests just as much to the contrary.
posted by carmen at 9:30 PM on January 20, 2010 [2 favorites]

Doesn't the fact that antagonists to the West have emerged from radically diverse societies argue that the common cause is the West, and not things that are specific to those societies? It's either that or Islam.
posted by GeorgeBickham at 4:33 AM on January 21, 2010

Doesn't the fact that antagonists to the West have emerged from radically diverse societies argue that the common cause is the West, and not things that are specific to those societies? It's either that or Islam.

Common cause of what, precisely? It's obviously a target of hostility in many places, but you could say the same thing about China - Americans and Europeans worry about its growing economic strength and authoritarianism, Indians worry about it's regional power, Muslims don't like the way it treats their co-religionists in the western provinces. I suspect that you can take any significant cultural or sociopolitical entity and find antagonism towards it emerging from "radically diverse societies."
posted by AdamCSnider at 10:23 AM on January 21, 2010

Common cause of what, precisely?

Violent religious extremism - the phenomenon under discussion.

I suspect that you can take any significant cultural or sociopolitical entity and find antagonism towards it emerging from "radically diverse societies."

Unquestionably. So the nature and extent of that antagonism is the product of the entity's perceived impact on the world, or that part of it that the antagonists hold in common. What is particular to each society has very little to do with it.
posted by GeorgeBickham at 1:54 PM on January 21, 2010