Reliance on Direct and Mediated Contact and Public Policies Supporting Outgroup Harm

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/133624/1/jcom12234.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/133624/2/jcom12234_am.pd

Levels of Media Consumption and Muslim Intolerance

Exploring the various factors that lead to Muslim intolerance, specifically the role of media consumption and the control variables of age and education level

Drifting Further Apart? How Exposure to Media Portrayals of Muslims Affects Attitude Polarization

Political discourses about Muslim immigration in the media and on social networking sites (SNSs) are highly contentious and have the potential to further polarize societal segments, which may ultimately harm democratic processes. Especially on SNSs, politicians and citizens can circumvent journalistic filters often resulting in blatant and emotionally charged content. Using a two-wave panel design (N = 559), we investigated how positive and negative portrayals of Muslims in traditional media outlets and on SNSs influence anti-Muslim immigration attitudes among people who either agree or disagree with the encountered information. Our findings indicate that exposure to negative portrayals further reinforces anti-Muslim immigration attitudes among those who agree with the encountered information. In contrast, for those who disagree with the negative information, a backfire effect emerges, showing that anti-Muslim attitudes even decrease. This effect occurs for both SNSs and traditional media. Positive information about Muslims did not result in attitude polarization

Peddlers of Hate: The Existence of Norm Entrepreneurs as a Necessary Precursor to Genocide

Over the course of the 20th century genocide has been responsible for the murder of more than 170 million people; it is has proven to be four times deadlier than war (Voth, 2007). Although it often appears spontaneous, Genocide is instead a result of certain preconditions. Studies into the causes of genocide ought to aid in the formation of methods intended to keep violence from occurring. Unfortunately, seemingly different factors such as economic crisis, resource scarcity, institutional weakness, and ethnic resentment prove difficult to classify as the ultimate cause. Instead these conditions work collectively to create an atmosphere that is conducive to the emergence of genocidal behaviors. These preconditions can be specific to the cultures in which they arise; however there exists a continuity with which genocide may be characterized. All these conditions may be exacerbated by the common existence of a norm entrepreneur. For the purpose of this paper, a norm entrepreneur is an individual that holds some appearance of power which he/she uses to create or recreate social/societal norms through which polarizing attitudes are formed. In the case of genocide, these individuals may use a variety of methods intended to foster an atmosphere of hate. I argue that norm entrepreneurs are a catalyst to the emergence and growth of specific norms; and in the case of genocide, they are a necessary precursor to group polarization and ethnic violence. While the presence of a norm entrepreneur is merely one of many factors that contribute to the proliferation of polarizing attitudes and behaviors, he/she is the trigger to the emergence of genocidal violence. To begin I define the role of the norm entrepreneur while also describing how he/she may alter individual and group behavior. Following are a series of studies that demonstrate how a norm entrepreneur may influence an individual or group to commit acts of genocide. For example, the results of Philip Zimbardo’s study Diary of an Abandoned Automobile speak to the context of anonymity and the role it plays in the appearance of evil behaviors (Zimbardo, 2007). Also, Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment illustrates that an individual may single-­‐handedly create an environment in which evil behaviors may arise while simultaneously displays how the arbitrary creation of groups can lead to in-­‐group/out-­‐group polarization and dehumanization (Zimbardo, 2007). Moreover, the results of Stanley Milgram’s experiment on obedience indicate that individuals are more likely to participate in evil actions when under the command of an authority figure (Milgram, 1974). This is pertinent in that my hypothesis assumes that norm entrepreneurs must possess some semblance of power in order for their norms to experience the cascading effect necessary for them to become a part of the social fabric (Finnemore, 1998). Although it is difficult to prove the efficacy of a norm entrepreneur to alter group behavior, I discuss these studies in an attempt to further link the possibility of an individual to intensify polarized attitudes to such a point that genocide may occur. Next I discuss the Rwandan genocide prior to which, the existence of norm entrepreneurs appears to have been a necessary precursor. In Rwanda a series of endorsements made by President Habyarimana clearly condoned the use of violence against the Tutsi population. His lack of concern over the distribution of thousands of machetes indicated that violence was not only the answer, it was appropriate. In fact, many political figures sanctioned the use of violence against the Tutsi population; this allowed for a diffusion of responsibility among the Hutu participants. Much scholarship exists as to the causes of the Rwandan genocide; however, I argue that the presence of norm entrepreneurs is what exacerbated pre-­‐existing tension caused by ethnic disparity and food scarcity to a point where genocide became inevitable. Accordingly, in his book The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil, Dr. Philip Zimbardo commented, “Human beings are capable of totally abandoning their humanity for a mindless ideology, to follow and then exceed the orders of charismatic authorities to destroy everyone they label as “The Enemy” (Zimbardo, 2007)

Demonizing the “Other:” Fundamentalist Pakistani Madrasahs and the Construction of Religious Violence

This article explores the role of fundamentalist, extremist teachings and alleged child abuse in Pakistani Islamic schools, known as madrasahs, in the construction of Islamic violence. A comparison of the educational deprivation, psychological harm, and physical and sexual abuse endured by madrasah students with the experiences of former Canadian residential school survivors, indicates that these two groups generally suffer various pathological internal and external reactions to violence. Further research should attempt to investigate allegations of harm experienced by madrasah students, with the goals of policy reform to protect these children, and the modernization and standardization of problematic madrasah curricula

Attitudes of Muslim Americans Regarding Prejudice and Discrimination Displayed by Non-Muslims

Abstract Muslim Americans have reported experiencing racial profiling, physical threats, and verbal abuse based on their religion, ethnicity, and color (Samari, 2016). These types of lived experiences can have negative personal consequences for Muslim Americans and influence their attitudes and behavior toward non-Muslims. A literature review conducted by Simon et al. (2018) suggests the need for research that explores the point of view of minorities regarding intolerance displayed by majority members. Intolerance is defined as the refusal and unwillingness to tolerate or respect individuals from different social or minority groups who hold different beliefs. Prejudice and discrimination can hinder the discovery of new information needed to promote positive social change by influencing social boundaries among groups based on their negative lived experiences (Ellis & Abdi, 2017). Semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore the attitudes of Palestinian Muslim Americans in Cleveland, Ohio, regarding prejudice and discrimination displayed by non-Muslims. The theory of planned behavior was used as the theoretical framework for this study. Purposeful and convenience sampling were used to recruit the 10 participants in this study. Giorgi’s (2012) psychological method, coding, and template analysis were used to perform data analysis. The study revealed the participants described prejudice and discrimination among Muslims and non-Muslims as “good and bad” or “it depends.” The study also found participants used the terms “we versus they” or “us versus them” when describing the behavior displayed by non-Muslims. Information discovered from this study can be used to develop new social strategies that can help improve the social interactions among Muslims and non-Muslims in the United States

SEEDS OF SUSPICION: THE PERPETUAL CYCLE OF ANTI-MUSLIM STEREOTYPES, MIDDLE EAST INTERVENTION, AND TERRORISM

The central theory guiding my research is that interstate conflict, at least as covered in mass media, leaves residual cultural attitudes that can shape the political context in which elites formulate policy. Specifically, U.S. interventionism in the Middle East has given rise to fundamental hostilities, founded on misguided biases, that shape involvement in the region today. I focus on one step within that broader theory, to test it empirically: the hypothesis that anti-Muslim stereotypes, when activated, will shape an individual’s foreign-policy preferences. I begin by considering competing accounts that link 1) ethnocentrism or 2) targeted stereotypes with support for the use of military force in the Middle East. After careful review of the group-based and social-identity theories that undergird the two accounts, I synthesize them. My more-complete theory can be summarized as: Someone will exhibit an ethnocentric response toward an out-group when negative stereotypes about the group combine with an individual’s in-group identity to result in perceived threat. Applying the logic of that hypothesis to Muslims and American foreign policy, I argue that, for American whites, Muslims are uniquely situated to be perceived as realistic and symbolic cultural threats to their core national identity because they may differ in terms of ethnicity, culture, and religion. Mass media portray Muslims as violent and encourage Americans to evaluate them in terms of such cultural dissimilarity. On the other hand, Muslims present little identity threat to blacks, whose core in-group identity typically revolves around their status as a racial minority in the United States. Even blacks who identify with the nation will not view Islam as incompatible with their national identity because that identity is typically not predicated on looking, living, or believing a certain way. I develop these ideas into testable hypotheses and investigate how anti-Muslim attitudes shape opinion about important contemporary Middle East issues. Using survey and experimental data, I find compelling evidence linking anti-Muslim attitudes – among whites – to support for using military force (rather than diplomacy) against Iran and against Islamists. Those attitudes also predict opposition to accepting Syrian refugees. Finally, I turn from this narrative of negativity to argue that the anti-Muslim stereotypes many citizens bring to bear when forming judgments of Middle East policy can be shifted. I base this optimistic expectation on media framing theories, which suggest that issue frames can shift opinion when they emphasize strong and credible arguments. After constructing frames from debate statements during the 2016 Presidential Election, and an original frame that affirms counterstereotypes of Muslims, I expect and find evidence that strong frames emphasizing the obligations of American identity and factual counterstereotype-affirming information can shift those who oppose accepting refugees to more moderate positions. Broadly, my research offers a theoretically-grounded schematic for how stereotypes and identity construction operate together cognitively to shape public opinion. My methods offer leverage to those endeavoring to explain how these idea elements shape opinion in other issue domains. I also divulge important nuances about how specific actors (i.e., whites) propagate a cycle of anti-Muslim attitudes, warfare, and terrorism. I contribute to rivalry theory in international relations by explaining how cultural biases shape an enduring rivalry of the grandest scale: the perpetual U.S.-Middle East conflict. My framing research offers both academic and practical contributions by providing evidence on behalf of existing theory and by suggesting how media and political elites – by describing issues in unbiased ways – could knock off course the perpetual cycle of American interventionism, retaliatory terrorism, and resulting anti-Muslim stereotype generalizations

Delegitimizing Al-Qaeda: A Jihad-Realist Approach

Disrupting, dismantling, and ultimately defeating al-Qaeda based and inspired terrorism is a declared policy of the U.S. Government. Three key strategic objectives have been identified for accomplishing this: attacking al-Qaeda’s terror network, undermining radicalization and recruitment, and hardening homeland defense. The present monograph proposes a distinct jihad-realist approach for undermining radicalization and recruitment to al-Qaeda. First, a brief discussion of six means for ending terrorist organizations is provided. Second, the premises of a jihad-realist approach are described. Third, a jihad-realist shari’a case against al-Qaeda’s terrorism is presented. In conclusion, key assertions are summarized, and several specific policy recommendations offered for national security personnel charged with formulating and executing counterterrorist messaging strategy.https://dc.etsu.edu/etsu_books/1129/thumbnail.jp