Campusalam

• Skip to main content
• Skip to main navigation
• Skip to search
• Skip to navigation for this section

Ideological or religious orientation does not necessarily determine whether the overall impact of people’s interactions are constructive, or whether the people are ‘radical’ or ‘extremist’. Those who are not Muslim and lack experience and expertise in understanding Islamic thinking, belief, and contemporary trends should not attempt to make judgments about the orientation of Muslim students or staff based on what they hear or observe.

Judgments based on ideology, or fundamentals of Islamic behaviour or practice, can also miss the mark of serious potentially violent activity.

- Some individuals who wish to bring about a Caliphate in this country may have political aspirations that could be deemed ‘radical’. However, so does the Socialist Workers’ Party. Mere aspirations do not entail the intention to engage in violent acts for religious and political motivation.
- Meanwhile, the serious groups intent on actually doing harm – who pose the greatest threat – will adopt certain measures to avoid suspicion: a certain cell may have ‘license’ to drink alcohol, for example.

Trying to make blunt judgments based on ideology or fervour of religious practice can lead both to over-diagnosis and under-diagnosis, simultaneously casting suspicion on innocent people and missing those with serious intent to commit violence.

Instead, there are certain generic features that exist when religious and social interaction has an overall positive character. This holds broadly true whether those concerned are ‘Salafi’ or ‘Sufi’, politically ‘radical’ or religiously ‘moderate’.

Positive interpersonal pastoral or religious engagement generally has these features

- Rapport is built through understanding points of view, personal needs, and creating common ground
- Trust is built by delivering on promises, showing understanding in practical ways like perceiving needs and meeting them, demonstrating the ability to find solutions to personal problems, having the commitment to devote time to them
- Where there is an authoritative figure in the relationship, he or she establishes credentials through Islamic scholarship
- Respect is earned by personal conduct, integrity, interpersonal ethics and style
- Emotions are generally kept calm and negative emotions are not stoked up
- Emotional-social needs are catered for in appropriate ways (a sense of belonging, finding a meaning or purpose to life, the sense of serving a higher cause)
- The authority figure provides religious arguments, giving credible evidence, and thus makes the reasoning and the criteria accessible to the participant
- The mode of engagement empowers and activates critical thinking

Destructive, manipulative or exploitative engagement often has these characteristics

- Rapport-building is replaced by demagogic tactics: finding ‘common ground’ through appealing to shared prejudices, shared hatreds and grievances
- High levels of negative emotion are generated, both by content of material (distressing, enraging) and by manner of delivery: tone of voice, gesture, imagery;
- Emotional, social and other needs might be met in unconstructive ways: such as gaining respect and a sense of belonging through participation in dubious group activities
- The authority figure establishes credentials or gains credibility by appealing to existing prejudices or ideology, or by experience in jihadi activity or similar; less often by claiming scholarly credentials (though may cite accepted and popular figures such as Ibn Taymiyyah to gain credibility by association)
- ‘Us-them’ thinking is encouraged; solidarity, protectiveness and compassion are urged for ‘us’ but not for ‘them’