Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence
Juergensmeyer, Mark. 2003. Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. 3rd ed. University of California Press.
Rating:
10
Summary:
Gripping and insightful
The first section of the book is made up of accounts of terrorist acts performed in the name of religion (e.g. the Oklahoma City Federal Building bombing, the bombing of the World Trade Centers in 1993, etc.). The accounts are combined with interviews the author conducted with the perpetrators (or close associates of the perpetrators). The book doesn’t focus exclusively on terrorist acts perpetrated by one specific religious group (e.g. fanatical Muslims), but includes a wide variety of religions, illustrating that it is not just one specific religious group or religious ideology that encourages violence, but rather that many (if not all) can function in such a fashion. Those that are specifically addressed include: Christianity (the Identity Movement in the U.S.), Protestant Christianity (Ireland), Buddhism (Aum Shinrikyo), Islam (al Qaeda and Hamas), Hinduism and Sikhism (Sikh and Hindu radicals in the Punjab and elsewhere), and Judaism (the followers of a number of extremist rabbis in Israel and elsewhere).
The second half of the book is the author’s attempt to explain why ‘terrorists’ perpetrate terrorist acts. Jurgensmeyer concludes, “that it has much to do with the nature of the religious imagination, which always has had the propensity to absolutize and to project images of cosmic war. It also has much to do with the social tensions of this moment of history that cry out for absolute solutions, and the sense of personal humiliation experienced by men who long to restore an integrity they perceive as lost in the wake of virtually global social and political shifts” (p. 242). In other words, men who feel they have been humiliated or slighted in some way use religion and the notion of a cosmic war between good (their side) and evil (whomever they choose as their enemy) to justify violence. Yet, despite their violent means, the author points out that the ultimate goal of this violence is always peace – but only peace as terrorists envision it, which I’m not quite sure is really peace.
Review:
First, this is one of the most readable sociological texts I have ever read. It is very clearly written and understandable for even the non-sociologist. The book is also written in such a fashion that it leads you to ask the very questions the author is preparing to answer. Some might consider this approach a bit leading or manipulative but I saw it as just another indication of the caliber of writing in this book; it is a great book.
Though it goes without saying, it is also noteworthy that the subject matter is timely, potent, and, though I hate to phrase it this way, very engaging to the human sense of morbid curiosity. It almost seems to be a characteristic of humanity that we are interested in the abnormal and especially enjoy learning about those who commit despicable acts of violence (name a serial killer, now name one of their victims…). While reading about such abhorrent acts, people are decrying the luridness of the entire affair, but then they can’t seem to put the book down. Part of the attraction of this book comes from that aspect, but the other component of the attraction is the perceptive analysis of the motivations behind the violence.
Though there are a number of insightful analytic points made by the author concerning the motivations and justifications for religious sponsored violence, the most insightful idea to me was that it is much easier to justify violence when you are in a state of war then when you are in a state of peace. Thus, declarations by individuals like Osama bin Laden, who has claimed he is engaged in a ‘Holy War’ with the United States, are, in part, attempts to justify violent actions. If terrorists can lead people to believe that they are fighting a battle, they can then justify killing people, military and civilian alike. After all, every nation that has ever engaged in war has used violent means to work toward their avowedly ‘peaceful’ ends (Hiroshima and Nagasaki ring a bell?). Insights like these resulted in me coming away from having read this book feeling as though I had a much better understanding of why terrorists do what they do.
I should note that there is only minimal discussion of religious beliefs in the text. For the most part the beliefs are left out except where they pertain directly to the author’s arguments or the comments of the perpetrators of these acts. In short, if you are looking for a treatise on the religious beliefs of terrorists, this isn’t the book that is going to do it for you. It is almost taken as a given that readers of the text will have a rudimentary understanding of Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Sikhism, and Buddhism.
I would love to get Michael Savage’s opinion on this text (along with those of most right wing, conservative Christians), especially considering so much of the text centers on radical, right-wing Christians and their crazed notions that the secular U.S. government is out to get them. So much for demonizing Islam. How does their scripture put it… “And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? (Matthew 7:3).” In short, if they insist on criticizing radical Islam for encouraging violence, perhaps it should be made a blanket criticism. According to Juergensmeyer, no religions are immune from the potential for violence, not even Christianity.
Overall, I think everyone should read this book. Even if people were to read Juergensmeyer’s short treatise on how to define who is a terrorist, they (and everyone else in the world, IMHO) would benefit tremendously. For any who might be worried the book advocates or sympathizes with terrorism, it doesn’t, not even remotely. But what it does do is bring the concept of terrorism within reach of understanding. I highly recommend this book.