Final_paper_revised

ID: 20434003
Social Cognition: An understanding
of why individuals stay religious
extremists via cognitive dissonance
and self-affirmation.
By Hemant (Ricky) Hemant
Terrorism has been in existence long before the world witnessed the September 11 attacks on
the Twin Towers. The term terrorism started during the French Revolution in 1793, when over 41,000
people were executed in France for not supporting the French Revolution or acting against it (Linton,
n.d.). Today, homegrown radicalization has been a growing concern of our society. Recent events of
homegrown terrorism such as San Bernardino shooting and case of Aaron Driver have highlighted the
issue of homegrown radicalization. While a lot of research has been done on how and why people
radicalize, I think the topic of why individuals stay radicalized has been ignored by scholars. As such,
in this paper I would like to explore why individuals tend to hold on to their cherished beliefs and stay
radicalized even when they are given conflicting factual evidence of its harms.
In order to write a paper about terrorism, it is important to clarify the definition of terrorism.
Defining terrorism has always been a tough task. Even though many countries around the globe agree
that terrorism is a punishable offense and steps should be taken to prevent it, very few can agree on its
definition. Terrorism has a different definitions even amongst different US agencies (Dawson, 2016).
The challenge to define terrorism stem from multiple factors:
1

ID: 20434003
1. Terrorism is politically relative. An entity that engages in acts that are defined as terrorism by
the government and thus labeled as a terrorist organization could be labeled as freedom fighters
fighting for a noble cause or for the oppressed.
2. Terrorism is used as a term of condemnation. Since it carries so much negative connotation,
countries hesitate to define terrorism because their ally state could be engaging in certain acts
that might qualify those governments as terrorist regimes. This creates a risk of ruining key
relationships resulting in serious consequences in sectors of trade, economy, and defence.
3. The definition of terrorism can either be too inclusive or exclusive. This creates a lot of
difficulty for the judicial systems when the guilty entity has to be punished. If the definition is
too narrow then one risks creating loopholes that might allow radical preachers, such as Anjem
Choudary, to operate freely as they are not directly causing terrorism. However, if one makes a
definition that is too broad then many innocent civilians might get charged for activities that
they did not intend to do, such as searching Islamic State for educational purposes, thereby
clogging the judicial and law enforcement system which might lead to many potential terrorists
to escape or cause harm before they are correctly identified.
To illustrate how complicated this process can be, I will provide an example of a definition of terrorism
that was provided by Walter Lacquer in 2002. Walter Lacquer defined terrorism as “the illegitimate use
of force to achieve a political objective when innocent people are targeted” (Dawson, 2016). Under
this definition, the government of United States of America could be classified as a terrorist
organization that used illegitimate force to overthrow a democratically elected government of
Mossadegh in Iran to achieve its political objectives. Their act left many innocents within Iran
vulnerable. On the contrary, organizations such as Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan would not be defined as
2

ID: 20434003
a terrorist organization as their motive is a religious one and not political. For the purposes of this
paper, terrorism is defined as per Canadian Criminal Code as follows:
“An act or omission, in or outside Canada that (1) is committed
1. In whole or in on part for a political, religious, or ideological purpose, objective or cause, and
2. In whole or in part with the intention of intimidating the public, or in segment of the public,
with regard to its security, including its economic security, or compelling a person, a
government or a domestic or an international organization to do or to refrain from doing any
act, whether the public or the person, government or organization is inside or outside Canada,
and
(2) that intentionally
1. Causes death or serious bodily harm to a person by the use of violence,
2. Endangers a person’s life,
3. Causes a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or any segment of the public,
4. Causes substantial property damage….
5. Causes serious interference with, or serious disruption, of essential services...other than as a
result of advocacy, protest, dissent or stoppage of work that is not intended to result in the
conduct or harm referred to any of clauses A) to C), and includes a conspiracy, attempt or
threat….does not include an act or omission that is committed during an armed conflict….to the
extent that those activities are governed by the other rules of international law” (Gurski, 2016.
Pg 3-4)
Modern terrorism started in the 1870s during the Anarchist Wave in the Russian Empire. The
current wave of terrorism has very different tactics to achieve its goals when compared to the past ones.
3

ID: 20434003
Before security establishments and governments can tackle terrorism in its contemporary form, it is
important to know the history of waves of terrorism. While some might feel that learning about the
history of terrorism is redundant, as famous philosopher George Santayana once said, “Those who
cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it” (“George Santayana Quotes”, n.d.). While the
readers keep that quotation fresh in their memories, I will provide a brief overview of the 4 major
waves of terrorism.
First wave: Anarchist Wave (1870s-1920s)
The first wave of terrorism included asymmetric warfare between the Russian anarchists and Tsarist
regime. Even though the practice of Serfdom was abolished in 1860s, the former serfs still occupied the
lower tiers of the society. Most of the economy of the country was in the hands of the Tsar and the
Nobility. The academic class of Russia was unhappy with how the country was progressing and looked
forward to political and economic reform (Offord, 1986; pg 1). By the 1870s, socialist study circles
were already being formed by idealistic students (Offord, 1986; pg 16). The idea was to spread these
students throughout the country where they can work amongst the peasants and instill the ideas of the
revolution amongst them (Offord, 1986; pg 17). The wave resulted in mass rebellion from the working
class of people and the Tsar was assassinated. The wave spread its struggles of freedom and equality,
and its ideas to other countries (Dawson, 2016).
Second wave: Anti-Colonial Wave (approximate from 1920s-1960s)
After the Colonial powers were weakened near the end of World War 2, a doctrine of self determination
emerged. The freedom fighters of the colonies used terror tactics to prevent political slowdown of
independence. The primary target of the terrorist attacks were institutions of the government such as
4

ID: 20434003
police and military. This resulted in major crackdown by the colonial governments on the general
populace and a wave of atrocities ensued. This would sometimes further strengthen the cause of
independence. Many new nations were formed as a result, such as India (Dawson, 2016).
Third wave: New Left Wave
The New Left wave was formed by blending the readings of Karl Marx and Mao Zedong with
nationalism. It was sparked by the Vietnam war and some groups still exist to this day, such as the
Naxalites in India. A significant shift in this wave of terrorism was usage of media by terror groups to
propagate their cause. This included acts such as hijacking aircrafts, kidnapping of prominent figures,
hostage taking, and assassinations. Since there was significant collaboration amongst terrorist groups
internationally, it created numerous challenges for law enforcement agencies and State counter-
terrorism operations. As a result, new and extensive co-operations amongst many different nations’
counter terrorism task forces emerged (Dawson, 2016).
Fourth wave: Religious wave (1979-current)
The Religious wave of terrorism started after the Iranian Revolution of 1979. 1979 was a significant
year in Asian as Iran overthrew its leader Shah Pahlavi, and Soviet forces invaded Afghanistan.
Afghanistan is now part of what was previously known as Khorasan which is of cultural importance to
Muslims since many prominent scholars of Islam came from Khorasan. Therefore, when it was invaded
by the Soviet forces, it created an uproar within the Muslim community. This saw the rise of Islamic
militancy within the subcontinent. Contrary to popular belief, the US had begun supporting the Islamic
militants of Afghanistan against the Afghan government long before Soviets had invaded the region by
fueling the grievances of the youth, convincing them that secularism had failed their community and by
5

ID: 20434003
fostering ideas of Islamic theocracy. The Central Intelligence Agency used the Pakistani Inter Services
Intelligence as its extension in the training of the Mujahideen. The CIA provided the Mujahideens with
guerilla warfare training, while Wahhabi fundamentalists from Saudi Arabia funded the madrassas
where elements of Islam were integrated in their training to fight the Soviet invaders (Chossudovsky,
2008). Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter, admitted in a 1998
interview that the plan was to increase the probability of Soviets invading Afghanistan by supporting
the Mujahideens. This was done to get back at the Soviets for the failure of the United States in the
Vietnam war. Additionally, the United States also looked to advance the disintegration of the Soviet
Union by using Afghan jihad as a global cause to turn the Muslim states against Soviet Union.
According to Brzezinski, the collapse of the Soviet Empire was much more beneficial than the rise of
fundamental Islam (Chossudovsky, 2008). The creation of Religious wave of terrorism lead to new
types of asymmetrical warfare such as emphasis on soft targets that are unable to defend themselves.
This wave was unique in its priority to target civilians and other innocents to promote fear (Dawson,
2016).
As mentioned above, the current wave of terrorism (Religious Wave) is unique in its tactic to
target innocent civilians and other soft-targets to spread its fear. Religious terrorists now are also more
likely to engage in suicide bombings to spread fear and chaos. It is normal for the general public to try
and label such terrorists as abnormal, psychopaths, or mentally ill. Most individuals cannot see
rationality when another individual straps a bomb on themselves and decides to sacrifice themselves
only to murder and main other innocent civilians. After all, isn’t war between opposing aggressors?
Even though it might seem rational for many individuals to assume some sort of mental abnormality for
the actions of religious terrorists, as McCauley and Maikovich point out, data from over 30 years of
6

ID: 20434003
research does not suggest psychologic abnormality for individuals who choose to become terrorists
(Makovich, 2005; Pg 374).
After the horrific events of September 11, many in the west were concerned about foreign
terrorists coming into their countries. Since September 11 perpetrators were mostly from Saudi Arabian
background, some in the west believed that religious terrorism was mainly a foreign conspiracy aimed
to destroy the stability of their countries. While such arguments held some substance, the recent
migration of homegrown radicals in masse from Europe and North America proved otherwise (Kirk,
2016). Cases such as San Bernardino shooting, Bataclan shootings, and Strathroy have forced sceptics
to re-evaluate their alien conspiracy theory and address issues of homegrown terrorism and
radicalization. Hence, it has become evident that radicalization and terrorism is not just a Middle
Eastern issue but rather, a global issue.
Even though radical Islamic terrorism has harmed the west, most of its significant damage has
been felt by Muslims themselves -- both directly and indirectly. According to the U.S. National
Counterterrorism Center,”in cases where the religious affiliation of terrorism casualties could be
determined, Muslims suffered between 82-97% of terrorism-related fatalities over the past 5 years”
(Global Research, 2011. Page 14). In addition to suffering from terrorism directly, muslims have also
faced discrimination and ostracization due to radicalization and incidents of terrorism (Ingraham, 2015;
Valfort, Adida & Laitin, 2015).
Knowing that radical Islam and extremists have hurt their own Muslim community, why are
some individuals from the Muslim community so hesitant to abandon their cherished radical beliefs? In
this paper, I discuss two major social cognitive theories and discuss how they might explain an
individual’s resistance in abandoning their cherished beliefs. First, I will introduce Leon Festinger’s
Cognitive Dissonance theory which states that an individual has to reduce the importance of the
7

ID: 20434003
conflicting belief, increase the importance of their current belief/action, or change their beliefs/actions
to reduce the cognitive unease brought upon by cognitive dissonance (Instructional Design, n.d.). This
will highlight the motivated decision-making amongst Islamic extremists and shed light on how an
extremist might make decisions to stay and support a terrorist organization. Additionally, I will explore
Self-Perception theory, an alternative explanation to how an individual might make decisions. I will try
to explain how Daryl Bem’s self-perception theory explains an individual’s decision-making and how it
falls short in explaining the behaviour of the masses and why cognitive dissonance is more accurate
when explaining irrational behavioural choices. Second, I will discuss Claude Steele’s Self-Affirmation
theory that states that individuals merely need to affirm their self-integrity to solve a cognitive
dissonance, rather than only engaging in rationalizations, to justify their irrational actions or beliefs, as
previously suggested by Leon Festinger. I hope to explain, through self-affirmation, the methods by
which Islamic extremists and extremist sympathizers continue to justify their decision to support
radical groups and ideologies. Lastly, I would like to present some recommendations to Department of
Public Safety (Canada) on how to curb youth radicalization and enhance deradicalization efforts by
combining knowledge gained from self-affirmation and cognitive dissonance with prior knowledge of
sociology and psychology.
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE THEORY
In 1957 Leon Festinger wondered why people engaged in actions that clearly go against their
beliefs. It was an age old question that still holds relevance today. For example, smokers know that
smoking is harmful to not only a smoker’s health, but also for people around him or her. Yet those
individuals still engage in smoking, endangering not only their health but also compromising the health
8

ID: 20434003
of their loved ones. Why do smokers engage in this self-destructive behaviour? How can they engage in
smoking if they know it is potentially harmful for their health? Leon Festinger explains this behaviour
via his Cognitive Dissonance Theory. Festinger explained that whenever an individual engaged in
counter-attitudinal behaviour, it creates a mental conflict. He called this mental conflict cognitive
dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is very uncomfortable. This is mainly because everybody likes to
view themselves in a positive light. Therefore, they are likely to see themselves as rational, intelligent,
and kind human beings. When such individuals engage in behaviours counter to rationality, it creates a
threat to their self. I know smoking can potentially cause cancer, yet I am smoking. Am I not rational ?
To counter this, the individual has to solve the cognitive dissonance that creates the threat to self.
According to Leon Festinger, there are three ways whereby one can solve that cognitive conflict. The
first way that an individual can resolve the dissonance is to reduce the importance of the dissonant
beliefs. A smoker might do this by reassuring himself/herself that the potential risks of smoking are not
bad. The second way of resolving the cognitive dissonance would be to dilute the dissonant thoughts by
adding more consonant thoughts. A smoker might achieve that by prioritizing the instant gratitude they
receive from smoking over the long term consequences. For example, the smokers might try to
rationalize their actions by thinking,“The relaxation I receive from smoking outweighs the potential
harm,”. Finally, if the smoker cannot rationalize their actions in the above mentioned ways, they would
change their behaviour. According to Festinger, as long as the individual can use the first two methods
and rationalize their counterattitudinal behaviour, they can potentially continue to engage in those
behaviours.
Festinger and his colleague Carlsmith conducted a forced compliance experiment to investigate
changes in an individual’s beliefs due to their own behaviour (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959). They
recruited participants who were then asked to perform an uninteresting and tedious task of turning
9

ID: 20434003
spools. This was purposely done to ensure that no participant found the task interesting. The
participants were then randomly divided into experimental or control conditions. In the experimental
condition, the experimenter comes to the participant and tells him/her that they had hired a student to
act as a confederate. The participants were further told that the experiment had divided participants into
two groups. This was just deception and was necessary to ensure that participant carried out the
counterattitudinal task. They were told that while group 1 was the group that they were assigned to, the
upcoming participant was in group 2. Group 1 participants were not told anything about the task prior
to them arriving in the lab. However, group 2 participants were going to be told positive statements
about the experiments by the confederate such as “The task was very exciting”. The experimenter then
told the participant that the confederate did not show up because they had something important come
up. The participant was then asked to fill in the role of the confederate. This was done to make sure that
the participants engaged in the counterattitudinal behaviour. They did not find the task interesting yet
they were about to inform the upcoming participants that the task was interesting. Then the
experimental group, where the participants were told to act as confederate, was further divided into two
subgroups: one group of participants received $1 to act out as confederate while the other group of
participants received $20. These groups were assigned participants randomly. The two subgroups only
differed in the amount of money paid to the participants for acting the role of the confederate. In the
control condition, the participant went to a room for an interview. The difference in money paid was
done to arouse dissonance in one of the groups. After the experiment, the participants were asked to
give their honest review of the experiment. The researchers observed that while there were no
differences in attitudes regarding the experiment between participants in the control condition and those
who received $20---they thought the experiment was boring, there was a significant difference between
the attitudes of participants who received $1 and other participants (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959).
10

ID: 20434003
Festinger believed that participants in the control group and the $20 condition did not suffer
from cognitive dissonance as they could easily rationalize their actions. The fact that the experiment
was boring, but they lied to the upcoming participants would create cognitive dissonance in the
participants in the $20 and the $1 conditions. The participants in the $20 condition had lied to the other
participants because they were being paid good money. This explanation solved their cognitive
dissonance. However, this explanation was not sufficient for participants who were paid $1. “Why did
I lie to the other participants that this task was fun? It can’t be for just $1. The task must have been fun
for me too”. Festinger explains this change in attitude via his cognitive dissonance theory. By changing
their attitude, the participants were able to justify their actions and thus solve the cognitive dissonance.
The theory had its share of criticism. Leon Festinger’s view was disputed by Daryl Bem, who
proposed a non motivational theory to explain people’s behaviours. According to Bem, people often
engage in indirect methods to determine their attitudes. He believed that individuals often have no
direct way of inferring their attitudes. Since no direct way of inferring beliefs is available, people
observe their behaviour and then make inferences about their attitudes (Kunda, 1999). In order for this
theory to be true, Bem also assumed that individuals view themselves in a positive light. After all, why
would people believe that their beliefs would be consistent with their actions if they didn’t think of
their actions to be good to begin with. In order for self-perception to work, people had to believe that
they were good, moral, and intelligent beings and that is why their actions were good. Since their
actions had to have some sort of rationality behind it, their attitudes might be responsible for their
actions. As such, according to Bem, people inferred their attitudes by observing their actions and
believed them to be consistent with their beliefs. Bem suggested that this self-perception was the reason
why individuals changed their attitudes to match their behaviour in the forced compliance experiments.
However, self-perception failed to explain why participants in $20 condition did not change their
11

ID: 20434003
attitudes. After all, if self perception theory was true and people infer their beliefs by observing their
behaviours, then participants who received $20 should also change their attitudes to like the experiment
to match their behaviour.
Cognitive Dissonance theory is crucial to understand as it can aid researchers and security
agencies in constructing a deradicalization program. It helps us understand how an extremist might
rationalize their choices and how we, as law enforcement and security agencies, can restrict the
individual’s ability to rationalize radical choices thus giving them no option but to accept that radical
views are not the correct path to follow. A recent conversation between a jihadist and Dr. Amarasingam,
a post-doctoral researcher who studies radicalization, revealed that jihadists engage in Festinger’s
methods to resolve cognitive dissonance. This allows them to change their beliefs to match their actions
(Amarasingam, 2016).
12

ID: 20434003
Fig 1. Conversation between an ISIS supporter and Dr. Amarasingam
As Dr. Amarasingam engaged in a conversation with the ISIS sympathiser and questioned the
explosion that was carried out at one of the holiest mosques in Islam, the jihadist was faced with a
dilemma. On one hand he supported and joined ISIS because they proclaimed to be true Muslims, but
on the other hand he is supporting a group that just bombed one of the holiest mosques in Islam and
killed innocent Muslims. As Fig 1 illustrates, the jihadist tries to justify the attack by stating that the
13

ID: 20434003
attack was just on the parking lot of the mosque. This way the jihadist is trying to reduce the
importance of the dissonant belief. Additionally, the jihadist also tries to dilute the dissonance by
emphasizing that people who died in the attack were just apostates and thus, deserved to die
(Amarasingam, 2016).
SELF AFFIRMATION THEORY AND ITS ROLE IN RADICALIZATION
In 1980s Claude Steele pondered if Cognitive Dissonance provided the complete answer to why
people engaged in irrational actions. He began his research with a simple question which Leon
Festinger had asked in 1957. Why do smokers engage in smoking? As previously discussed, Leon
Festinger proposed two ways that could be possible used by smokers to justify their smoking. The
smokers can reduce the importance of the dissonant beliefs. As such, they can think,”The effects of
smoking aren’t that bad” and justify their smoking. The second way is to increase the importance of the
consonant beliefs to dilute the dissonant beliefs. A smoker can accomplish that by giving more weight
to the benefits of smoking, such as relaxation, over the harmful ones. The third course of action would
be to change the behaviour and quit smoking since the dissonant beliefs outweigh the consonant
beliefs. Even though these explanations were adequate in 1957 since the community was not informed
completely of the possible harmful effects of smoking and smoking was approved by public, the
society today has changed quite a lot. The contemporary world has irrefutable evidence that smoking is
injurious to health and the society disapproval of smoking has reached new heights, even forbidding
smokers from smoking near many public and community buildings. Therefore, besides quitting it has
become virtually impossible for a contemporary smoker to continue to engage in this self-destructive
behaviour of smoking. However, why do smokers still smoke? Claude Steele proposed that individuals
14

ID: 20434003
have their self-image threatened when such dissonance arousing situations are presented. Therefore, the
individual has to find a way to restore that self-integrity. Dr. Steele suggested that as long as an
individual can be reminded of something that restores self-integrity, such as a valued aspect of self, the
individual can resolve that cognitive dissonance and continue to engage in counterattitudinal behaviour
(Kunda, 1999). In the case of a smoker, they know that smoking is harmful for their health but they still
engage in smoking. This act questions their intelligence thus creating dissonance. They believe they are
intelligent, moral, and rational beings but the fact that they are doing something irrational creates a
threat to self which they get rid of by affirming their self-worth. According to Dr. Steele, one can
achieve that by doing something totally unrelated to the situation that is causing dissonance (Kunda,
1999). In this case, the smoker might achieve this by donating more money to charity or spending more
time with their kids. That act affirms their belief that they are nice, rational, and intelligent beings and
thus they can continue to engage in smoking. Claude Steele conducted some experiments to illustrate
this phenomenon. The participants were subjected with a standard force-compliance dissonance
paradigm. This usually consists of participants to doing something against their beliefs and then their
attitudes after the task are measured. In Dr. Steele’s experiment, the participants opposing tuition hikes
were called in for an experiment that examined the effects of attitudes on social perception at
University of Washington. Participants were asked to participate in a survey to measure their attitudes
for or against tuition increases at the university. They were randomly divided into two groups: forced
compliance and control condition. Participants in forced compliance condition could choose to write
for or against the tuition hike. However, they were told that there was an oversupply of essays against
the tuition hike. As such, they were requested if they could write an essay supporting tuition increase as
there were too many essays opposing the hike. Even though they were requested to write an essay for
the tuition hike due to the oversupply issue, they had been given a clear choice to write against or for
15

ID: 20434003
the tuition hike. Nobody forced them to write an essay favoring tuition hike and they could have easily
rejected the offer and wrote an essay against the tuition hike. However, in the control group, the
participants were not given any choice to pick the side. This was intended to produce high dissonance
among forced compliance group whereas the control condition would result in low dissonance.
Dissonance reduction was measured by measuring if the participants had changed their attitudes after
writing the essay to fit their position or not. Generally, participants who had been given a choice
changed their attitudes to fit their positions, whereas the participants who were not given a choice did
not change their attitudes. In order to see if self-affirmation reduces dissonance, a group within the
forced compliance condition was identified which had strong economic-political value orientation. The
other members of the forced compliance condition did not have such orientation. After writing the
counter-attitudinal essay, the forced compliant group had to complete the economic-political subscale.
This was done to ensure that one group of the forced compliance condition was reminded of their
valued self-concepts, while the others would be unaffected by such thoughts. The idea was that if self-
affirmation reduced dissonance then individuals with strong economic-political value orientation would
not change their attitudes, as their dissonance is already reduced by reminding them of their values,
while the other individuals would change their attitudes to eliminate dissonance caused by counter-
attitudinal behaviour. Researchers found that, as hypothesized, individuals in forced compliance
condition with a stronger economic-political orientation did not change their views. This is because
those individuals already had their dissonant beliefs resolved when they were reminded of a valued
aspect of self -- their economic-political orientation. However, this was not the case for individuals who
did not value economic-political values. For them, the dissonant thoughts still existed and were only
resolved when they changed their attitudes to match their behaviour. While there might be a valid
criticism that time spent completing the economic-political subtest could have distracted the
16

ID: 20434003
participants from their dissonant essay, the fact that only participants with strong economic-political
values maintained their initial attitudes confirms that self-affirmation reduces dissonance and
distraction does not play a part in this situation (Steele, 1988).
Knowing these effects of self-affirmation, it can be said that self-affirmation can be used by
radical Islamists to justify their support to a violent terrorist groups. For instance, a radical might
support radical groups such as Islamic State because he/she believes themselves to be a devout Muslim,
but on the other hand, such groups often massacre Muslims and engage in many un-Islamic acts such as
the rape of children. This creates dissonance which is uncomfortable, as it prompts the supporter to
question their self-integrity of being a devout Muslim. Subsequently, the radical might engage in self-
affirmation and remind themselves of values they hold dear, such as reading the Quran everyday, to
justify that they are good devout Muslims. This would help them reduce their dissonant thoughts and
allow them to continue engaging in counterattitudinal behaviours such as supporting Islamic State.
Self-affirmation has been used for other judgements as well. In 1997, Dr. Spencer and his colleague
Dr. Fein demonstrated that self-affirmation can reduce application of stereotypes and prejudice. Think
of an instance when your self-esteem and sense of self-worth experienced a significant blow. One of
the ways an individual might fight back that sense of incompetence is to accomplish something that
makes them feel competent again. Alternatively, another way to feel competent is to compare oneself
with someone who is even less competent. It takes effort to accomplish something that can make one
feel competent. On the contrary, it is very easy to affront someone, especially an individual who is
already a member of minority or negatively stereotyped group. Insulting someone else makes them
seem incompetent and thus alleviates one’s own competence. Feeling better about themselves, the
offender might restore that sense of self-integrity (Kunda, 1999. Pg 361-362).
17

ID: 20434003
This was exactly what was observed by Dr. Spencer and Dr. Fein in their 1997 series of
experiments. They first conducted a two part experiment to see if self-affirmation played a role in
application of stereotypes. Participants were randomly divided into two groups: self-affirmation or non
self-affirmation. Group members who engaged in self-affirmation were required to indicate which
interests they identified with from the list containing interests such as business/economics,
art/music/theater, social life/relationships, and science/pursuit of knowledge. They were then asked to
write a few paragraphs explaining why these values were important to them. This ensured that the
participants were reminded of values they feel most inclined towards and thus would allow them to
affirm their self-identity. Participants in the non affirmation condition were asked to indicate values
from the previous list that were least important to them. Then they were asked to write a paragraph
explaining why those values might be important to someone else. This was done to make sure that only
one group of participants engaged in self-affirmation before the actual task. In the second part of the
experiment, participants were required to evaluate an individual who had applied for a job as a
personnel manager. The researchers manipulated the ethnicity of the job candidate by giving her either
a Jewish or Italian name. Additionally, they photographed her wearing a Star of David in one of the job
applicant forms while the other group received a photograph without the Star of David (the candidate
was the same in both instances). The participants were given general information about the
responsibilities of a personnel manager. They were also provided with a fictitious job application which
was constructed to suggest that the candidate was qualified for the position although not a stellar
candidate. The participants were also presented with the same video which contained excerpts from the
candidate interview where she displayed a neutral performance. Researchers found that participants
who did not engage in self-affirmation prior to the evaluation rated the candidate more negatively if she
was portrayed as Jewish than when she was portrayed as Italian. In contrast, participants who engaged
18

ID: 20434003
in self-affirmation prior to evaluation had this negative evaluation difference reduced or eliminated
(Fein & Spencer, 1997). The results revealed that when participants thought about self-relevant values,
it reduced the expression of their prejudice.
While this experiment illustrated that self-affirmation can reduce prejudice, Dr. Spencer and Dr.
Fein conducted another experiment to investigate if a threat to self-image would amplify the
application of stereotypes and expression of prejudice. Participants were told that they would be
required to participate in a series of different cognitive and social judgement tasks. Half of the
participants were randomly assigned to receive a negative feedback from the tasks whereas the other
half were randomly assigned to a neutral condition. They achieved that by informing the neutral
condition participants that the test was bogus and the time limits were unrealistic. After presenting the
participants with their scores from the cognitive and social judgement tasks, participants were
presented with some information about an individual and asked to make judgements about that
individual. Researchers manipulated the individual’s (named Greg) sexual orientation by revealing that
he had been living with his girlfriend (implying that Greg was straight) or partner (implying that Greg
might be homosexual). All other details about Greg were identical for both groups. Results suggested
that participants who had received negative feedback, rated Greg using more stereotypes than
participants who received neutral feedback. Participants who received negative feedback were also less
likely to like Greg and were also more likely to rate their personality much more different than Greg,
thereby psychologically distancing themselves (Fein & Spencer, 1997). These studies clearly suggested
the role of self-affirmation in stereotype application and expression of prejudice.
These findings can help explain how radical recruiters might introduce radical narratives to
vulnerable individuals. Radical preachers might promote self-identity threats and provide the
vulnerable target with an easy way to self-affirm---dehumanization of outgroup members to enhance
19

ID: 20434003
their own self-image. Such incidents could progress into violence and then lead to the victim joining a
terrorist organization. For instance, a recruiter might remind the vulnerable individual about instances
where he/she was discriminated against. Being denied an opportunity solely because of one’s colour, or
religion would pose a huge threat to an individual’s self identity. Even though they might try to find
affirmation through their accomplishments, constant reminders of such instances of discrimination
might lead one to suffer from learned helplessness which would prevent the victim from engaging in
any activity that might result in feelings of accomplishment. As a result, an easier way to affirm self-
identity would be engaging in active discrimination of the perceived outgroup. Stereotypes such as lack
of morals amongst the ‘infidels’ (outgroup) because of their drinking and gambling, tolerance of
homosexuality, and willingness to allow their women to behave inappropriately in public (such as
wearing jeans, and not wearing the veil) could become common focal points in creating a divide
amongst the vulnerable individuals and the general western public. This might prompt some radical
preachers to further instruct these vulnerable individuals to exploit and murder the infidels (outgroup)
as they are not Allah’s chosen people. Additionally, these preachers might also ease the guilt of
committing crimes by reminding their radical extremist followers that all these acts are done for Allah
and his holy jihad thereby freeing the perpetrators of any guilt as they are simply serving Allah’s will
and fulfilling his holy cause. This might explain the frequent abuse of social services by radical
extremists such as Anjem Choudhary’s abuse of social benefits in UK (Dailymail Reporter, 2013).
Furthermore, radical preachers might provide terrorist narratives of oppression. They might point
towards the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan as the West’s attempts to slowly destroy Muslims. They
might talk about the Palestinian cause, providing a very one dimensional picture, and portray Muslims
as the permanent victims of the Zionist Jews and infidel West. All these thoughts aim to create a
dissonance within the individual and create (or amplify) an identity threat. To resolve that dissonance,
20

ID: 20434003
the radical preachers might encourage the victim to engage in violence with selective quotes from the
Quran further reinforcing their narratives. Subsequently, the victim might engage in violence against
the outgroup and join terrorist organizations with aims to suppress those threats to self.
WHY IS THIS SIGNIFICANT
Knowing how radicals and jihadists might radicalize and justify their actions, it is important to
invest in a deradicalization strategy. So far, the solution to this issue of Islamic radicalization has been
arrests and peace bonds, the latter requiring the individual to report to the police at regular intervals.
However, if the recent shootout in Strathroy, Ontario is any indication, this strategy has not been
successful. A major issue with jailing radicals and jihadists is that it strengthens the other radicals’
narratives about oppression of the Muslim community.
Additionally, the radicals and/or jihadists might radicalize those who are in prison with them, thus
creating new problems of individuals who are now not radical, but also experienced with the criminal
world. Such individual can provide other radicals with illegal weapons, passports, and/or use narcotics
trafficking as a means to fund their jihadist cause. I believe that by engaging religious leaders (as
mentors) and parents for religious and cultural education, ensuring successful integration of Muslim
communities, and presenting opportunities to self-affirm via legitimate means would be successful
deterrents against radical extremism and homegrown radicalization .
To start off with, one of the prime reasons for many radical extremists to fight for religious
extremist organizations such as Islamic State (Daesh) could be the disparity between the sense of duty
to be a good Muslim, and the sense of duty to protect one’s nation. One of the reasons why I am
inclined to believe so is due to the fact that many radical Muslims choose to stick with the extremist
organization of their choice and instead turn on against their own countrymen. Although much
21

ID: 20434003
information in this field is confidential, I suspect most radical recruiters are very quick to erase the
national identity of the vulnerable target and provide them with a new religious identity. The vulnerable
individuals won’t be Iraqi, Canadian, American, British, Pakistani or Afghani nations. Instead they
would be taught that their identity is being Muslim. This allows the extremist organizations to strip
away the actual identity of their recruits, making them similar as Sunni Muslims while removing the
culturally distinct part of their identity. The quest to search for one’s identity might be a very strong
factor amongst children of immigrants who come from a Muslim background. On one hand they are
told to be ‘Canadian’, however on the other hand, they cannot do things that other Canadians casually
engage in such as drinking, having a girlfriend/boyfriend, eating bacon etc. They know they are not
Iraqi or Afghani (for example), but they don’t completely feel Canadian either. This could be due to the
restrictions their family have imposed on them or due to the feeling of alienation that they might feel
amongst their peers, be it subtle or explicit. The current events of global terrorism has also increased
the alienation of many Muslims who are French, British, American or Canadian, but are alienated as
Arabs. This is evident from a 2014 Pew Research survey that asked Americans to rate the “warmth”
towards Muslims and other religious groups from a scale of 0-100 (0 being cold and negative, while
100 being hot and more positive). Muslims were rated 40, dead last, even behind Atheists (Pew
Research Center, 2014). According to a January 2016 survey, over 49% Americans believe at least
“some” Muslims to be “anti-American”, greater than options such as “just a few” or “none”. Similar
situation could be observed in Europe. Hungary (72%), Italy (69%), Poland (66%), Greece (65%), and
Spain (50%) had unfavorable view of Muslims, while most other Europeans nations that had a positive
view of Muslims in the survey such as UK, France, Sweden and Germany have had their orientation
turn negative this year (Lipka, 2016). 61% Germans and Dutch believed that refugees (during the
Syrian civil war) will increase terrorism while countries like UK, Sweden, France agreed with the
22

ID: 20434003
statement at 52%, 57%, and 46%. Additionally, citizens of France, Hungary, Poland, Italy, and Greece
are more likely (over 50%) to believe that refugees will be a burden to their country because they take
away jobs from local population and drain social benefits (Foster, 2016).
Knowing that such alienation of the Muslim community exists in the western countries, it is
important to invest in educating Muslim community to prevent radical sentiments and to inform the
non-muslim population about Muslims to prevent prejudice and alienation. This can be achieved with
policy making by the government. The government can engage imams (Islamic priest) from the
mosques of the country and ask them to focus more on the peaceful aspects of the religion and act as
mentors for the disillusioned Muslim youth. Using an imam to bring a radical closer to the religion
would allow a radical individual to affirm a valued aspect of self while assuring that he/she does not
come in contact, or stay in company of, radical preachers who might otherwise encourage them to
commit violence or support violent groups. Since imams hold a position of authority in the religion and
know the religion well, a radical would find it very difficult to downplay and discredit their integrity
and credentials. This leaves very little room for a radical to justify and emphasize their beliefs over the
imam’s and thus increasing the likelihood of deradicalization. We can pass legislation to outlaw
unverified foreign funding to curb donations from Salafist and Wahhabi organizations and donors. This
prevents influence from external sources who might otherwise push their political or religious agenda
such as Salafism or Wahhabism. Ishaan Tharoor, a prominent Washington Post journalist, writes how
the Saudi Kingdom used various mosques around the world to spread its intolerant brand of Islam
called Salafism. This was not news to Belgian authorities who, in April 2012, “quietly forced Saudi
authorities to remove the main director of the Great Mosque (Saudi backed mosque in Brussels,
Belgium), Khalid Alabri, a Saudi embassy employee suspected of propagating the intolerant Sunni
radicalism that is shared by the extremists of the Islamic State” (Tharoor, 2016). Since there is a great
23

ID: 20434003
demand within the Muslim community to learn about their religion and most courses (up to 95%) on
Islam for Muslims are operated by preachers who have been trained in Saudi Arabia, a country that
follows a strict and intolerant Salafi ideology, it should not come to anyone’s surprise that Belgium has
been sending the most radical fighters per capita from Europe to Islamic State (Capatides, 2016;
Tharoor, 2016). Additionally, legislation can be passed to make sure that the individual is certified to be
an imam which could be agreed upon by a council of Canadian imams and government. This prevents
radical preachers to claim themselves as legitimate voice of the religion, ensuring safety of individuals
wishing to convert into Islam.
Parents can be encouraged to introduce cultural aspects of the religion to their children. This
ensures that the Muslim youth is well educated not only about their religion, but about their culture as
well. Knowing one’s religion well and being proud of one’s cultural background could be a source of
affirmation that could prevent an individual from falling prey to radical preachers who might otherwise
seduce them by claiming to know the “truth” about Islam. World Religions class could be offered in
public schools. As Berger and his colleagues have demonstrated previously, exposure to other cultures
and individuals of different religions reduces prejudicial attitudes (Berger, Benatov, Abu-Raiya &
Tadmor, 2016). By introducing a world religions and cultures course, the government ensures that the
community is exposed to different ideologies and cultures resulting in diminished prejudicial attitudes
towards Muslims and other religions. This serves dual purpose. It not only provides an opportunity for
one to learn about their own religion but also ensures that both Muslims and followers of other faiths
accept each other as a community. Subsequently, it will increase integration of Muslims in the society
making it harder for radical preachers to incite hatred and recruit jihadists from a well integrated
Muslim youth.
24

ID: 20434003
Besides educating the Muslim community with the help of Imams, it is also necessary to
educated the non-Muslim community to minimize prejudice. This can be prevented by diminishing
ethnic homogeneous townships. In order to understand this issue we have to first understand why towns
such as Brampton and Markham pose a threat due to their homogeneous ethnic mixture. For the
purposes of this paper, I will look at Brampton as that is the town I am most familiar with. According to
Peel Region’s official website, 57.8% of Brampton residents are South Asians (Indian, Pakistani,
Bangladeshi etc) and 66.4% of the total residents are visible minorities (StatsCan, 2011). Interestingly,
the groups of different ethnicities are not spread apart i.e. they tend to live in clusters. As such, there are
areas where you will find mainly Punjabis, other areas with only Pakistanis, and other areas where
there are people predominantly from Portuguese or Italian origin. This means that ethnic minorities
tend to stay in clusters that are large enough to live independently -- without having to learn the
language of the host nation, or its culture. This creates a feeling of panic among the long time residents
of the town (Europeans) who now feel that their town is being invaded. As majority of the community
is of South Asian origin, most businesses will also be owned by South Asians and catering to the South
Asian market. As there is a cultural divide, due to ethnically independent clusters, there is a large
ingroup bias among the people. This can be seen in cases such as Richmond, British Columbia where
racial discrimination of non-Mandarin speaking residents saw a human-rights case being filed (Wood,
2015). In certain cases, the house owners show ethnic bias when renting their property such as in
Mississauga where Black individuals were told not to call the owner to see the property (Williams,
2016), in Toronto where only Muslims were accepted (Boesveld, 2011), and in Vancouver where only
Asian tenants were accepted (Lee and Weichel, 2016). Likewise, many business owners also show
ingroup bias when hiring for their businesses. A recent example from Brampton’s Shopper’s World
shows a job posting outside the shop with details in Filipino, so that only Filipinos can apply (Fig 2).
25

ID: 20434003
Fig 2: A racially biased job posting in Brampton
As Fig 2 illustratues, ostracization of specific ethnicities and rampant racism by the minority
creates a sense of hatred. It polarizes society and breeds resentment which increases racial prejudice
and hate attacks. Unable to find employment, rental housing, and seeing most businesses not catering
for their needs, most non-immigrants leave the town; a phenomenon dubbed as “white flight”. Such
communities, however, still have disproportionate amount of non-minority members in position of
authority such as police force. This makes matters worse as implicit bias might increase arrests based
on ethnic profiling. Living in a homogenous ethnic community, with no access to any other ideological
view except their own and with limited exposure to other cultures leads to increased prejudice and
increased risk of radicalization. Although the probability of Brampton being radicalized is low due to
its overwhelming visible minority population, towns such as Malmö and Sint-Jans-Molenbeek pose
26

ID: 20434003
significant threats due to its clustered ethnic minority population which often feels rejected and
ostracized.
To counter this issue, it would be in government’s best interest to make an active effort to
integrate and exposure these ethnic minorities to different cultures while also educated its ethnic
majority about its ethnic minorities to prevent prejudice. One such way to prevent ethnic homogenous
towns could be to provide incentives to immigrants for settling in different towns. Seeing that there is a
large South Asian community in Brampton, the government can provide faster citizenship for South
Asian immigrants if they settle in cities such as Regina. The government can increase the amount of
time needed to apply for citizenship if the South Asian immigrant is living in Brampton to further
promote its new South Asian immigrant population to live in cities like Regina or Manitoba. For
instance, if a South Asian immigrant family wants to live in Brampton then it would take them 10 years
to be eligible for citizenship. On the other hand if they choose to live in Manitoba, it would only take
them 5 years for citizenship. Once the family has been living in Manitoba for 5 years being exposed to
different community, they are likely to stay there since their jobs and friends have all been in Manitoba.
It would be a real struggle for someone to move out of their friend circle to find a new house, job and
friends in Brampton. The goal of this approach is to allow ethnic minorities to come in groups, but not
a group large enough to live independently without having to learn the language and culture (such as in
Brampton). In addition to limiting the number of ethnic minorities that settle in an area, the government
can increase ethnic amalgamation of a homogenous town by opening facilities that cater to a different
ethnicity from a nearby town. For instance, holding Russian concerts and restaurants or Italian concerts
and restaurants will mean that nearby Italian or Russian ethnic minority will come to the ethnic
homogenous South Asian town. South Asian cricket fields or Bollywood concerts can be held in Polish
majority towns so that South Asians travel to such ethnically homogenous Polish town. This can
27

ID: 20434003
encourage ethnic mixing between the two minorities and the exposure can reduce prejudice between
the two groups -- just as Berger and his colleagues had found during their research (Berger, Benatov,
Abu-Raiya & Tadmor, 2016). Moreover, the government can ensure that the police force of the town
accurately represents the ethnic mixture of the town they are policing. This reduces implicit bias
amongst the police and minimizes the feeling of alienation that the Muslim youth might otherwise feel.
Besides imams, parents, and successful integration, the key to reducing radical beliefs and
violent action is to provide an individual with opportunities to increase their affirmations so that their
self-integrity can be upheld.
Fig 3: Global Self-integrity
As Fig 3 illustrates, an individual’s self-integrity can be affected by multiple factors. While some
factors might hurt the self-integrity, such as being a victim of discrimination, others might serve to
28

ID: 20434003
affirm values important to the self. Although these important values can vary from an individual to
individual, certain factors such as family ties or desire to help the community are almost universal.
After all, why would an individual join jihad if it was not to help the global Muslim community? If we
focus on upholding the self-affirmation of the individual then we can not only reduce the violence
amongst radical individuals, but potentially dilute the extremist ideology as well. The government can
open legitimate centers where Muslims and the general public can help their community and/or donate
to global Muslim causes such as education of children in Palestine. By ensuring the community in a
transparent manner that the government is directly taking donations from Muslims and using the money
to build the Palestinian community, Muslims can be provided with another legitimate means of helping
their community and affirming a valued aspect of self. Moreover, the government can also have
donation drives where the general public and Muslims can donate money for individuals who cannot
afford to go to religious pilgrimage. Seeing the support from Canadian non-Muslim community might
strengthen the bond of Muslims and non-Muslims, making it harder for extremists to recruit individuals
to attack Canada as they have clearly seen their fellow countrymen support the global Islamic ummah.
Additionally, making the general public aware of the destruction and harm caused to Muslim
communities by terrorist groups and ignorance could be beneficial as it would reduce the recruitment of
individuals who join the jihadist cause to help the Muslim community and encourage people to donate
for the education of children in less developed Muslim countries in Middle East. Highlighting the
Western foreign policies and its role in helping the Muslim communities and refugees can strengthen
our narrative and reduce animosity that Muslim youth might have against the western governments.
Phil Gurski, a former CSIS analyst, asserts that while the Canadian government may have tried to
launch deradicalization programs, these programs focus solely on psychological factors. They ignore
29

ID: 20434003
the importance of Canadian foreign policies which fuel the narratives of radical recruits that Canada
and the west’s foreign policy is killing Muslims (Nasser, 2016). Engaging Muslim community in
politics will ensure that the youth do not feel disenfranchised. Politics could provide them with a
political discourse to resolve their grievances rather than a violent one thereby further preventing
recruitment of jihadist organizations.
To conclude, homegrown radicalization has been a current threat in our contemporary society. Its
effects are not only observed in the war torn countries of the middle East, but also right at our doorsteps
here in Europe and North America. While sceptics could subscribe to an alien conspiracy view
claiming that the terrorist attackers during the September 11 plot were from Saudi Arabia and thus the
radicalization problem was external, recent exodus of many European and North American citizens
who readily and happily joined Islamic State has been a cause of concern for many governments.
November 13 Paris shootings, March 22 Brussels airport bombings, and December 2 San Bernardino
shootings have highlighted the issue of homegrown radicalization and its transition to violent terrorism
have shaken the core of our western society. While there has been a great deal of research on how
individuals might radicalize, very few researchers have explored why radical individuals stay radical
even in wake of conflicting evidence. In this paper, I discuss cognitive mechanisms outlines by Leon
Festinger and Claude Steele, that aim to explain how individuals can be resistant to abandon their
cherished beliefs even if factual evidence points out its harmful effects. Understanding how radicals
tend to maintain their radical views will shed a new light on how law enforcement agencies can tackle
the challenge of deradicalization. Additionally, I recommend some policies and strategies to the
Department of Public Safety and researchers in developing effective deradicalization programs while
providing quality policy ideas to politicians which would look to reduce the spread of radical ideology.
30

ID: 20434003
SOURCES:
• Amarasingam, A. (2016, July 4). [Twitter picture]
• Berger, R., Benatov, J., Abu-Raiya, H., & Tadmor, C. T. (2016, May 6). Reducing prejudice and
promoting positive intergroup attitudes among elementary-school children in the context of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Journal of School Psychology, 57, 53-72. Retrieved August 7, 2016.
• Boesveld, S. (2011, October 6). Landlords face no punishment for discrimination in online ads.
National Post. Retrieved September 24, 2016, from
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/landlords-face-no-punishment-for-discrimination-in-
online-ads
• Capatides, C. (2016, January 25). Which European countries have produced the most ISIS
fighters? CBS News. Retrieved August 7, 2016, from http://www.cbsnews.com/news/isis-terror-
recruiting-europe-belgium-france-denmark-sweden-germany/
• Chossudovsky, M. (2008, January 20). Al Qaeda and the “War on Terrorism”. Retrieved August
7, 2016, from http://www.globalresearch.ca/al-qaeda-and-the-war-on-terrorism/7718
• Cognitive Dissonance (Leon Festinger). (n.d.). Retrieved July 17, 2016, from
http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/cognitive-dissonance.html
• Dailymail Reporter (2013). ‘Claim jobseeker’s allowance and plan holy war’: Hate preacher
pocketing £25,000 a year in benefits calls on fanatics to live off the state. The Dailymail.
Retrieved September 22, 2016, from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2279972/Anjem-
Choudary-Hate-preacher-pocketing-25-000-year-benefits-calls-fanatics-live-state.html
• Dawson, L. (2016). Defining and studying terrorism [Powerpoint slides]
• Dawson, L. (2016). Terrorism in historical perspective [Powerpoint Slides]
31

ID: 20434003
• Fein, S., & Spencer, S. J. (1997). Prejudice as Self-Image Maintenance: Affirming the Self
Through Derogating Others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(1), 31-44.
Retrieved August 4, 2016.
• Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959, March). Cognitive Consequences of Forced
Compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58(2), 203-210.
• Foster, P. (2016, July 12). Anti-Muslim sentiment on rise in Europe due to migration and Isil as
continent rejects multi-cultural society, The Telegraph. Retrieved 12 July, 2016, from
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/12/europe-rejects-multi-cultural-society-says-survey/
• George Santayana quotes. (n.d.). Retrieved August 17, 2016, from
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/georgesant101521.html
• Gurski, P. (2016). The threat from within. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Ingraham, C. (2015, February 11). Anti-Muslim hate crimes are still five times more common
today than before 9/11. Washington Post. Retrieved September 22, 2016, from
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/02/11/anti-muslim-hate-crimes-are-still-
five-times-more-common-today-than-before-911/
• Kirk, A. (2016, March 24). Iraq & Syria: How many foreign fighters are fighting for ISIL? The
Telegraph. Retrieved September 17, 2016, from
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/29/iraq-and-syria-how-many-foreign-fighters-are-
fighting-for-isil/
• Kunda, Z. (1999). Social Cognition: Making sense of people. Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
32

ID: 20434003
• Lee, M.J., Weichel, A. (2016, June 22). Landlord under fire for ‘Asian only’ rental ad. CTV
News. Retrieved September 24, 2016, from http://bc.ctvnews.ca/landlord-under-fire-for-asian-
only-rental-ad-1.2957829
• Linton, Marisa. The Terror in the French Revolution. Kingston University. Retrieved 12 August,
2016.
• Lipka, M. (2016, July 22). Muslims and Islam: Key findings in the U.S. and around the world.
Pew Research Center. Retrieved 22 September, 2016, from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-
tank/2016/07/22/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/
• Maikovich, A.K. (2005). A new understanding of terrorism using cognitive dissonance
principles. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 35(4), 373-397.
• Muslim group working with police to create de-radicalization program. (2014, November 12).
Retrieved August 7, 2016, from http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/muslim-group-working-with-police-
to-create-de-radicalization-program-1.2099401
• Muslim Publics Share Concerns about Extremist Groups. (2013, September 10). Retrieved July
14, 2016, from http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/09/10/muslim-publics-share-concerns-about-
extremist-groups/
• Nasser, S. (2016, May 13). If you want to deradicalize Muslim youth, talk more politics, less
religion, say critics. CBC News. Retrieved August 7, 2016.
• Offord, D. (1986). The Russian Revolutionary Movement in the 1880s. Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.
33

ID: 20434003
• Pew Research Center (2014, July 16). How Americans feel about religious groups. Pew
Research Center. Retrieved September 22, 2016, from
http://www.pewforum.org/2014/07/16/how-americans-feel-about-religious-groups/
• StatsCan (2011). 2011 NHS Bulletin: Ethnic diversity & Religion. Regional municipality of
Peel. Retrieved September 24, 2016, from
https://www.peelregion.ca/planning/pdc/pdf/Ethicity_Religion_Bulletin.pdf
• Steele, C. M. (1988). Psychology of self-affirmation. Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, 21, 271-273.
• Tharoor, I. (2016, March 23). The Saudi origins of Belgium’s Islamist threat.Washington Post.
Retrieved August 7, 2016, from
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/03/23/the-roots-of-belgiums-
islamist-threat-reach-back-to-saudi-arabia/
• Valfort, M.A., Adida, C.L., & Laitin,D. (2015, January 21). The cycle of anti-Muslim
discrimination in France is likely to worsen. The Conversation. Retrieved September 22, 2016,
from http://theconversation.com/the-cycle-of-anti-muslim-discrimination-in-france-is-likely-to-
worsen-36092
• Washington’s Blog (2016, March 25). Muslims are the victims of “between 82 and 97% of
terrorism-related fatalities”: US Government. Global Research. Retrieved September 22, 2016,
from http://www.globalresearch.ca/muslims-are-the-victims-of-between-82-and-97-of-
terrorism-related-fatalities-us-government/5516565
• Williams, R. (2016, August 23). Racist Kijiji ad for basement apartment in Mississauga violates
human rights code, says lawyer. The Mississauga News. Retrieved September 24, 2016, from
34

ID: 20434003
http://www.mississauga.com/news-story/6821584-racist-kijiji-ad-for-basement-apartment-in-
mississauga-violates-human-rights-code-says-lawyer/
• Wood, G. (2015, December 21). Chinese-only strata council prompts human rights complaint.
Richmond News. Retrieved September 24, 2016, from http://www.richmond-
news.com/news/chinese-only-strata-council-prompts-human-rights-complaint-1.2137818
35

Final_paper_revised

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Final_paper_revised

Final_paper_revised