This is not necessarily an Islamic phenomena. It appears to be a human one. We have seen the reappearance of violent Christian radicalism in the Balkans. We have seen the reappearance of violent Hindu radicalism in India. A very few Jews have even exhibited violent Jewish radicalism in Isreal. (Wanting your own ancestral homeland is not radical. Neither is acting to prevent pogroms and genocide.) One could make the argument that Marxism was violent radical atheism.
I have not heard of any violent radical apatheists, so Arnold may be safe from recruitment.
What seems to vary between sects is the frequency of violent radicalism. I'm not aware, for example, of any widespread violent radical Buddism since Ashoka, and his might be characterized as typical violent conquest, and before his conversion to boot. I do suppose it is violent and radical to set oneself on fire as a protest. I would advance the notion, however, that violent religious radicalism is closely tied to how much raw political power a given religion has. Religions which don't have much opportunity to kill people seem to avoid it, while religions which gain the opportunity to kill people seem to take it up.
Temptation on a grand scale?
By that standard, the Jews in Israel have been remarkably restrained.
It appears to me that many religions have trouble restraining their violent radicals.
This is not necessarily an Islamic phenomena. It appears to be a human one. We have seen the reappearance of violent Christian radicalism in the Balkans. We have seen the reappearance of violent Hindu radicalism in India. A very few Jews have even exhibited violent Jewish radicalism in Isreal. (Wanting your own ancestral homeland is not radical. Neither is acting to prevent pogroms and genocide.) One could make the argument that Marxism was violent radical atheism.
I have not heard of any violent radical apatheists, so Arnold may be safe from recruitment.
What seems to vary between sects is the frequency of violent radicalism. I'm not aware, for example, of any widespread violent radical Buddism since Ashoka, and his might be characterized as typical violent conquest, and before his conversion to boot. I do suppose it is violent and radical to set oneself on fire as a protest. I would advance the notion, however, that violent religious radicalism is closely tied to how much raw political power a given religion has. Religions which don't have much opportunity to kill people seem to avoid it, while religions which gain the opportunity to kill people seem to take it up.
Temptation on a grand scale?
By that standard, the Jews in Israel have been remarkably restrained.
It appears to me that many religions have trouble restraining their violent radicals.
Yours,
Wince