Insurgency arises from a combination of two conditions: significant unmet psychological needs, and the feasibility of violence (via both attitudes receptive to it and the actual tools of armed action). While simplistic, the familiar Maslow's hierarchy portrays this: While insurgency unfolds within a specific cultural context which causes much of the variation in it, basic human needs are trans-cultural. It means that the true essence of insurgency is not political objectives, but unmet psychological needs (although political objectives may serve as a proxy for psychological needs as insurgent leaders seek to legitimize and popularize their efforts). This is a simple observation with profound implications. People become insurgents because the status quo does not fulfill their needs. Most insurgents do not seek a better political system but rather one that empowers them or, at least, leaves them alone. Most often the political system is used by an elite to solidify its hold on power and defend the status quo.
Much of the world-including the parts prone to insurgency-sees things different. The improved state can then return to its mission of reconciling competing interests, priorities, and objectives. And since insurgency is political, so too are its solutions: strengthen the state so it can address grievances and assert control over all of the national territory. It occurs when "grievances are sufficiently acute that people want to engage in violent protest." The state cannot or will not address the grievances. From this vantage point, we see insurgency as a form of collective, goal-focused activity that comes about when nefarious people exploit the weaknesses of a political system. We assume that the purpose of a political system is to reconcile competing interests, priorities, and objectives. We are a quintessentially political people, but it is politics of a peculiar type, born of the European Enlightenment. This entails a major dose of mirror imaging. This is easier said than done as we Americans face a mental barrier of our own creation-we insist on approaching insurgency (and counterinsurgency) as a political activity.
It's common sense: to make insurgents quit the fight or to deter other people from joining them, to understand their appeal, we must know what makes them tick. Rebel Hearts: Journeys Within the IRA's Soul
#INSURGENCY WORKSHOP PROFESSIONAL#
"Who can tell the truth in a world filled with double deceptions, handlers, confused loyalties, liars, self-loathing, professional deceivers, disinformation, black propaganda, and betrayers?"
What drives insurgents " is not political objectives, but unmet psychological needs," he writes. Editor's Note: Steven Metz gives us a look into the psyche of insurgents, arguing that we fail to understand them due to our own preconceptions and mirror-imaging of western logics, ideals, and norms onto others.
0 kommentar(er)
