Природа террористического действия. Проблемы и примеры
The article presents the results of the study into the rhetoric of youth in Dagestan about those who left for ISIL. The authors reconstruct the everyday discourse of “leaving for ISIL” among the youth in the region, presented by Russian authorities and media as one of the leading regions in terms of the number of ISIL followers. The research focus is not on the public forms of the construction of social problems, but on everyday talk, in particular on the claims made in the course of in-depth interviews. The study is based on the constructionist research program developed by Peter Ibarra and John Kitsuse and focuses on the identification of the discursive means of problematization used by Dagestani youth in relation to “leaving for ISIL” and young people “leaving.” The young Dagestanis occasionally use the rhetoric of endangerment, including the metaphor of a “virus.” However, the dominant rhetoric is the rhetoric of unreason. The terms used in the description of those who “left for ISIL” correspond to this idiom’s vocabulary. The image of manipulation, which is central for the rhetoric of unreason, is detailed by constructing the image of the “recruiter.” One of the identified features of the talk of the “leaving for ISIL” was episodic, that is, different from the previous and subsequent phrases and utterances of young people in accordance with the official discourse, supposedly in order to protect themselves from a possible suspicion of sympathy for ISIL. However, the rhetoric of unreason indicates a lack of social distance between young Dagestanis and those who have “left.” Informants express regret and sympathy in relation to their families and link “leaving for ISIL” with unemployment. The informants’ speech suggest the need for the development of social policy, education, and employment opportunities in Dagestan, rather than the strengthening of repressive measures.
This article studies challenges and threats in post-industrial development of the civilization. Information challenges include information inequality between countries and regions; information stratification of society; cybercrime; cyberwarfare; difficulty in protection of intellectual property rights, copyright and related rights; increased information and communication threats to privacy; advanced technological capabilities for information manipulation of public opinion. There is a rise in environmental threats, including air pollution and climate change. In future, revolutionary changes in biotechnology and genetic engineering can lead to the social problem of vital inequality causing stratification by the quality of life. Migration as an integral part of globalization brings about new issues of inter-ethnic, inter-confessional and inter-cultural exchange. The rise of Islamism plays an important role in the actualization of this trend. Religious radicalism, of Islamic or any other kind, contributes to the development of terrorism and destruction of internal stability of modern societies. The main political threats of post-industrial transit are separatism, which endangers the stability of public authorities and integrity of the country, and modern terrorism, most common ideological ground of which is religious extremism of Islamic type. Threats and challenges of postindustrial transit bring up the question of whether they can be successfully overcome under the conditions of post-Fordist model of capitalism and whether it can be preserved as the economic basis of the planetary civilization.
In what follows I make two interrelated claims: 1. It is necessary to understand terrorism as a communicative action, not as a negative label. There are thus 5 major types of terror actions (Affective, Traditional, Value-Rational, Rational and Hyper Rational), which have little in common. The term ‘terrorism’ itself is an empty abstraction and it is impossible to ‘fight terror’. 2. Terrorism may be and often is much more morally constrained than ‘warrism’. Terroristic struggle is, at least in theory, morally superior to war. Two case studies (Russian terrorism and Chechen terrorism) are provided as empirical justification of the claims.