354 ChapteR 10 Behavior in Social and Cultural Context
but most terrorists are not easily distinguishable
from the general population. Indeed, the major-
ity of them—including Mohamed Atta, who led
the attack on the World Trade Center—have no
psychopathology and are often quite educated and
affluent (Krueger, 2007; Sageman, 2008; Silke,
2003). Rather than defining themselves as ter-
rorists, they see themselves as committing “self-
sacrificing violence for the greater good”; and
far from being seen as crazy loners, most suicide
bombers are celebrated and honored by their
families and communities for their “martyrdom”
(Bloom, 2005). This social support enhances their
commitment to the cause (Bloom, 2005; Ginges &
Atran, 2011). The methods of indoctrination that
lead to that commitment include these elements:
• The person is subjected to entrapment.
Just as ordinary people do not become tortur-
ers overnight, they do not become terrorists
overnight either; the process proceeds step by
step. At first, the new recruit to the cause agrees
only to do small things; gradually the demands
increase to spend more time, more money,
make more sacrifices. Like other revolutionar-
ies, people who become suicide bombers are
idealistic and angry about injustices, real and
perceived. But some ultimately take extreme
measures because, over time, they have become
entrapped in closed groups led by strong or
charismatic leaders (Moghaddam, 2005).What do you think might be the personality
dispositions that underlie your own ideological
commitments? How have experiences you’ve had,
because of your family, gender, ethnicity, social
class, or unique history, shaped your own political
views?Persuasion or “Brainwashing”? The Case
of Suicide Bombers. LO 10.9 Let’s now see
how the social-psychological factors discussed
thus far might help explain the tragic and disturb-
ing phenomenon of suicide bombers. In many
countries, young men and women have wired
themselves with explosives and blown up soldiers,
civilians, and children, sacrificing their own lives
in the process. Although people on two sides of a
war dispute the definition of terrorism—one side’s
“terrorist” is the other side’s “freedom fighter”—
most social scientists define it as politically moti-
vated violence specifically designed to instill feel-
ings of terror and helplessness in a population
(Moghaddam, 2005). Are these perpetrators men-
tally ill? Have they been “brainwashed”?
“Brainwashing” implies that a person has had
a sudden change of mind without being aware
of what is happening; it sounds mysterious and
strange. On the contrary, the methods used to
create a terrorist suicide bomber are neither mys-
terious nor unusual (Bloom, 2005; Moghaddam,
2005). Some people may be more emotion-
ally vulnerable than others to these methods,The methods used in the indoctrination of suicide bombers are also used to indoctrinate mem-
bers of some religious and New Age cults, sometimes with tragic results. More than 900 mem-
bers of the Peoples Temple committed mass suicide at the instigation of their leader, Jim Jones.