This article was previously published in the Jakarta Post in November 2015
Coordinated attacks perpetrated by the Islamic State (IS) movement in the heart of Paris on Nov. 13 last week shocked France and the global community. Governments across the world quickly condemned these heinous acts against innocent civilians and warned that the fight against religious extremism, with IS forming its latest strain, was far from over. Aside from military means to counteract extremist operations, many wonder if the ideological battle can also be won. The ideological battle entails preventing people from being seduced by extreme and pernicious ideologies that inspire them to commit acts of terrorism. As IS rapidly expands its presence in Southeast Asia, especially in Indonesia and Malaysia, the importance of the ideological battle cannot be overstated.
There is a relatively simple way to prevent someone from turning into a radical and taking on an extreme ideology: cultivate curiosity. Cultivating curiosity can be one of the most practical and effective ways to counter radicalization. It could lead one to expand one’s horizons and uncover ideas outside of his or her current sphere of knowledge, and it could work to counter the rigorous indoctrination that Islamist groups engage in, to which some people fall victim. Cultivating curiosity will lead one to read different kinds of books and listen to different kinds of lectures, which in turn might challenge preconceived notions and unsubstantiated beliefs.
Learning from radically polarized sources does not in any way imply a lack of confidence in what one has learned so far, nor does it represent doubt in one’s sacred beliefs. It is rather a tacit, astute understanding that others might have something of value to offer and that no one possesses a monopoly on knowledge and truth. This understanding is vital for two reasons. First, possessing a broader understanding of the world and of history is anathema to radicalization. Radicalization often happens when individuals are constantly and systematically indoctrinated with extreme and anti-status quo ideologies germinating from only one source that is unilaterally labeled as infallible. By contrast, curiosity stimulates individuals to venture to the other side of the fence, initially, perhaps, for a benign purpose. However, there is also the not-so benign purpose of learning the weaknesses of the arguments presented by one’s ideological adversaries. Nonetheless, a sustained venture to the other side of the fence may lead to the erosion of one’s flawed ideology, for any extreme ideology is intrinsically rife with gaps in logic and is inherently untenable.
This is exactly what happened to Arno Michaelis, a former leader of a violent white-supremacist group. Michaelis ventured into reading books and listening to lectures concerning racial equality from African-American leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr. This process marked the beginning of Michaelis’ own self-de-radicalization. During a recent discussion about the intersection of knowledge, technology, and counterterrorism at the Declara office in Silicon Valley, I asked Michaelis what made him leave the racist skinhead organization that he had helped establish. Through a hoarse voice, he said, “compassion is very important to me. But also, I have always been curious, and I’ve always wanted to learn other stuff. That is what I think made me leave.” The Michaelis case is telling, for it illustrates that it is possible even for leaders of extreme organizations, not just their followers, to experience a complete cognitive shift by cultivating their curiosities.
Furthermore, extremist groups tend to be obsessed with the control and monopoly of information. Ingrained in their teachings is the idea that they hold all the truth and information that one will ever need. Since the truth is with them, others surely possess nothing but untruth. Through this false dichotomy, extremist groups emphasize to their followers and potential followers the importance of getting information only from one source—the group’s version of truth.
IS brainwashes and molds its subjects into, as Thomas Aquinas warned, people of one book. Getting information or knowledge from other sources is strictly prohibited and often penalized. IS, for example, established a fatwa (edict) Department to codify its own Islamic teachings and made the Department’s publications the only permitted source of reference in Islamic jurisprudence. It has also employed a religious police called Hisbah to enforce its draconian teachings. IS brainwashes and molds its subjects into, as Thomas Aquinas warned, people of one book—homo unius libri. In this already not-so-distant dystopia, IS plans to dissuade people from reading other books that fall out of line with its teachings. IS will try to create a parochial atmosphere where everything is observed and interpreted from only one lens. When this intellectual insularity is compounded with a penchant for violence, the only plausible outcome is the production of bigoted and enslaved individuals who have only hammers. And for those who have only hammers, everyone else who contradicts their one-sided ideology appears to be a false idol waiting to be smashed.
This leads to the second reason why cultivating curiosity is important. Those who cultivate their curiosity tend to seek information from different sources, remain open to new ideas, and are wary of institutions that seek to control and monopolize information. This creates built-in defense mechanisms against the appeal of extremist groups. Intellectually curious people might become interested in an extremist group at first, simply for the sake of learning new ideas, but upon discovering the rigidity of its dogmas and structures, its authoritarian nature, the shallowness of its logic, and atrocities the group is willing to commit, they would quickly leave.
If your friends and relatives begin to venture into the treacherous waters of extremism, be it religious or political in nature, politely ask them whether they have read or considered arguments from opposing angles. Ask them whether they have seriously considered both the material and human costs for changing the status quo. Chances are that they have not. Offer them different, but reasonably objective sources of information without pontificating or displaying condescension. Guide them to discover new horizons and paradigms. In short, help cultivate their curiosity.
Sometimes all it takes to prevent incidents like the attack in France is the cultivation of curiosity through reading different texts and considering different points of view. Let’s prevent such attacks from ever happening again. Our world deserves better.
