Impact of education, income on support for suicide bombings

RichardPrins · #1 by **RichardPrins** » Mar 23, 2010 4:48 am

Study examines impact of education, income on support for suicide bombings

BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- Conventional wisdom holds that supporters of suicide bombers are people with low educational attainment and income, so investments in education and economic development should reduce support for such attacks. But a study by two Indiana University faculty members raises questions about that approach.

In an analysis of public opinion data from six predominantly Muslim countries that have experienced suicide bombings, M. Najeeb Shafiq and Abdulkader H. Sinno show that the relationship of education and income levels to support for suicide bombing is complicated at best. Support for bombings and the influence of education and income vary greatly from one country to another; and attitudes differ significantly by whether the attacks target civilians in one's own country or foreign militaries.

Shafiq is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies in the School of Education. Sinno is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science in the College of Arts and Sciences. They say the study, published in the February 2010 issue of the Journal of Conflict Resolution, points to the need for carefully developed policies to address terrorism and suicide attacks.

"Each country is different, and the attitudes are different depending on the targets," Shafiq said. "By just asking about suicide bombing, you're not likely to get a very useful sense of what people think."

The study, "Education, Income and Support for Suicide Bombings: Evidence from Six Muslim Countries," relies on detailed data collected in 2005 for the Pew Global Attitudes Project. It examines attitudes in Indonesia, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan and Turkey, which have been hit by suicide bombings in recent years. Along with many other questions, the Pew survey asked if suicide bombings were often, sometimes, rarely or never justified, both when carried out "against civilian targets" and "against Americans and other Westerners in Iraq."

Generally speaking, the study found that people who were more highly educated were more strongly opposed to suicide bombings targeting civilians in their own countries. But support for suicide bombings against foreign targets tended to be consistent across education levels. The study also found that political dissatisfaction was a factor in respondents' attitudes, with those who felt that Islam was "under threat" more likely to support suicide bombing. (...)

The study can be seen online at http://jcr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/54/1/146.

jaydot · #2 by **jaydot** » Mar 27, 2010 5:32 am

somebody flood those countries with playboy magazines. let them see what a complete woman looks like. maybe when enough of the men realise the extent of the mutilation that their women suffer, attitudes on both sides of the sexual divide will change.

Aurlito · #3 by **Aurlito** » Mar 27, 2010 5:35 am

My study shows that "fill them with food dammit."

lordshipmayhem · #4 by **lordshipmayhem** » Mar 27, 2010 11:07 am

There is a certain amount of logic to "rising income allows increased support of suicide bombing": the poor are too damned busy trying to keep their families fed to worry much about what some idiot preacher has to say. The rabble that has money to burn after filling their bellies, clothing their bodies and putting a roof over their heads has the time to listen to the rabble rouser, and the more they have to burn, the easier it is for them to stop and spend some time every day to listen to the aforementioned rabble rouser.

Matthias Wasser · #5 by **Matthias Wasser** » Mar 28, 2010 12:39 am

My understanding is that most terrorists themselves come from a hard sciences or engineering background - although that could just be a matter of the sort of expertise useful to terrorism - so the type of education may matter as well.

katja z · #6 by **katja z** » Mar 28, 2010 4:02 pm

Matthias Wasser wrote:My understanding is that most terrorists themselves come from a hard sciences or engineering background - although that could just be a matter of the sort of expertise useful to terrorism - so the type of education may matter as well.

Probably true about the type of terrorist who flies planes into buildings. You need a good deal of knowledge to do that. But I strongly doubt that people who strap bombs on and blow themselves up in the street are more likely to have this kind of background. :think:

shh · #7 by **shh** » Mar 30, 2010 12:38 am

I'd say people of medium education, or at least what's considered medium here, medium to high income, but from an oppressed or impoverished culture. If your whole country is fucked up, you're more likely to support terrorism, but you still need the skills capital and time to actually get involved in it.

samantha so-weet · #8 by **samantha so-weet** » Jul 25, 2010 8:56 pm

It's slightly more comforting to think that this practice might be a form of self-sacrifice for the good of the collective; a way of weeding out the more maladapted and misanthropic members from the gene pool. But I guess that's wishful thinking.

james1v · #9 by **james1v** » Jul 25, 2010 11:46 pm

The upshot is...Education does not equal intelligence. Some fools can remember everything they read. Islamists are very good at it, are they educated? Are they intelligent? :think:

Darwinsbulldog · **#10** by **Darwinsbulldog** » Jul 26, 2010 12:37 am

james1v wrote:The upshot is...Education does not equal intelligence. Some fools can remember everything they read. Islamists are very good at it, are they educated? Are they intelligent?

Plus there are many "types" of "education".....a real education that broadens the mind and teaches rational critical thinking and respects proper evidence ...verses....... brainwashing in religious schools that just get people to parrot dogma-which is not real education.

kamel · **#11** by **kamel** » Jul 26, 2010 1:28 am

RichardPrins wrote:Study examines impact of education, income on support for suicide bombings
BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- Conventional wisdom holds that supporters of suicide bombers are people with low educational attainment and income, so investments in education and economic development should reduce support for such attacks. But a study by two Indiana University faculty members raises questions about that approach.

In an analysis of public opinion data from six predominantly Muslim countries that have experienced suicide bombings, M. Najeeb Shafiq and Abdulkader H. Sinno show that the relationship of education and income levels to support for suicide bombing is complicated at best. Support for bombings and the influence of education and income vary greatly from one country to another; and attitudes differ significantly by whether the attacks target civilians in one's own country or foreign militaries.

Shafiq is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies in the School of Education. Sinno is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science in the College of Arts and Sciences. They say the study, published in the February 2010 issue of the Journal of Conflict Resolution, points to the need for carefully developed policies to address terrorism and suicide attacks.

"Each country is different, and the attitudes are different depending on the targets," Shafiq said. "By just asking about suicide bombing, you're not likely to get a very useful sense of what people think."

The study, "Education, Income and Support for Suicide Bombings: Evidence from Six Muslim Countries," relies on detailed data collected in 2005 for the Pew Global Attitudes Project. It examines attitudes in Indonesia, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan and Turkey, which have been hit by suicide bombings in recent years. Along with many other questions, the Pew survey asked if suicide bombings were often, sometimes, rarely or never justified, both when carried out "against civilian targets" and "against Americans and other Westerners in Iraq."

Generally speaking, the study found that people who were more highly educated were more strongly opposed to suicide bombings targeting civilians in their own countries. But support for suicide bombings against foreign targets tended to be consistent across education levels. The study also found that political dissatisfaction was a factor in respondents' attitudes, with those who felt that Islam was "under threat" more likely to support suicide bombing. (...)

The study can be seen online at http://jcr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/54/1/146.

It seems to me as though,radical islamic teaching largely corrupt humanity values regardless of educational background or intelligence of the faithfuls

GreyICE · **#12** by **GreyICE** » Oct 26, 2010 7:20 pm

shh wrote:I'd say people of medium education, or at least what's considered medium here, medium to high income, but from an oppressed or impoverished culture. If your whole country is fucked up, you're more likely to support terrorism, but you still need the skills capital and time to actually get involved in it.

It's a hell of a lot more than that. Look at the famous revolutionaries . Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Castro, Guevara, Mao, Robespierre, Madison, Jefferson, Ataturk, Ndadaye.

Can I find one that is not from a well-to-do background? One who came from poverty? One whose family was even at the 'median income' such as it was?

We so like to tout the virtues of education, and I believe in them. But not without reservation. Education and money are tools, and in the right hands, tools are weapons.

shh · **#13** by **shh** » Oct 30, 2010 10:27 pm

Good points. I tend to see education as the indoctrination society approves of, there's always danger in indoctrination though, I'm often amazed at the things people have been "educated" to believe which are just flat out wrong. I'm sure there's stuff I believe that's wrong like that too, but obviously I won't notice in those cases.