The other week I posted a piece on my blog and at Sojourners — a progressive Christian publication associated with the work of Jim Wallis — about why Westerners join ISIS. The piece focused on some of the more sociological reasons Westerners choose to connect to such an violent group. The piece attracted some critics. Most notably, an ISIS supporter contacted me on Twitter to let me know where I got it wrong.

@DarAlHaq, who has an ISIS flag and symbol as his cover photo on Twitter and regularly posts photos and stories from the front in Syria and Iraq, told me, “the article doesn't give the reality of why a young western Muslims wants to leave the comfort.” Fair enough. This is my effort to share his views and problematize my previous presentation.

Many politicians, pundits, and everyday people are wondering why Westerners are joining ISIS and the answer is not singular, static, or straightforward. Westerners, who some surmise make up a significant segment of ISIS’s some 20,000 - 40,000 fighters, are joining ISIS for various reasons, but three categories of thought are worth considering — the theological, the societal, and the sociological.

*For more on religion & culture, follow @kchitwood

Theological

As I argued previously, there is a sense in which (no matter the political rhetoric) ISIS is Islamic. It is Islamic insomuch as ISIS’s leaders, and many of its outspoken supporters abroad, contextualize ISIS’s cause within a theological framework.

Specifically, many media sources and ISIS spokespeople are explaining ISIS’s thought and action in terms of Salafism. Salafis are Islamic reformists who view their movement as a return to the roots, to the ways of the 'as-Salaf as-Saliheen', the first three generations of Muslims — the pious “predecessors” or “ancestors” of Islam. They hold to a literalist and individual interpretation of the Qur’an and Sunnah and a strict science of tawhid — the oneness of Allah. Their theological idealism leads them to contest and combat what they see as contaminated innovations (bida’) in Islam — such as veneration of saints, visiting graves, various forms of Sufism and Islamic mysticism, and even other Muslim schools of thought (an extreme view of taqfir, which leads ISIS to murder other Muslims they do not see as “pure” or “authentic” enough).

Salafis have a superiority complex, emerging from their understanding of their reform movement as a pure and perspicuous manifestation of Islam. As Roel Meijer said, “the basic power of Salafism lies in its capacity to say ‘we are better than you.’” This superiority bleeds not only into thoughts on theology, but also in terms of discourse and action. For Salafis, right thought must lead to right moral acts. Of course, not all Salafis are violent, but those who are — Jihadi-Salafists — theire superiority complex is on steroids because of the ultimate demands their philosophy makes of its adherents. This would be the case with ISIS fighters who go to Iraq and Syria and put their lives on the line for their brand of theology.

Yet, to say ISIS Islam is too simplistic. There are too many other Muslim communities and expressions of glocal (localized forms of the one global faith) Islam throughout the world. Islam is a diverse global faith, which takes on a different form, with varying interpretations of the Qur’an and the tradition of Muhammad where the local Muslim community deals with dissimilar concerns about local realities and contrasting views on religious violence and Westernization. It is unsophisticated to simply posit that ISIS represents Islam or is Islamic in a general sense with no further discussion or clarification. As Alireza Doostdar shared via Sightings at the University of Chicago, not only is there great theological diversity within Islam in general, and Salafism in particular, but also within ISIS itself. Furthermore, he opined, “the view that one particular religious doctrine is uniquely extremist will not help us understand the cycles of brutality that have fed on years of circulating narratives and images of torture, violent murder, and desecration.” Theology alone does not explain the allure of ISIS.

Societal Ideology

This is where my Twitter pal @DarAlHaq comes in. His handle name means, “Land of Truth” or, perhaps, “Land of the Right” or “Land of God,” depending on the translation. He is, evidently, in search of the “Land of Truth” where he feels he can live out his faith without the corrupting influences of modern, Western, society.

As Olivier Roy wrote we underestimate just how much Westernization contributes to the radicalization of Muslims and other extremists. @DarAlHaq is not alone in struggling with how to authentically practice (according to his view of what is “authentic”) his faith and remain pure in a context he is convinced is corrupting at its core.

In response to why he thinks Westerners leave “comfort” to join ISIS where “death and constant war” are guaranteed, he said to me:

these young [ISIS recruits] are fed up with [the] West and its lies, they don't want to see Muslims die and humiliated. They feel the [sense] of responsibility to protect them and free them from [the] hegemony of [the] U.S. and it’s corrupt agents and puppets who rule Muslims and plunder the little food they have left. They are sick and tired of western life. They are constantly bombard[ed] by prostitution, clubbing […]. The young muslims who knows their religion love to live a life of piety and faithful muslims, but the society they they live in is full of evil and that is [why] they seek salvation and join [a] group who truly believe in the same goal they want to establish a society where there is zero corruption, full of piety and [a] high standard of morals. These Islamic movements offer them a structural society where God[’s] words are above everything. They believe in the freedom of people, [but it has turned them] in[to] animals [who] have no second thought as to what the purpose of life is.

Because of this, he challenged, “we are eager to meet death, but what about you?”

@DarAlHaq’s sentiments echo a broader revitalized, and reformist, call from many Muslims whose lives are fragmented by Westernization. They see “the West” as responsible for immorality, widespread death, and a loss of purpose for life. Their ideological interpretation of Western society leads them to join groups like ISIS who, at the moment, are the foremost adversaries against “Western hegemony.” In this way, @DarAlHaq and others like him buy into the identity politics of Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” binary between “Islam” and “the West.” In so doing, they mirror the multiculturalists and “Islamophobic networks” in “the West” who and form a strange partnership with them in promoting the idea that “authentic” Islam is not compatible with modernity and vice versa.

In the past, those who wanted to join anti-Western movements would have become communists, joined leftist political or military organizations, neo-Nazi camps, or trained with al-Qaeda. Now, as ISIS seeks to establish an “Islamic state” in the Levant and the Middle East these young men and women fed up with “the West” join their ranks to combat the society they feel is degrading and destroying their lives. This sentiment is not necessarily Islamic, but could stem from various ideological sources including non-conformist sentiment, leftist creeds, or even Christian fundamentalism. Because of ISIS’s Islamic rhetoric it recruits Muslims, but any number of organizations opposing the “Western world” (notably, the anti-globalization camp) attract people from other backgrounds with similar attitudes toward the unethical lifestyle of “the West.”

Sociological

As I mentioned in my previous blogs, many Westerners also join ISIS for social reasons. Most notably, because they are isolated and lonely. In his book Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Ummah, Olivier Roy says that in the passage to the West, Islam as a religion (and its practitioners) undergo a deterritorializing, deculturalizing, and destabilizing process that, both of us argue, leaves individuals feeling rejected not only by Western society (see above), but by their fellow Muslims. Thus, these isolated men and women go in search of a new ummah (global Islamic community, on the macro level) and a new local community (on the micro level). Enter ISIS.

This list of reasons why Westerners join ISIS is not comprehensive nor entirely cohesive. There are other reasons why Westerners leave their homes to fight in the deserts of Syria and Iraq alongside other ISIS recruits, ranging from the psychological to the criminal. Furthermore, our understanding of ISIS and its fighters is limited. My contact with @DarAlHaq is just an initial foray, but gaining further access is fraught with difficulty and danger. Thus, intimate knowledge of ISIS recruits’ motivations remains scant. Moreover, understanding why Middle Easterners join ISIS is an entirely different consideration, but I surmise that theological neofundamentalism, societal struggles related to the increased pressure of Westernization, and deculturalization, destabilization, and deterritorialization still play a significant role even there.

Whatever the conclusions, the situation is complicated and in need of further investigation and fine-tuned perspectives that attempt to summarize the multifarious motivations for Westerners to join the ISIS cause. Without thoughtful and nuanced discussion we run the risk of oversimplifying ISIS and its philosophical compatriots, which inevitably leads to exacerbating the issue we set out to solve in the first place.

*For more on religion & culture, follow @kchitwood.

Whether or not ISIS/ISIL is "Islamic," or a "state," it is definitely terrifying. As it terrorizes the Levant -- killing Muslims, Christians, Jews, Yazidis, & other religious/cultural minorities in Syria and Iraq -- and takes the lives of Western journalists, it strikes fear in the hearts of many.

Swirling around the alarming analysis are the rumors and realities of individuals from Europe and the U.S. joining the ranks of ISIS/ISIL and fighting for their "cause."

The intelligence organization Soufan Group recently released a report stating that fighters from at least 81 countries have traveled to Syria since its three-year conflict began. Hundreds of recruits come from nations like France, Germany, the UK, and the U.S.

Of all the fearful intimations of this conflict, this feature seems to be the most frightening to many in the West. Could it be that my neighbor is a secret jihadi? Are redheads (a "pure" European stock) more prone to terrorism? Are mosques their hideouts? Regardless of the judiciousness of these questions, underlying them all is the question "why?" Why would someone leave the West to fight for ISIS in Syria and Iraq?

According to the Soufan report, those that leave for the Middle East to fight are typically 18-29 year-old men (some as young as 15) and some Western women who join with their spouses, or come alone to become "jihadi brides." These men and women are Islamic, often second or third generation immigrants, though very few have prior connections with Syria.

Why do they join? Is it religious devotion? Psychological imbalance? Tendency toward radical movements and anarchy? All of these motivations may play a part, but my argument is that these men and women who leave their Western homes for the dunes of terror are lonely.

These Western jihadis are isolated -- that is why they join ISIS.

In his book Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Ummah Olivier Roy says that in the passage to the West, Islam as a religion (and its practitioners) undergo a deterritorializing, deculturalizing, and destabilizing process that, both of us argue, leaves individuals in search for a new ummah (global Islamic community, on the macro level) and a new community (on the micro level).

As Islam is less and less associated with a specific nation, tribe, or territory (deterritorialization) the lines between Islam and the West become blurred. This leads to Islamization and a renewed and revived effort to stake a clear claim for Islam in the modern world. This Islamic revival can be either progressive or conservative, but it leaves the individual Muslim with a choice. This choice is problematized by the fact that, often, to be "Muslim" is necessary for the sake of identification in the West.

In the West, Islam undergoes a deculturalization process, which leaves the term "Muslim" as the sole identifier (as opposed to Egyptian, Somali, Indonesian, Bosnian, Argentinian, etc.) Muslims lose their sense of culture in the West, no longer able to identify according to their ethnic heritage or national identity. In this environment, where religion defines identity, two things happen: 1) Muslims feel they must ratify their credentials -- prove they are really, and truly, "Muslim" to people within, and on the outside, of their community or 2) having broken with the culture of their past, second and third generation Muslim migrants who are part of, but do not feel integrated into, Western society choose to reconstruct their identity along strict Islamic lines.

This whole process is quite destabilizing as it continues to isolate the individual from their former identity markers -- family, culture, nation. Everything that used to define them -- their culture, their dress, their economic standing, their political affiliation -- breaks down in the West and they are left with Islam alone to rebuild themselves. In this process is offered, what Roy calls, "the realization of the self." (37) Islam becomes the way that the marginalized and lonely Muslim in the West can reconstruct their identity.

Of course, this self cannot be reconstructed alone. There needs to be a community within which it can be rebuilt and resurrected. Enter ISIS.

"Neofundamentalist" (Roy prefers this term over 'Salafi') jihadi groups offer answers to what ails secluded Muslims in the West. Their community is built upon the free association of individuals and voluntary devotion to the community's cause. It is a "reconstructed ummah," one in which the individual plays an oversized role.

However, the ummah is never really reconstructed. Terror groups rarely have an end goal in mind. They do not wish to establish an "Islamic state," no matter what they call themselves. They are comfortable with the deterritorialized condition and the destabilized nature of the world and continually leave it up to individuals to construct the community and define its norms. In the process, fanaticism and radicalism germinate as insecurity about the borders of the community intensify. The lonely jihadi who left the West for "true Muslim community," finds that the lines are blurred even within ISIS. The loneliness and deep inner questions continue.

In the midst of this "imagined ummah" undertaking, groups like ISIS inculcate a sixth pillar of 'individual jihad' to give purpose to the life of the wayward Muslim. "This overemphasis on personal jihad complements the lonely situation of the militants, who do not follow their natural community, but join an imagined one." (42) Fighting and, to a greater degree, giving one's life to the cause, becomes the "ultimate proof" not only of one's religious devotion, but also of one's "reform of the self." (289) All the while, in search of a new community, the jihadi remains alone, isolated, and solitary -- especially in suicide attacks.

This is why bombing, however "strategic," will not stem the tide against terror organizations such as ISIS. Unfortunately, where integration or assimilation into Western societies is eschewed, the neofundamentalist path towards isolation, both externally and internally imposed, begins. Not all marginalized Muslims in the West join jihadi groups. Some of them simply choose to live in "Islamized territories" (Islamic ghettos, per se) shut off from Western influence even as they live in the West. However, for those that do not find that such closed communities fit the bill, radical Islamic terror groups call out ever stronger.

Thus, programs for integration and assimilation -- at the national, local, and personal levels -- are the only way to "fight" ISIS and restrict the flow of Westerners joining their ranks. Assimilation should not mean that Muslims must give up the authentic beliefs and practices of their faith. Integration does not lead to Islamization or the imposition of shariah law. It is, instead, a friendly policy towards Muslims in the West that leads all of us, Muslim and Christian/Jew/agnostic/etc. deeper into a real community where identity is not solely defined by religion, but also historic cultural, and new national, characteristics.

This is how we can combat the lonely jihadi.