Denunciation and the construction of norms in group conflict: examples from an Al-Qaeda-supporting group

In situations of violent group conflict, group members often argue about how to deal with the outgroup. While some argue for aggression, force and separation, others argue for negotiation and cooperation. Each side attempts to persuade the group that their own position is normative and is most in line with the interests and essence of the group. These arguments often involve denunciations of opponents as disloyal or deviant. In such situations, definitions of group identities and norms, and what counts as loyalty and deviance, are therefore disputed. This paper analyses how a UK-based Al-Qaeda-supporting organisation denounces ‘moderate’ Muslims in the UK who engage with secular institutions and who ally themselves with non-Muslims in political disputes. Drawing on theological, historical and political arguments, a prescriptive norm is constructed whereby the correct behaviour of Muslims in the West is to avoid participation in secular political systems and to avoid political cooperation with non-Muslims. Muslims who are seen as breaking these norms are denounced and denigrated in a variety of ways by assigning them a range of deviant identity positions. Denunciations involve explanatory accounts which construct opponents as unworthy representatives of the group based on their deviation from Islam, or from ignorance, cowardice, mental weakness or self-interest. This paper illustrates that the practice of denunciation is an important aspect of the organisation of group conflict. Finally, it argues that it is dangerous for social psychologists to treat group norms and protoypes as consensual

Response to Karen Bauer’s Review of The Study Quran

In her review of The Study Quran in AJISS (34:4), Karen Bauer makes anumber of broad claims about the authors’ ideology and methodology, particularlyin producing the commentary that accompanies the translation.Her claims regarding the commentary, however, seem to be based on alimited reading of the text, which has led her to make a number of otherwiseinexplicable factual errors. For example, in assessing the SQ authors’selection, use, and representation of Islamic tafsīr sources in the commentary,she overlooks the note in the front matter entitled, “Understanding theCitations in the Commentary”—which makes it clear that, in the interest ofsaving space, the citation of various commentaries as sources for the opinionsmentioned in the Study Quran commentary is done through a systemof abbreviations, for which a key is provided on pages lvii-lix ...</jats:p