Should we leave ideology behind in our study of terrorism and terrorists? In this response to Clark McCauley’s article, I suggest three reasons why, despite the merits of his observations, ideology remains an important component in our understanding of terrorists. First, definitional ambiguity—while not unique to ideology—can be overcome. Second, the worlds of collective action frames and ideology are inherently intertwined. Third, while we need to be able to ‘measure’ ideology, a grading scale—such as the one I proposed—has arguably greater utility than one based on framing. Ultimately, we need to adopt an inclusive approach that draws out the complex relationship between ideology and the multiple other components that coalesce in processes of terrorism.
Photo credit: AndryDj/Shutterstock.com
