Pablo Cañete Blanco Jihadism as an expression of violence... 359 in jihadist rhetoric, now the narrative has fragmented and adapted to new global audiences (more abstract and less concerned by successes and specific causes). On the postmodern stage – where reality and power have become perhaps more elusive than ever before – a type of violence is consolidating that, while not new, is growing in importance due to its effects and increasing presence. Nihilistic violence, i.e. violence as an ultimate goal, is not a direct productof jihadism but rather the result of a mainly western social and psychological process – that even has western roots. It is not a question of an instrumental use of religion for political purposes, but rather the use of religion for violent purposes that, in this case, the Islamic State is able to channel in the pursuit of a political project. In other words, extremist entities are channelling and offering an (interesting) escape to this alienated population as opposed to the nation states doing so. Combatting this hollow violence involves thinking about the narratives and also the circumstances in which they can be developed. The constant call for the need for a counter-ideology or to win on the battlefield of ideas may lead to forgetting that ideologies are not only fought with counter-ideologies, but that they are also fought by offering ideologies capable of replacing them. And for these ideologies to take shape, a social basis shared by the majority of the population capable of avoiding falling into nihilism needs to be created. Offering meaning and existence is, however, a tough challenge when adopting public policies. The consequences of the nihilistic process impact on security and defence but have much deeper roots that affect all manner of issues and that, ultimately, are closely related to the level of social cohesion and to the ability to recognise the value of the individuals that make up the social group.The integration, not only of different needs but also of ideologies, reactive identities etc., is necessary.Ultimately, there is a need to recognise diversity in an increasingly uniform and standardised world that is experiencing huge human displacements and in which, however, dialogue has been eliminated as a form of encounter (to be substituted by confrontation). Many of the necessary integration policies should not be implemented vertically because this makes it more likely to come to a disagreement. Recognition is achieved with time and cohabitation, not imposition and coexistence. Public authorities should be charged with creating a framework for cohabitation through public policies, but it should also be the state institutions who are in charge of implementing them through cohabitation with neighbours, forums for dialogue, discussions, etc., as far as possible. State police and security forces, as well as the armed forces, should also take initiatives capable of contributing to this cohabitation. This should translate not only into appropriate training for personnel, but also in being able to confrontthe weight and capacities of the institution regarding the social reality it contributes to and works for.As guardians and guarantors of legal violence, they have a fundamental responsibility in its use. The same is true of those whose job it is to inform on the reality (journalists and other players in the media and social media). Their responsibility when defining and http://revista.ieee.es/index.php/ieee
REVISTA_IEEE_10
To see the actual publication please follow the link above