Analysis Of Radicalisation And Extremism Criminology Essay

Analysis Of Radicalisation And Extremism Criminology Essay Radicalisation is a complex term which has different meanings and can be used in different contexts. To be radicalised does not necessarily mean that one has to resort to violence or terrorism. It is not a synonym to extreme religious teachings or activities either. Radicalism can be intolerant behaviour or intolerance towards the views of other people. It can be intolerance towards homosexuality, ethnicity, race, colour, religion. Being radical can be intolerance towards the western culture or Asian immigrants living in Britain as well. The US Southern Baptists do not recognise homosexuality as a valid alternative lifestyle (Kahn, 2006). The army of God, a Christian extremist group in the US murders doctors who practice abortion (Gray, 2007). A former Dutch immigration minister sought to deny asylum to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Iranians, threatening to deport them back to Iran which imposes a death penalty on homosexual conduct (Human Rights Watch, 2007). Do the above examples not illustrate radical and extremist behaviour? Therefore Radicalisation can vary from having extreme views about something to intolerant behaviour towards certain people, to violent radicalisation which has severe consequences. For the purpose of this research we shall look into extremist radicalisation or violent radicalisation with religious or political aims. According to Precht (2007), â€Å"Radicalisation is a process of adopting an extremist belief system and the willingness to use, support, or facilitate violence and fear as a method of effecting changes in society†. In this definition we can see that a person is radicalised when they adopt an extremist belief system and perceive society as defective and aim to change it through non-violent or violent ways. There is a very fine line between extremism and radicalisation. According to Archbishop Desmond Tutu â€Å"extremism is when you do not allow for a different point of view; when you hold your own views as being quite exclusive; when you don’t allow for the possibility of difference† (Tutu, 2006). One could argue that there is nothing wrong with extremism or radicalisation, as it does not necessarily lead to violence but on the other hand the very fine line can easily be crossed over. However when extremism starts to have a political end, for example to force governments to the table of negotiation or to changes in policy it then converges into radicalisation (Davies, 2008). And when the willingness to use violence for a political or religious change combines with this radicalisation it can lead to terrorism. Radicalisation is a process where an individual adopts extreme political or religious ideas and goals, becoming convinced that the attainment of these goals justifies extreme methods (Ongering, 2007). In the context of this research we shall look into Islamist radicalisation or violent Islamism. Before we look into the literature we should not confuse the terms Isla m and Islamist. Islam is a religion and the follower of this religion is known as a Muslim not an Islamist. Islamist or Islamism is a term coined by the West to differentiate between Islam the faith or religion and Islamism as the ideology or political Islam.

DECISION MAKING AND INFORMATION POLITICS Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

DECISION MAKING AND INFORMATION POLITICS - Essay Example This discussion includes the exploration of the strengths and weaknesses of my organization’s circumstances and one improvement that I would make to either its structure or process. The IT governance structure and decision-making process in my organization will be a shared one. This structure entails the assigning IT governance duties to five decision-making structures. First, a Technology Architecture Committee would fall under this IT governance structure and be inherent in every operating team (Haes & Van Grembergen, 2014). Each of these teams would be in charge of convening the exclusive requirements of the divisions of the organization. Second, an Enterprise Architect Unit would entail a group of business division IT officials. These officials would take the responsibility of establishing organization-wide criteria for leading the advancements contributions of all functional units (Brisebois, Boyd, and Shadid, n.d.). Third, an IT Council comprised of chief technology officers and chief information officers of every operating team would be part of this governance structure. These representatives would convene monthly to discuss new inventions and methods that the organization can control (Haes & Van Grembergen, 2014). Fourth, a Shared Services Board would comprise of chief information officers and chief financial officers. These officials would convene to pinpoint opportunities to deliver shared IT and fiscal services to the organization. Lastly, an Investment Committee would comprise of a subsection of the executive board that offers ultimate ruling on all of the organization’s big investment plans (Hughes, 2003). Governance structures and decision-making processes echo responsibility for both decisions and contributions made exclusively to those decisions (Haes & Van Grembergen, 2014). This principle applies to my organization’s IT governance structure as well. Five decision-making structures should offer vision as to