Tag: psychology

Controlled/Manipulated Isolation:

~ HeatherR ~ Leave a comment

A Key Distinction between Recruiter and Recruited in Violent Extremism

The following is a paper I wrote (unpublished) for a university course back in 2022. In it I outline multiple variations of social isolation, both personal and group based, as well as influenced by a variety of factors, including identity, social dynamics, neuro-cognition, and circumstances. This paper was my first foray into focusing on the role of social isolation in radicalization and motivation toward violent behavior, either within lone acts (single actor/live shooter/attacker) or group activities (extremism, terrorism, cults). At the time, my focus was on the role of social isolation in making individuals vulnerable to radicalization and violent actions. As I’ve re-examined this paper over the years, I’ve expanded on and refined this important area of inquiry.

Initial Social Isolation Paper UpdatedDownload

In 2024, I was working with a colleague on trying to model how social isolation plays a role in radicalization toward violent extremism. As I delved into defining and outlining social isolation for our project, I looked back on the paper above. While that paper provided a basis for identifying societal and individual traits and circumstances to include in our model, I also recognized that something was missing. Social isolation is both a vulnerability, which the earlier paper addresses, and a weapon, which I had not previously identified.

As I worked through describing this to my colleague, it seemed to me to be well defined by the term controlled isolation. Controlled isolation is when a person or people use manipulative controls to socially, financially, and/or emotionally isolate individuals from other sources of social support or resources. This control is intended to gain allegiance from the intended target, and further be able to manipulate them into performing actions to the benefit of the controlling individual. Cult activities and patterns will help you understand the concept of controlled isolation: restricting exposure to contradicting narratives, controlling daily behavior and routines, isolating individuals from their families and friends, undercutting their self confidence, applying peer pressure and threats of social ostracization (a form of social isolation), among others.

As Gonzalez et al describe in their paper on psychological manipulation in violent radicalization, “Manipulation is contemplated as something subtle, imperceptible, and gradual without the application of violence or force. Defined in this way, individuals are unaware of the manipulation, which undermines their volitional capacity (43).” There’s a controlled isolation through the psychological and emotional control of identity, media and literature exposure, and behavior. Perpetrators engaging in socially isolating recruits rely on a cyclical pattern of preying on those already experiencing circumstantial and identity isolation (my earliest definitions of social isolation), and then further entrenching them in the group’s mindset and allegiance through controlled isolation:

  • Reliance on the social circle for identity and acceptance
  • Shame, guilt, peer pressure to suppress any individualism
  • Financial reliance
  • Welfare reliance
  • Increasing distrust of others

Recognizing and better understanding these dynamics is important for developing programs and policies for preventing and intervening in radicalization. From a judicial perspective, not acknowledging a distinction makes prosecution of manipulators incredibly difficult, as the traditional perception of cults and extremist groups can appear to outsiders, and be argued by manipulators, to be one where the individuals recruited acted on their own volition, voluntarily. They believed in the movement, were one of them, and are now turning against the group that was trying to be there for them. This blurs the lines for outsiders between leaders of movements and followers/recruits. When viewed from the lens of manipulator (recruiter) and controlled (recruited), these two groups require significantly different approaches to deterrence, prevention, and deradicalization.

As I reflect back on my early paper and the research I have done since, I am updating my term controlled isolation to manipulated isolation, to further drive home the relationship and dynamic between the recruiters and the recruited. Recruited individuals who choose to move away from the group identity and dynamics should not only have available resources for deradicalization and disengagement, but should have recourse for legal protection and assistance. This new term manipulated isolation is a step in the direction of bringing more awareness to the dynamics of manipulation and the need to recognize and address separately the two distinct parties involved.

Citation

González I, Moyano M, Lobato RM and Trujillo HM (2022). Evidence of Psychological Manipulation in the Process of Violent Radicalization: An Investigation of the 17-A Cell. Front. Psychiatry 13:789051. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.789051

Breaking the Cycle:

~ HeatherR ~ Leave a comment

How Historical Trauma Fuels Modern Extremism

As political divisions and extremist rhetoric continue to escalate across America, we find ourselves rehashing the same debates and battles that have plagued our nation for over a century. From arguments about “woke” versus “traditional” values to clashes between elite and working-class perspectives, these conflicts seem to echo something much deeper in our national psyche. What if the roots of today’s extremism aren’t just about contemporary grievances, but stem from unhealed collective trauma dating back to the Civil War?

Recent research suggests that social disconnection—the feeling of being isolated or excluded from one’s community—serves as both a consequence of historical trauma and a pathway to extremist vulnerability. When people feel cut off from meaningful social connections, they become prime targets for extremist groups that offer belonging, identity, and purpose. This psychological vulnerability, combined with cognitive impairments that result from social isolation, creates a perfect storm for radicalization. Extremist recruiters, from ISIS to domestic terrorist organizations, have long understood this dynamic and specifically target individuals seeking a place to belong.

The aftermath of the American Civil War provides a compelling case study for understanding how collective trauma creates lasting social disconnection. Confederate veterans returning home found not just physical destruction—with Southern wealth decreased by 60 percent and farm machinery ruined—but a complete upheaval of their social order and worldview. Archival evidence from asylum records reveals the psychological toll: over half the residents of one Indiana Civil War veterans’ home either attempted or completed suicide. The trauma wasn’t limited to immediate physical and economic devastation; it fundamentally shattered assumptions about the world being safe, predictable, and meaningful.

In response to this collective trauma and social disconnection, the white South developed the “Lost Cause” narrative—a meaning-making story that helped process grief and loss while maintaining group identity. Organizations like the United Confederate Veterans claimed over 1,500 local camps by 1904, providing community and belonging for those feeling isolated by defeat and Reconstruction policies. While often viewed simply as historical revisionism, the Lost Cause also functioned as a trauma response that created in-group solidarity against a perceived threatening out-group. This narrative framework, passed down through generations, established patterns of thinking about victimhood, injustice, and collective identity that persist today.

The transmission of trauma-informed worldviews across generations helps explain why certain communities remain vulnerable to extremist messaging decades or even centuries after the original traumatic events. When current realities feel disconnected or threatening, people often turn to nostalgic narratives about a “golden age” that was supposedly taken from them. This psychological pattern—looking backward to a mythical better time while framing current conditions as the result of out-group persecution—forms the foundation of many extremist ideologies, from historical fascist movements to contemporary far-right groups.

Traditional counter-terrorism approaches often focus primarily on ideology and security measures, treating extremism as a problem of wrong thinking rather than addressing the underlying psychological drivers. However, trauma-informed alternatives used successfully in other post-conflict settings suggest different possibilities. These approaches emphasize healing collective wounds, rebuilding social connections, and creating inclusive processes that acknowledge the legitimate grievances and trauma experienced by all sides of historical conflicts.

Moving forward requires recognizing that lasting peace and reduced extremism cannot be achieved simply by defeating “wrong” ideologies or proving someone “right.” Instead, we need approaches that treat the entire nation as part of a larger story of shared trauma experienced in different ways by different communities. This doesn’t mean excusing harmful ideologies or actions, but rather understanding that healing long-standing divisions requires addressing the social disconnection and unprocessed collective trauma that make communities vulnerable to extremist recruitment. Only by breaking this cycle of inherited trauma can we hope to build a more unified and resilient democracy.

Full length article in progress.