Summary Of The Myth Of Martrydom By Adam Lankford
Adam Lankford, a criminal justice professor at the University of Alabama, studies the minds of those who claim they would murder strangers to advance their political goals. His book, The Myth of Martrydom, provides several arguments as to how society has been continuously deceived by the misconception that suicide terrorists and other self-destructive killers are in fact, normal psychologically stable individuals. Lankford reveals parallels that exist between suicide bombers, hijackers and rampage shooters in order to deliver a unique outlook on suicide terrorism around the world. Lankford takes you through the minds of suicide bombers, airplane hijackers, terrorists, cult members, school shooters, and more. His findings account nothing
…show more content…
Lankford expresses his ideas in a way that seems to be contradictory to some of his beliefs. In his book, he blames suicide terrorism experts of being somewhat under educated and over-emphasizing the political/ideological dimension of the topic. However, Lankford himself over-emphasizes the psychological/behavioural dimension of suicide terrorism over other variables that are just as, if not more important. While the book makes some interesting points, understanding suicide terrorists as mainly mentally unstable individuals, if followed, may channel the efforts of national security professionals away from more relevant causes and triggers of suicide terrorism, and terrorism in general. This can be dangerous for a country’s national security. Another example of a weak argument the author makes is the in the case of Mohammed Atta, the most influential suicide terrorist in human history. He was the ringleader of the nineteen hijackers who struck on September 11, 2001. Lankford states that because Atta was in social isolation as a child, depressed in his later years, and struggled with feelings of guilt and shame throughout his life, suicide was the ultimate goal of his terrorist
Lankford expresses his ideas in a way that seems to be contradictory to some of his beliefs. In his book, he blames suicide terrorism experts of being somewhat under educated and over-emphasizing the political/ideological dimension of the topic. However, Lankford himself over-emphasizes the psychological/behavioural dimension of suicide terrorism over other variables that are just as, if not more important. While the book makes some interesting points, understanding suicide terrorists as mainly mentally unstable individuals, if followed, may channel the efforts of national security professionals away from more relevant causes and triggers of suicide terrorism, and terrorism in general. This can be dangerous for a country’s national security. Another example of a weak argument the author makes is the in the case of Mohammed Atta, the most influential suicide terrorist in human history. He was the ringleader of the nineteen hijackers who struck on September 11, 2001. Lankford states that because Atta was in social isolation as a child, depressed in his later years, and struggled with feelings of guilt and shame throughout his life, suicide was the ultimate goal of his terrorist