Who Joins Violent Groups?

1*QGll5nzHhdQq3v_m_MpyDQ.jpg

The question that has been most pervasive and consistent throughout my career has been: Why do we do the things we do? Over the years, it has taken on many hues – largely because of the setting in which the question has been asked. It has guided my enquiry in work environments like operating room theatres, among aircrew and astronaut teams, within settings of business leadership and cultural change, in occupational health and safety, and in social landscapes dominated by violent groups. 

While all of these environments have led to fascinating work, publications, and talks, one that I feel worthy of highlighting here covers findings from field research I carried out in West Africa, looking at two warring ethnic factions. This multi-year study became the first of its kind in the world because my research team was able to conduct face-to-face interviews with members of the violent groups and death squads, witnesses to the conflict, injured victims, recruiters, and group leaders. The research was published in the journal, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism and while taking place in a distant land, is nonetheless generalizable to countless settings of global unrest in which people with little or no history of violence can find themselves caught up in the moment.

The most concise way to understand the gestation of violent groups is by looking at who joins, and why. Most importantly, it’s not what ties them together that is most critical in dissecting such groups, but what differentiates them. From my findings, here are the six types of individuals who find themselves as members of violent groups. It is important to remember that these categories of joiner can all be present in the same group. 

The Pragmatist. This individual is motivated by reasons like power, wealth, or influence, which are almost always not the same as the advertised social cause for group action. Pragmatists tend to be charismatic group leaders that cultivate and inspire recruitment.

The Ideologue. This type of joiner is the one who truly believes in the group’s cause and is motivated to take action on behalf of the advertised group narrative. They tend to be early joiners and make up the dedicated core.

The Criminal. As the name suggests, these individuals join the group, not because they believe in what the group upholds, but because the group offers them physical and social cover for nefarious activities, like looting and stealing. They are criminal opportunists but can sometimes be tolerated by the group so long as they participate in the collective action.

The Basic Needs. These individuals join groups because the group offers them solidarity, a sense of belonging, or in some settings, shelter and sustenance. They are less motivated by the group’s narrative than they are by what the group can provide to them. Basic needs can also be “social” insofar as joiners of this type may have been outcasts, but by joining the group, are now applauded for their role. 

The Follower. This type of joiner is not concerned with group ideology, only how they appear to others. They are the ones “following the crowd” in order to avoid criticism and to gain the acceptance or admiration of those in their social circle, and as such, are solely motivated by a need to signal their virtue. Because they are less driven by the cause itself and more motivated by appearing to care, the Follower is also the easiest to recruit. 

The Soldier. This type of joiner is not a “military soldier” per se. The name was chosen because they tend to join when no one else is correcting the injustice and (in their understanding of the issue), someone has to do something to correct the wrongs. Hence, unlike the ideologue, who is motivated solely by the group cause, the Soldier is motivated by a sense of justice for the group itself.

There are, of course, many other layers to these types of joiners, including when each of them typically joins in the gestation of group formation and how each of them responds to particular forms of intervention and de-escalation. These are topics for another day.