TERRORISM AND RADICALISM IN THE GLOBAL AGE: A CRITICAL

REFLECTION ON VIOLENCE AND IDENTITY

Introduction

Globalization has expanded information interchange and accelerated the

flow of people, goods, and ideologies across boundaries (Juliswara & Muryanto,
2022). With the rapid flow of global communication, terrorism and extremism
have become increasingly complex (Usmita et al., 2022). Globalization,
previously thought to drive modernity and civilization, has revealed a paradox that
threatens global security stability. Social media and digital technologies are used
by international terrorist networks to disseminate violent beliefs, recruit adherents,
and launch attacks in an open environment.

This has changed perceptions of security threats. Unlike local terrorism,

today's extremist groups promote their ideology globally through narratives that
influence emotions, identities, and alienation. Teachings packaged in pseudo-
religious or pseudo-nationalist arguments that target vulnerable groups can lead to
radicalism (Pfundmair et al., 2021). It is crucial to understand how radicalism
thrives in a globalized world where ideology can spread freely.

This paper examines how globalization fuels radicalism and terrorism and
its effects on social stability and national security. This analytical article examines
the relationship between globalization and new terrorism and radicalism
tendencies and how society and the state can respond. Comprehensive
contemplation is intended to raise awareness that these threats cannot be dealt
with only through violent means but require a structural understanding of the
conditions that foster extremist ideas.

Content

In the global era, violent ideologization no longer requires direct contact

with field operations or movement leaders (Budijanto & Rahmanto, 2021). Digital
channels have revolutionized how people are exposed to violent beliefs by
creating alternative discursive spaces beyond official authority. Extremist groups
use online forums, propaganda videos, and social media algorithms to spread
narratives of good versus evil. Identity crises, social dissatisfaction, and
existential dread can lead to black-and-white thinking that justifies violence.

Modern radicalism is not just deviant ideology. It reflects complicated

conditions caused by structural inequity and societal collapse. When society fails
to meet fundamental needs and discriminates against opportunity, marginalized
people seek alternate meanings for their lives. Extremist rhetoric becomes a
justifiable response to existential and societal unhappiness in this vacuum. The
state's failure to promote justice deepens this situation.

Inequality is growing as globalization moves knowledge and goods,

widening the gap between resource holders and marginalized people (Mohiuddin,
2024). Economic openness that promises progress is often only available to a few
established persons, leaving the bulk in structural exclusion. Collective concern
over oppression and lack of control over the future fosters rhetoric promising
rapid self-worth restoration. In such an environment, radical speech uses symbols
that can break social impasse.

The main mistake is viewing radicalism as a religious or value clash

(Saingo, 2022). This crisis is caused by the erosion of social solidarity, citizen
relationships, and communal justice processes. Extreme narratives arise when
people lose contact with the social structure that should safeguard them. When
community belonging evaporates, public spaces become unfamiliar, and life
experiences are disappointing, extreme choices are the only meaningful form of
resistance. Justice, societal reconciliation, and relationship restoration must be
prioritized to resolve this situation.

Today, global terrorism is a loose network with decentralized logic. ISIS

proves that sympathizers may mobilize violence without military training or a
central command. This is a new era of psychological, ideological, and virtual
terrorism. Terrorist assaults are a sort of political communication that instills fear
and paralyzes society.
 Because it physically attacks and polarizes society, this threat is becoming
more complex. Radicalism attacks anyone with ideological vulnerabilities, not
only religious adherents. Digital channels that are difficult to police disseminate
hate speech, conspiracy theories, and racial superiority ideologies in some
countries. In such an environment, belief and fanaticism blur, and society readily
splits into distrusting factions. Democracy is threatened by identity-based rhetoric
in the public domain.

The state's reaction to terrorism is often based on a restricted security

paradigm that prioritizes repression. Forceful law enforcement often ignores the
problem's deeper causes. This perspective views violent extremists as apart from
society. The state portrays them as threats that must be destroyed by security
forces without recognizing their historical, psychological, and cultural roots that
lead them to use violence.

Deradicalization efforts become technical and fail to address the deeper

components needed for permanent social change. Anti-terrorism efforts based on
enemy logic widen the state-citizen gap. Radicalized people are seen as outsiders
to the nation, reinforcing their sense of estrangement. Exclusion reinforces
narratives of struggle against an oppressive and exclusionary society, creating a
new cycle of violence. The state ignores the fact that extreme violence is often the
outcome of societal grievances, dislocation, and an unmet need for meaning.

If policies remain simplistic, preventing radicalization from the start

becomes increasingly difficult. A paradigm shift toward a more humane and
comprehensive approach is needed. Critical education that fosters social reflection
and analysis is key to combating hate ideology. Deeply reading reality helps a
civilization avoid radical binary narratives. Solidarity across identities and
tolerance for diversity also strengthen social links weakened by segregation. To
channel citizens' goals and frustrations through democratic mechanisms, the state
must provide a healthy and equal place for expression. Extremism loses appeal
when individuals feel heard and valued.

Civil society must consider its role in meeting this challenge. Social
organizations, religious communities, and progressive alternative media can
oppose radical narratives (Haluti et al., 2025). Promoting reasonable public
opinion and preventing group stigma are key to social cohesion. Early digital
literacy and critical thinking can decrease exposure to deceptive extremist
propaganda.

Global extremism cannot be addressed by limiting national borders. Every

country affected by violent extremism must know that this threat can spread
through cyberspace, ideology, and social inequities that cross borders. Building a
system of intelligence and digital monitoring cooperation across nations is
important, but it requires transparency and not suspicion. State actors must trust
each other to respond to global extremism, not geopolitical superiority.

A coercive approach to extremism will only perpetuate the cycle of

violence from the same foundations. Cross-cultural awareness that goes beyond
superficial understanding and generates empathy for oppressed communities'
alienation is needed. Education should promote humanistic ideals based on
diversity, not only academic knowledge. When children feel heard and appreciated
by their social structure, radical ideological exploitation decreases. Without
addressing human needs for purpose and self-worth, counter-terrorism efforts will
fail psychosocially.

Hidden turmoil in global expectations, resource distribution, and human

position contributes to terrorism (Żuk, 2023). Disparities in education,
employment, and social representation fuel hate narratives. Some turn to violent
ideologies that offer identity and revenge when the global system fails to give
certainty. Addressing these issues requires moral and intellectual courage to tackle
the core reasons that have been ignored in pursuit of illusory stability. Change
demands a collective commitment to rethink global mechanisms that have long
disregarded equity and justice.

Conclusion

The worldwide challenge of terrorism and radicalism is multifaceted and

cannot be solved quickly or simply. This threat comes from ideological networks
that use globalization to recruit and expand. Globalization brings progress and
allows violent extremist forces to emerge. Repression without comprehending
radicalism's internalization won't solve the problem. Building an inclusive and
equitable social ecology where people may express themselves and be treated with
dignity requires transformative efforts. To prevent violence, the state, society, and
global community must prioritize a dialogical strategy that emphasizes
reconciliation, cross-perspective understanding, and social justice. Terrorism is a
result of a broken hope and justice system. Collective awareness and deep social
restoration are the only ways to mitigate this threat and reorient civilization
toward humanistic principles.

REFERENCE

Juliswara, V., & Muryanto, F. (2022). Indonesia dalam pusaran globalisasi:

Pengembangan nilai-nilai positif globalisasi bagi kemajuan bangsa. Uwais
Inspirasi Indonesia. https://books.google.com/books?
hl=id&lr=&id=mY2IEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=info:lGveCFLW
AcYJ:scholar.google.com/&ots=3kh3kVL8bb&sig=b2w7sDO2LGn2VB-
xa6_EKf0yhjA

Usmita, F., Rinaldi, K., & Rangkuti, R. A. S. (2022). Upaya perangkat desa dalam
mencegah berkembangnya radikalisme. Bhakti Nagori (Jurnal Pengabdian
kepada Masyarakat), 2(2), 179–185.
https://ejournal.uniks.ac.id/index.php/bhakti_nagori/article/download/
2614/2058

Pfundmair, M., Paulus, M., & Wagner, E. (2021). Activism and radicalism in
adolescence: An empirical test on age-related differences. Psychology,
Crime & Law, 27(8), 815–830.
https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/74337/1/Pfundmair%2C%20Paulus%2C
%20%26%20Wagner%20%282020%29%2C%20Activism%20and
%20radicalism%20in%20adolescence.pdf
Budijanto, O. W., & Rahmanto, T. Y. (2021). Pencegahan paham radikalisme
melalui optimalisasi pendidikan hak asasi manusia di Indonesia. Jurnal
HAM, 12(1), 57.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7722/6aa0fa23d8c1f1d4516e54bf0e58eec
2dcd1.pdf

Mohiuddin, A. (2024). Islam in the age of globalization. Rowman & Littlefield

Publishers.
https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/de/10.5771/9798881801342/islam-in-the-
age-of-globalization

Saingo, Y. A. (2022). Penguatan ideologi Pancasila sebagai penangkal radikalisme

agama. Jurnal Filsafat Indonesia, 5(2), 147–161.
https://ejournal.undiksha.ac.id/index.php/JFI/article/download/40994/2228
3

Haluti, F., Judijanto, L., Apriyanto, A., Hamadi, H. H., Bawa, D. L., & Kalip, K.
(2025). Moderasi beragama: Menciptakan suasana kondusif keberagaman
agama di Indonesia. PT. Green Pustaka Indonesia.
https://books.google.com/books?
hl=id&lr=&id=9cM_EQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=info:UPRVHOx
DPeIJ:scholar.google.com/
&ots=7Bda34qHE6&sig=pXZmM_Xl7HllyeKuCiKavlSa7Jc

Żuk, P. (2023). “Eco-terrorists”: Right-wing populist media about “ecologists”

and the public opinion on the environmental movement in Poland. East
European Politics, 39(1), 101–127.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Piotr-Zuk/publication/359442532_Ec
o-terrorists_right-
wing_populist_media_about_ecologists_and_the_public_opinion_on_the_
environmental_movement_in_Poland/links/
6519b848321ec5513c28618b/Eco-terrorists-right-wing-populist-media-
about-ecologists-and-the-public-opinion-on-the-environmental-movement-
in-Poland.pdf