Tony Blair, speaking in the wake of multiple bombing attacks in London, pledged to confront “an evil ideology” that makes for fanatical beliefs and distorts the true message of Islam. This confrontation has thus far focused on rooting out the preachers of hatred, be they hate spewing clerics in British mosques or militant mullahs in Pakistani seminaries. He has asked for Muslim help in this endeavor both within Britain and in countries such as Pakistan. But does this sharp emphasis on the preaching of ideology make for good anti-terror policy?

There have been groups of people through ages who have shown a commitment to killing people – often annihilating themselves in the course of doing so. This is equally true of the middle-ages assassins, the World War II kamikaze pilots and the modern suicide bomber. But what drives the fanatic? Even more importantly, how does he come so often to enjoy popular support?

In his classic book, The Fear of Freedom, Erich Fromm suggests a psychological explanation for the rise of the fanatic and his popular societal support. Fromm links fanaticism in the modern world to the rise of capitalism and more specifically to the emergence of the individual. Capitalism, argues Fromm, implies a transformation in human relations, with man breaking the traditional bonds that tie him to society and which ensure his place in a social order that emphasises community rather than individuality. This emergence of the individual, which Fromm calls the process of “individuation”, makes man increasingly free by smashing the chains that bind him to a traditional social order. On the other hand, it also makes him feel increasingly alone and insecure. Once humans start seeing themselves as individuals rather than part of a social whole there is a marked increase in uncertainty and an associated sense of insecurity and powerlessness. The anxiety arising from this sense of being alone and isolated frequently scares people into seeking an escape the freedom their individuality begets.

One mechanism of this escape is the individual retreating into, what Fromm calls, the “authoritarian personality” that enjoys inflicting pain and suffering on himself and others and a subservience to higher authority however twisted. Another escape mechanism is conforming religiously to traditional cultural patterns. In other words, the individual ceases to be himself, gives up his individuality and becomes an “automaton”. Such conformity promises greater security for the individual and hence provides an escape from feelings of isolation and powerlessness. Fromm uses the notion of the individual and the mechanisms of the escape from freedom to explain the rise of Nazi Germany and the popular support it enjoyed during its heyday. He is careful to relate the psychological origin of fanaticism to its socio-economic context. Economic and political strife then provides a fertile environment for the rise of authoritarian personalities and a mass of acquiescing “automatons”.

While Fromm’s linkage between the emergence of the individual and the onset of capitalism needs to be substantially filled out both at a theoretical level and in the context of history, particularly in the case of Islamic world, his idea of the individual’s desire to escape his self opens a promising window into the mind of the modern Islamic fanatic and his sympathisers. The Muslim world is slowly marching up the path of modernity, where the emphasis is on the individual rather than traditional notions of an Islamic community and society. The economic and political strife provides fertile ground for the rise of authoritarian personalities (Ben Laden style?) and a mass of dedicated followers, including potential suicide bombers. The psychological roots of terrorism among a people in flux and the socio-economic and political triggers of conflict are equally important.

The Islamic world will have to reconcile internally the psychological conflicts that stem from the onset of modernity and the emergence of the individual. New literature on institutions and economic performance - including seminal contributions by Douglass North, Avner Greif and Timur Kuran - suggests a clear link between economic prosperity and the rise of impersonal, individualistic exchange and the institutions which support it. The Muslim world then has to confront and accept the sound theoretical basis and strong statistical correlation between the rise of the individual and economic and political development.

This is in line with calls for internal reform within Muslim societies by Mr Blair and influential columnists like Thomas Friedman of the New York Times.

From a Western policy perspective the socio-economic and political triggers of terror that frequently under-gird pan Islamic fanaticism need to be addressed. This includes aiding the economic and political integration of Muslim communities in the West, supporting progressive reforms in the Muslim societies, as well as addressing political and economic conflicts in the Muslim heartlands of the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Efforts to contain anti-Western rhetoric are only a small part of the solution to the problem of international terrorism. A successful confrontation of terror will have to include addressing its deep-rooted psychological and socio-economic origins. This can only be done via a comprehensive economic and political partnership between the Muslim world and the West. Progressive reformers in the Muslim world and the West would do well to pay heed to the biblical command of Isaiah, “to undo the heavy burden and let the oppressed go free. And if you extend your soul to the hungry and satisfy the afflicted soul, then shall light dawn in obscurity and your darkness shall be as the noonday.” (Isaiah: 58)