Why do some Muslims hate America? Researchers offer an intriguing new answer

Jun 22, 2012

The US struggle for hearts and minds in Muslim countries has been aiming at the wrong targets, a new study claims.

The effort poured into diplomacy and public relations to counter anti-American sentiment among some Muslims has so far ignored the main source of their anti-US feeling - competing political factions in their own countries.

In a groundbreaking study in the (APSR) published by Cambridge University Press, Lisa Blaydes of Stanford and Drew A. Linzer of Emory University examine the views of thousands of Muslims across the Islamic world on American culture and American foreign policy for their paper, 'Elite Competition, Religiosity, and Anti-Americanism in the Islamic World'.

In a finding that could potentially have far-reaching effects for how the US shapes and conducts its outreach to Islamic countries, Blaydes and Linzer conclude that the main explanation for high levels of anti-American opinion in a given country depends, not as previously thought on Muslim perceptions of what America is culturally or what it does politically, but on the degree of competition between the within that country itself.

Policy-makers and the public often assume that the most religious and fundamentalist Islamic societies are most anti-American, but the research suggests this is incorrect: really anti-American Muslim societies tend to have strong secular groups.

Analysis of a huge amount of survey data collected from 13,000 Muslims in 21 countries showed that those countries where people expressed the most anti-American views were also those where two powerful political elites (one Islamist and one secular) were competing fiercely with each other for supporters. In countries where this did not apply, the amount of anti-Americanism expressed was significantly lower.

Blaydes and Linzer conclude that these battling political forces are prone to exploit grievances against the United States for political gain and, in the process, create a heightened sense of anti-American feeling among their citizens. Media outlets such as Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya also played a significant role, but Blaydes and Linzer's central tenet is that competing national politicians are the main force behind high levels of hatred of America. Blaydes comments:

"When the struggle for political control between two factions escalates, they both tend to ramp up anti-American appeals to boost their own mass support with the result that political debate in certain countries is more or less saturated with anti-American messages. This means that larger numbers of Muslims hear, consider, and are led to adopt anti-American attitudes.

"Conversely we found that in Islamic countries where the battle for local supremacy has already been won by those who are more religious, neither side of the political divide had strong incentives to invoke grievances against the US to recruit supporters and hence the level of anti-Americanism among citizens was lower."

The implications for how US diplomacy goes about winning over public opinion in the most anti-American countries is clear, adds Linzer. They must find ways to counter the messages being put out by the competing political forces within those countries:

"A core assumption made by those who advocate increasing investment in public diplomacy campaigns is that anti-Americanism stems from poor 'strategic communication' on the part of the US. The results of our study suggest, instead, that Muslim publics are highly responsive to messages from their own domestic elites and the media that report what they say about America.  Any American-led effort to change the story in the most anti-American will have to find a way to counter the effects on Muslim minds of local politicians spouting  anti-US rhetoric in order to bolster their own positions and win supporters."

Explore further: The nostalgia effect: Do consumers spend more when thinking about the past?

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Facing the future -- science in the Muslim world

Apr 01, 2010

Scientists in Islamic countries are often thought by those in the West to be languishing behind the rest of the world. Jim Al-Khalili tells Physics World readers what has been impeding scientific progress in the Islamic world ...

Recommended for you

P90X? Why consumers choose high-effort products

12 hours ago

Stuck in traffic? On hold for what seems like an eternity? Consumers often face situations that undermine their feelings of control. According to a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research, when a person's sense of con ...

Overdoing it: Multiple perspectives confuse consumers

12 hours ago

Television commercials for luxury vehicles pack a lot in their 30-second running times: the camera offers quick shots of the soft leather upholstery, the shiny colors, the state-of-the-art entertainment system, ...

User comments : 29

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

COCO
1 / 5 (4) Jun 25, 2012
I guess killing them in record numbers based on the false flag of 911 would have little of statistical effect.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (8) Jun 25, 2012
exploit grievances against the United States for political gain

Sounds just like the other socialist party in the US who are attempting to divide the US on race and class.
How does this research help when politicians in the USA have the same tactics?
TkClick
2 / 5 (4) Jun 25, 2012
that anti-Americanism stems from poor 'strategic communication'
This is of course just another silly propaganda, i.e. the "poor strategic communication". At first, people do need a strong of rational reason for to hate something or someone. The origins of deepest hate are often quite trivial. But I don't think, the Muslims have absolutely no reason to hate the USA. This country practiced a neocolonialism for whole years, during which it drained the main treasure which the Arabian countries have. I.e. the oil for a prices, which definitely don't correspond the importance of oil for western economy and therefore the price of this raw source for Western society. The USA corrupted the local governments whole years just to keep the oil prices low and if it didn't work anymore, then it simply attacked and occupied these countries for the fabricated pretences, like the alleged weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. If I would live in these countries, I would become upset for it as well.
Michael_Rivero
2.6 / 5 (5) Jun 25, 2012
Actually, the reason some Muslims hate America is that for the last 60 years, every time there is a huge explosion in the middle east and everyone Muslims lie in bloody shreds on the ground, the shrapnel is stamped "Made in the USA."
TkClick
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 25, 2012
The other reasons of Muslim hate of Western society aren't so pragmatic, though. We should realize, the Islamists aren't any lambs, and they do attack the Jews, Christians and Hinduists in another countries with no mercy, whenever their concentration in population exceeds certain level (Sudan, Sri Lanka, etc) - the USA aren't any exception. Islamism is uncivilized expansive religion by its very nature and it cannot be compared with rather peaceful Hinduism or Buddhism. Therefore the objective sources of problems exists at both western both islamic culture and each side of conflict has its truth in it, which makes the sociopolitical situation potentially explosive.

This is one of reason, why I hope in cold fusion so much, because it would remove the unhealthy dependence of Western world on the oil. Unfortunately, both militaristic , both fossil fuel lobbies in the USA are still strong and their motivations are synergistic.
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (8) Jun 25, 2012
This country practiced a neocolonialism for whole years,

What did the Muslims practice when they invaded and colonized?

I think what really should annoy the 'man in the street' Muslim in Muslim countries is how poorly their leaders have done. Muslims who want to succeed leave Muslim countries because they have no opportunities.
The extremist Muslims are resent being left behind economically by Jews and Christians.
When ALL the Arabs attacked in 1948 they assumed they would walk all over the Jews and wipe them out. They failed and were shown how inept their leaders and, maybe, their philosophy is.

rubberman
2.6 / 5 (5) Jun 25, 2012
It's not just "some Muslims" folks.....there is a very anti-American sentiment globally and citizens in every country have their own reasons for not liking America...most of the reasons are legitimate. The bombs, death and destruction don't help...
ryggesogn2
2.7 / 5 (7) Jun 25, 2012
The current regime in the USA hates the USA for being exceptional for saving Europe, three times (WWI,WWI, cold war), China, Korea and Japan.
Funny how those bombs from the USA stopped the bombs and death from the Axis, the NAZIs the Japanese, the Soviets, Red Chinese and Japanese.
Rubber, maybe you can emigrate to North Korea it you like tyranny so much. They don't use many bombs, internally, but do have much death and destruction.
geokstr
2 / 5 (8) Jun 26, 2012
The USA corrupted the local governments whole years just to keep the oil prices low and if it didn't work anymore, then it simply attacked and occupied these countries for the fabricated pretences, like the alleged weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.


Please provide cites for the massive amounts of oil that the US plundered from Iraq in the last 10 years, and how this has kept gas prices so very, very low in that time.

Also, you must mean those WMD that the CIA, Kerry, Clinton, the rest of the Democrat Party, British intelligence and many others believed they had. But they must have all been tricked in a stroke of genius by that mastermind Bush, supposedly the dumbest president ever in history, even though his academic achievements were much better than Kerry's and Gore's.

Muslims hate the US because the Koran teaches them to hate all non-Muslims.
COCO
1 / 5 (3) Jun 26, 2012
yes - and their teaming with Iran for 911 - the asasination of the Kennedys - global warming - me not winnig the Lotto - there is more than enough crime committed against an innocent Amerika indeed - let us revel in our superior and benign beliefs of tolerance and domination.
TkClick
2 / 5 (4) Jun 26, 2012
Please provide cites for the massive amounts of oil that the US plundered from Iraq in the last 10 years
LOL, why just last 10 years? The Muslim's hate of USA is of much deeper and older origin - you can google it easily. I don't want to judge the Bush's intelligence, but the fact, the global economical crisis started during his government indicates his actual role a bit. But IMO the ignorance of cold fusion finding will broke a neck of every world leader, who will insist on it, because the price of oil will raise ad infinitum in such case.
TkClick
4 / 5 (4) Jun 26, 2012
Just consider this: in the USA the price of gasoline was systematically lower, than at the rest of the whole world.
http://img.photob...axes.jpg

How is it possible, when most of this oil was imported and USA oil reserves are quite minimal? Apparently free market economy didn't worked here...

http://img.photob...gion.png

Now the USA economy faces the deep problem, because it's heavily dependent on the low price of oil. Just because I'm essentially USA fan, I urge for the fastest implementation of cold fusion technology, or the whole geopolitical equilibrium will be destroyed. The fossil fuel aristocracy must understand, it's times are over.
COCO
2.3 / 5 (6) Jun 26, 2012
you want oil - go after your main source - Kanada - invade them - they have no army and most are stoned anyway. They will love us more than those graceless AfPak clowns.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (16) Jun 26, 2012
Actually, the reason some Muslims hate America is that for the last 60 years, every time there is a huge explosion in the middle east and everyone Muslims lie in bloody shreds on the ground, the shrapnel is stamped "Made in the USA."
Not so - most third world militaries were sold soviet junk so that western allies could destroy them easily. Just consider the arab/israeli conflicts. MiGs dropped like flies. T-55 turrets flew like frisbees. They were suckered because the US and the USSR were on the Same Side. This is how wars are Designed and their outcomes Predetermined.

"high levels of anti-American opinion in a given country depends... on the degree of competition between the political elites within that country itself."

-And THIS is how the next wars are being Engineered. This is how humanity is divided up and caused to fight itself for Beneficial and Constructive Purposes. Because when war is absolutely Inevitable it is imperative that it NOT be allowed to happen by itself.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.9 / 5 (15) Jun 26, 2012
the global economical crisis started during his government indicates his actual role a bit.
It was Planned and Prepared for because it was Inevitable. Economic cycles are inevitable because investment causes growth which will ALWAYS exceed capacity.

But just like joseph and pharaoh in the bible, if you know what is going to happen you can Prepare for it and Benefit from it. The 2 of them ended up owning everything of value in egypt. This is how the rothschilds got started.

Planning and Preparation can reap unbelievable profit and power. An Entity which can Engineer wars to produce Beneficial results, would stand to gain the most of all. And ALL this would take, is 2 supposed enemies agreeing to cooperate to wage a war Reasonably. To their mutual benefit. It is easy for leaders to conclude that the people, and not each other, are the real enemy.

We can assume that this extremely obvious conclusion was reached a few millenia ago, and that all of our history is a record of it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.1 / 5 (14) Jun 26, 2012
Also, you must mean those WMD that the CIA, Kerry, Clinton, the rest of the Democrat Party, British intelligence and many others believed they had.
We did indeed find and destroy a most potent WMD in iraq, capable of regional destruction. The iraqi army. We had to destroy it twice. Rumsfeld was not lying, he was only being a little obtuse.
Terriva
1 / 5 (1) Jun 26, 2012
It's a nice rhetorical training, but what the WMD is and what it isn't is IMO clear for everybody. Anyway, even IF the Iraq would have such a weapon of mass destruction, it's not still a reason to attack any sovereign country on the world. Why the USA didn't attack Pakistan from the same reason?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (16) Jun 26, 2012
"A weapon of mass destruction (WMD) is a weapon that can kill and bring significant harm to a large number of humans (and other life forms) and/or cause great damage to man-made structures (e.g. buildings), natural structures (e.g. mountains), or the biosphere in general. The scope and application of the term has evolved and been disputed, often signifying more politically than technically. "

-Seems to fit pretty well doesnt it? Describes what happened in kuwait pretty well yes? Including torching the oilfields.
Terriva
2.8 / 5 (4) Jun 26, 2012
Seems to fit doesn't it?
I refuse to discuss with people, who are adjusting the reality and the meaning of well established words to suit their political interests and propaganda. I'm simply NOT buying it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.8 / 5 (16) Jun 26, 2012
Seems to fit doesn't it?
I refuse to discuss with people, who are adjusting the reality and the meaning of well established words to suit their political interests and propaganda. I'm simply NOT buying it.
Reality is like two dimensional ripples on a pond with many more dimensions grasshopper. It is the sound of one hand slapping your pud.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (16) Jun 26, 2012
well established words
You did take note of the official description I posted?

"The scope and application of the term has evolved and been disputed, often signifying more politically than technically."

"Disputed:
2.Question whether (a statement or alleged fact) is true or valid."

Grasshopper
http://www.youtub...JRXvPNRo

-Leaders can be using words which may mean one thing to you but something entirely different to Them. Like victory vs Victory or enemy vs Enemy. Their double Entendre may make Them laugh like the old man laughs at Kwai Chang Caine.

"Fear of god is the beginning of Wisdom." Bwahaaahaaahahaha. Grasshopper.
Terriva
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 26, 2012
You did take note of the official description I posted?
Weapon is a weapon, army is an army. Army can use a weapons, so it cannot be a weapon itself. I can imagine, such silly metaphors could make the Muslims pretty upset. And not just Muslims. USA aren't the first country, which used fabricated excuses of military action - Nazi Germany did use it too.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.8 / 5 (16) Jun 26, 2012
Weapon is a weapon, army is an army. Army can use a weapons, so it cannot be a weapon itself. I can imagine, such silly metaphors could make the Muslims pretty upset. And not just Muslims. USA aren't the first country, which used fabricated excuses of military action - Nazi Germany did use it too.
A weapons system such as a tank or a ship necessarily includes the personnel who man it. These things are only so much dumb metal unless humans are included as an integral part.

Germans acknowledged this relationship in naming their service branches; luftwaffe = air weapon; waffen SS = SS weapon.

This is also made clear when a person is an integral and disposable part of the weapon ie kamakazi or suicide bomber. But then all soldiers are considered expendable arent they?

And as weapons become smarter the distinction will only become less clear.

Martial artists such as kwai chang caine use only their bodies as weapons.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.7 / 5 (15) Jun 26, 2012
And as far as the potential for destruction, saddaams armed forces were every bit as deadly and destructive as an arsenal of nuclear weapons. They were used to threaten and intimidate. They killed perhaps 1 million iranians. They were capable of destroying entire cities. They could travel long distances and be used to attack foreign countries.

I think the analogy is a very apt one and I am certainly not the only one. Saddaams forces needed neutralizing for exactly the same reasons as any NBC stash, and it required armed forces to do it in either case.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Jun 26, 2012
"The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. The Bahmani sultans (1347-1480) in central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 captives in a single day, and many more on other occasions. The conquest of the Vijayanagar empire in 1564 left the capital plus large areas of Karnataka depopulated. And so on."
http://www.topix....V8CBQ6F9
COCO
1 / 5 (2) Jun 27, 2012
thank our legitimate God we never did anything but alturistic and glorius acts of kindness. Time to have one world religion comrades.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.1 / 5 (14) Jun 27, 2012
thank our legitimate God we never did anything but alturistic and glorius acts of kindness. Time to have one world religion comrades.
What religion is that? The GOOD one? Not this one certainly:
http://en.wikiped...in_Burma

-Buddhists have killed a few 100 thousand moslems there.

All religions = one thing, and it's all bad.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.9 / 5 (15) Jun 27, 2012
"The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves
No innocents in religions. Upon pakistans independence;

"This division created inter-religious violence of such magnitude that exchange of population along religious lines became a necessity in these provinces. More than two million people migrated across the new borders and more than one hundred thousand died in the spate of communal violence, that spread even beyond these provinces."

-It was much more than this. Hindus were also responsible for exterminating buddhists in India where that religion originated.

This is what happens when your social clubs are all designed to outgrow and overrun each other.
Rajamundi
1 / 5 (2) Jul 09, 2012
Bashir in Sudan, Syria, Gadaffi in Libya, Saddam in Iraq, Saleh in Yemen and more Generals in Pakistan ... kings in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Morocco and little princes in Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait and nobody in Somalia.

Who do you blame? The islamists? No! Never the religion of Islam ... it must be somebody else ... and America is the "Big Devil".

But wait a minute ... given half a chance, the Pakistanis, Palestinians, Bangladeshis, Egyptians, Sudanies and every one else from the 56 Islamic countries will settle in the UK, Canada and of course, ... AMERICA!

In a few years Kristoffersen and Cash won't be singing "Sunday Morning Coming Down" deut. It will be "Friday morning and Halal Chicken!"