This study examines the phenomenon of Global Jihadism through the lens of modern social movement theory. Through an in-depth analysis of its history, beliefs, and practices, we will argue that Global Jihadism has taken on many of the same characteristics as other social movements of the 20^th century by, (1) Appealing to a set of familiar symbols (in this case, religious, rather than cultural or societal) to construct a collective identity that transcends all cultural, national, ethnic, and gender boundaries, with the aim of mobilizing individuals to rise up and effect radical social change. (2) Employing frame alignment techniques to create in-groups and out-groups (Protagonist Framing), to identify and vilify the enemy (Antagonist Framing), and to mark bystanders as either sympathetic or antagonistic to the movement (Audience Framing). (3) Framing legitimate grievances, which are named and connected to other grievances within a larger frame of meaning (a Master Frame), so as to communicate a uniform message to a large portion of the population. (4) Employing consensus mobilization techniques to identify a problem, assign blame, suggest solutions and remedies, and develop tactics and strategies for mobilization, all in an attempt to direct diverse values, interests, and ideas into collective action.

By treating Global Jihadism as a social movement and noting the parallels between it and similar movements of the last century—all of which were replete with individuals who existed on the radical fringes of the political spectrum and all of which brought together a wide array of political views, ethnic backgrounds, socioeconomic statuses, and ideological causes under a master frame in which grievances were identified, blame assigned, solutions suggested, and participants mobilized—can we more effectively confront the security challenges posed by this little understood but much-feared ideology. The lesson to be learned from the rise and fall of the last century's social movements is that only when the movements' grievances were addressed and their specific concerns gradually “co-opted” into mainstream society, were the movements' members de-radicalized.