Creating cognitive dissonance by disrupting apocalyptic narratives: cautions and opportunities

Violent apocalyptic groups pose a unique problem to state actors because their actions can seem unpredictable. However, state actors can disrupt the apocalyptic narratives of these groups to decrease their legitimacy and ability to radicalize, recruit, and retain followers. Disrupting an apocalyptic narrative, or, in other words, causing a prophecy to fail, creates cognitive dissonance in a group’s followers, reducing their leaders’ ability to inspire acts of violence. I use case studies of four apocalyptic groups to analyze the efficacy of these disruptions. Branch Davidians, Islamic State (ISIS), QAnon, and The Seekers are, or were, apocalyptic groups according to Leon Festinger’s classic definition. However, they differ in how closely their eschatology ties to their sacred texts, with ISIS closely aligned, QAnon and The Seekers unaligned, and Branch Davidians occupying the middle ground. I argue that the more literalist an approach a group takes, the more vulnerable it may be to narrative disruptions. I also consider whether a group views prophecy as predictive or prescriptive – in other words, do they wait to see prophecy fulfilled, or do they act to fulfil it themselves? I argue that groups with a prescriptive view of prophecy tend towards more aggressive actions.