Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1080/17539153.2022.2116155
Gina Vale
ABSTRACT Integral to its military and state-building activities, the Islamic State (IS) terrorist organisation recruited and mobilised large numbers of children into its ranks. The group’s propaganda publications showcase the commitment and skills of its young male militants, with footage focused on training in weapons handling and hand-to-hand combat. Marketed as a potent weapon against IS’ enemies, a sub-set of propaganda videos foregrounds the role of boys in the ultra-violent executions of hostages. This article presents analysis of 20 official IS propaganda videos released between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2018, in which 71 boys conducted on-camera executions on behalf of the group. Data presented include the setting and method of killing; the profile and “charge” of the victim; and the boy’s nationality, age group, and “justifications” for their acts. Highly staged, these violent displays frame and constitute the status of the young IS “cub” and the adult male hostage as symbols of their respective societies, values, and masculinities. The author examines the juxtaposition of the two figures and their constructed positions in IS’ ideological, military, and masculine hierarchy.
{"title":"“You are no longer cubs, you are now lions”: examining the constructed masculinities of Islamic State child executioners and their victims","authors":"Gina Vale","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2116155","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2116155","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Integral to its military and state-building activities, the Islamic State (IS) terrorist organisation recruited and mobilised large numbers of children into its ranks. The group’s propaganda publications showcase the commitment and skills of its young male militants, with footage focused on training in weapons handling and hand-to-hand combat. Marketed as a potent weapon against IS’ enemies, a sub-set of propaganda videos foregrounds the role of boys in the ultra-violent executions of hostages. This article presents analysis of 20 official IS propaganda videos released between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2018, in which 71 boys conducted on-camera executions on behalf of the group. Data presented include the setting and method of killing; the profile and “charge” of the victim; and the boy’s nationality, age group, and “justifications” for their acts. Highly staged, these violent displays frame and constitute the status of the young IS “cub” and the adult male hostage as symbols of their respective societies, values, and masculinities. The author examines the juxtaposition of the two figures and their constructed positions in IS’ ideological, military, and masculine hierarchy.","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"50 1","pages":"823 - 845"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85588643","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-01DOI: 10.1080/17539153.2022.2111777
A. Russo, E. Selenica
ABSTRACT Scholarly attention is emerging on the globalisation and proliferation of initiatives and measures in the fields of counter-radicalisation and countering violent extremism (Hayes and Kundnani 2018). A multitude of international actors endeavour to provide security norms and governance standards in that respect, including international and regional organisations, donor communities, transnational/global networks as well as non-governmental actors, informal coalitions, platforms and think tanks. This article aims at mapping and analysing how such many-sided assemblages function along European peripheries, more specifically, in two under-studied countries, Kosovo and Georgia, where several international actors are involved in projects to prevent and counter radicalisation and violent extremism. The study will contrast and compare externally driven efforts of countering violent extremism and radicalisation, and trace the interests and agendas pursued by different international actors operating in the Western Balkans and the South Caucasus. Moreover, it will analyse how the concepts of radicalisation and extremism and measures to counter them have been specifically “localised” in Kosovo and Georgia, as well as grounded and embedded in their specific socio-political contexts and normative frameworks.
{"title":"Radicalisation, counter-radicalisation and countering violent extremism in the Western Balkans and the South Caucasus: the cases of Kosovo and Georgia","authors":"A. Russo, E. Selenica","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2111777","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2111777","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Scholarly attention is emerging on the globalisation and proliferation of initiatives and measures in the fields of counter-radicalisation and countering violent extremism (Hayes and Kundnani 2018). A multitude of international actors endeavour to provide security norms and governance standards in that respect, including international and regional organisations, donor communities, transnational/global networks as well as non-governmental actors, informal coalitions, platforms and think tanks. This article aims at mapping and analysing how such many-sided assemblages function along European peripheries, more specifically, in two under-studied countries, Kosovo and Georgia, where several international actors are involved in projects to prevent and counter radicalisation and violent extremism. The study will contrast and compare externally driven efforts of countering violent extremism and radicalisation, and trace the interests and agendas pursued by different international actors operating in the Western Balkans and the South Caucasus. Moreover, it will analyse how the concepts of radicalisation and extremism and measures to counter them have been specifically “localised” in Kosovo and Georgia, as well as grounded and embedded in their specific socio-political contexts and normative frameworks.","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"8 1","pages":"963 - 987"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82675218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-28DOI: 10.1080/17539153.2022.2111776
E. Njoku
ABSTRACT Although there have been attempts to theorise state-Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) relations in the Counter-Terrorism (CT) context, including the “co-option and containment” and “duality of coercion” perspectives, these two-way articulations have failed to account for the range of strategic options open to the state in regulating CSOs. This study presents the framework of Strategic Exclusion, Co-option and Containment (SECC) to underscore the general patterns of state engagement of CSOs in the context of CT. It mapped secondary evidence in 19 countries and used three illustrative case studies (Australia, Uganda and Russia) to examine the elements of SECC, namely, states’ exclusion of CSOs in law and policymaking on CT, the use of strategic ambiguity in enacting and interpreting CT laws, delegitimizing or criminalising advocacy and influencing the transformation of CSOs into state adjutants. This pattern of engagement with CSOs is transforming voluntary and associational life in precarious ways. The article advances the Copenhagen School and rational-actor model of global strategic decision-making, and contributes to discourses on the closing of civic spaces, democratic recession and the resurgence of authoritarianism. It lays a foundation for generalisable theory and future empirical research on state behaviour towards CSOs in the context of violence, conflict, and security.
{"title":"Strategic exclusion, co-option and containment: towards an integrative theory of state-CSOs relations","authors":"E. Njoku","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2111776","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2111776","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Although there have been attempts to theorise state-Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) relations in the Counter-Terrorism (CT) context, including the “co-option and containment” and “duality of coercion” perspectives, these two-way articulations have failed to account for the range of strategic options open to the state in regulating CSOs. This study presents the framework of Strategic Exclusion, Co-option and Containment (SECC) to underscore the general patterns of state engagement of CSOs in the context of CT. It mapped secondary evidence in 19 countries and used three illustrative case studies (Australia, Uganda and Russia) to examine the elements of SECC, namely, states’ exclusion of CSOs in law and policymaking on CT, the use of strategic ambiguity in enacting and interpreting CT laws, delegitimizing or criminalising advocacy and influencing the transformation of CSOs into state adjutants. This pattern of engagement with CSOs is transforming voluntary and associational life in precarious ways. The article advances the Copenhagen School and rational-actor model of global strategic decision-making, and contributes to discourses on the closing of civic spaces, democratic recession and the resurgence of authoritarianism. It lays a foundation for generalisable theory and future empirical research on state behaviour towards CSOs in the context of violence, conflict, and security.","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"9 1","pages":"917 - 944"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81600216","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-28DOI: 10.1080/17539153.2022.2116154
Eleanor Leah Williams
ABSTRACT Northern Ireland is used as a case study internationally, from how to deal with terrorism to initiating peace processes. Internment was the first state action of the Troubles that was conducted throughout the whole of Northern Ireland. The general consensus surrounding internment is that it was a failure. But, was it ethical? Were there some “good” elements to internment? What specific parts of internment should the UK tell other states to avoid? Or was the whole practice, from start to finish, unethical? This article attempts to make these lessons clearer by analysing internment through an ethical lens. To do so, it uses the Just Intelligence framework proposed by Mark Phythian and David Omand. It argues that overall, internment was unethical. Whilst internment was properly authorised, it is mostly unethical because it was not proportionate, it was not necessary in the rural areas, it failed to discriminate, the intention behind it was dubious and it was ultimately unsuccessful. Internment exacerbated the conflict by fuelling the PIRA with recruits; shifted the conflict from being urban-based to a nation-wide conflict; alienated Nationalists against the security services; and tarnished the local and global reputation of the UK government.
{"title":"Counterterrorism and just intelligence, an oxymoron? The ethical analysis of internment without trial in Northern Ireland","authors":"Eleanor Leah Williams","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2116154","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2116154","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Northern Ireland is used as a case study internationally, from how to deal with terrorism to initiating peace processes. Internment was the first state action of the Troubles that was conducted throughout the whole of Northern Ireland. The general consensus surrounding internment is that it was a failure. But, was it ethical? Were there some “good” elements to internment? What specific parts of internment should the UK tell other states to avoid? Or was the whole practice, from start to finish, unethical? This article attempts to make these lessons clearer by analysing internment through an ethical lens. To do so, it uses the Just Intelligence framework proposed by Mark Phythian and David Omand. It argues that overall, internment was unethical. Whilst internment was properly authorised, it is mostly unethical because it was not proportionate, it was not necessary in the rural areas, it failed to discriminate, the intention behind it was dubious and it was ultimately unsuccessful. Internment exacerbated the conflict by fuelling the PIRA with recruits; shifted the conflict from being urban-based to a nation-wide conflict; alienated Nationalists against the security services; and tarnished the local and global reputation of the UK government.","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"7 1","pages":"42 - 61"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78799707","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-21DOI: 10.1080/17539153.2022.2096079
Tim O’Farrell
ABSTRACT The presence of the “Islamic terrorism” narrative in New Zealand (NZ) counterterrorism, including its impact on NZ’s response to terrorism, has not been accorded the concern it merits. In the aftermath of the Christchurch Mosque attacks on 15 March 2019, the NZ government, the Royal Commission of Inquiry, and the media unreservedly agreed that NZ’s counterterrorism approach was misguided and erroneous. Central to this erroneous approach was the narrative of “Islamic terrorism” – the subject of this study – which sought to focus NZ’s counterterrorism efforts almost exclusively upon Islamic groups and individuals. The research employs a methodology of discourse analysis to examine how John Key’s National Party government drew on the “Islamic terrorism” narrative in its counterterrorism discourse. It then illustrates how this discourse manifested in NZ’s response to terrorism, both domestically and internationally, including in the introduction of new legislation. The primary purpose of this article is to demonstrate, and subsequently critique, the “Islamic terrorism” narrative as adopted in the Key government’s counterterrorism discourse and response. A major finding of the research is the Key government’s conflation, and at times virtual equalisation, of terrorism with “Islamic terrorism”. The concept of emancipation is proposed as an alternative to NZ’s erroneous counterterrorism approach.
{"title":"“Islamic terrorism” in New Zealand? The John Key Government, Counterterrorism, and the “Islamic terrorism” Narrative","authors":"Tim O’Farrell","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2096079","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2096079","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The presence of the “Islamic terrorism” narrative in New Zealand (NZ) counterterrorism, including its impact on NZ’s response to terrorism, has not been accorded the concern it merits. In the aftermath of the Christchurch Mosque attacks on 15 March 2019, the NZ government, the Royal Commission of Inquiry, and the media unreservedly agreed that NZ’s counterterrorism approach was misguided and erroneous. Central to this erroneous approach was the narrative of “Islamic terrorism” – the subject of this study – which sought to focus NZ’s counterterrorism efforts almost exclusively upon Islamic groups and individuals. The research employs a methodology of discourse analysis to examine how John Key’s National Party government drew on the “Islamic terrorism” narrative in its counterterrorism discourse. It then illustrates how this discourse manifested in NZ’s response to terrorism, both domestically and internationally, including in the introduction of new legislation. The primary purpose of this article is to demonstrate, and subsequently critique, the “Islamic terrorism” narrative as adopted in the Key government’s counterterrorism discourse and response. A major finding of the research is the Key government’s conflation, and at times virtual equalisation, of terrorism with “Islamic terrorism”. The concept of emancipation is proposed as an alternative to NZ’s erroneous counterterrorism approach.","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"40 1","pages":"893 - 916"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74182920","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-18DOI: 10.1080/17539153.2022.2082092
Tahir Abbas
The first and most important thing that I would say is that I am extremely grateful to the conference organisers, and in particular Dr Rik Peels, for providing me with an opportunity to read the book and to provide some input on some of its topics. I was at once intrigued by the many ways in which different sorts of extremism are characterised in this book, and this continued throughout the book. Examples include the contrast between tactics extremism, ideological extremism, and psychological extremism as a valuable framework for working through ideas that are about the application, techniques, and mindsets concerning those that might interest us as extremists, among other things. These themes are explored in-depth, and the philosophical ramifications of the application in context are discussed for all who are interested in its meaning in practice – and, in some cases, what can be done to alleviate it in working through these conceptualisations. But what is interesting is how there are synergies between all the themes explored. In other words, extremism does not exist in a vacuum – and as argued by Cassam, we are talking about violent extremism here, rather than extremism in general – because not all extremism is violent. And what matters to us as social and philosophical thinkers, as well as those involved in policymaking, is how to deal with the most concerning form of extremism, which is extremism that poses a threat to our national security.
{"title":"Extremism: a philosophical analysis by Quassim Cassim: a review","authors":"Tahir Abbas","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2082092","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2082092","url":null,"abstract":"The first and most important thing that I would say is that I am extremely grateful to the conference organisers, and in particular Dr Rik Peels, for providing me with an opportunity to read the book and to provide some input on some of its topics. I was at once intrigued by the many ways in which different sorts of extremism are characterised in this book, and this continued throughout the book. Examples include the contrast between tactics extremism, ideological extremism, and psychological extremism as a valuable framework for working through ideas that are about the application, techniques, and mindsets concerning those that might interest us as extremists, among other things. These themes are explored in-depth, and the philosophical ramifications of the application in context are discussed for all who are interested in its meaning in practice – and, in some cases, what can be done to alleviate it in working through these conceptualisations. But what is interesting is how there are synergies between all the themes explored. In other words, extremism does not exist in a vacuum – and as argued by Cassam, we are talking about violent extremism here, rather than extremism in general – because not all extremism is violent. And what matters to us as social and philosophical thinkers, as well as those involved in policymaking, is how to deal with the most concerning form of extremism, which is extremism that poses a threat to our national security.","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"13 1","pages":"1032 - 1037"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83903662","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-15eCollection Date: 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1080/17539153.2022.2082095
Naomi Kloosterboer
In his newest book, Extremism (Cassam 2022), philosopher Quassim Cassam brings together and analyses many different concepts in extremism studies, such as ideology, violence, radicalisation, grievances, counternarratives, fanaticism, radicalism, and fundamentalism. Central to the book is the distinction between three different types of extremism: ideological, methods, and psychological extremism. This distinction illuminates the different ways in which the term is used and can be used to identify an extremist. In this commentary, I question what I consider to be Cassam’s predominantly individualistic approach to becoming and being an extremist. I will first focus on one of the types – psychological or mindset extremism – and question its relation to (counter-) extremist narratives. Next, I draw attention to Cassam’s emphasis on the role of epistemic agency instead of the role of social or structural factors in radicalisation processes, and argue that conceptualising agency as situated diminishes the dichotomy between these different explanations.
{"title":"Mindsets and narratives: A commentary on Quassim Cassam's <i>Extremism</i>.","authors":"Naomi Kloosterboer","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2082095","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2082095","url":null,"abstract":"In his newest book, Extremism (Cassam 2022), philosopher Quassim Cassam brings together and analyses many different concepts in extremism studies, such as ideology, violence, radicalisation, grievances, counternarratives, fanaticism, radicalism, and fundamentalism. Central to the book is the distinction between three different types of extremism: ideological, methods, and psychological extremism. This distinction illuminates the different ways in which the term is used and can be used to identify an extremist. In this commentary, I question what I consider to be Cassam’s predominantly individualistic approach to becoming and being an extremist. I will first focus on one of the types – psychological or mindset extremism – and question its relation to (counter-) extremist narratives. Next, I draw attention to Cassam’s emphasis on the role of epistemic agency instead of the role of social or structural factors in radicalisation processes, and argue that conceptualising agency as situated diminishes the dichotomy between these different explanations.","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"15 4","pages":"1026-1031"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/23/43/RTER_15_2082095.PMC9639581.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40464610","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-10DOI: 10.1080/17539153.2022.2099059
S. Nabi
{"title":"The Suspect, Counterterrorism, Islam and the Security State","authors":"S. Nabi","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2099059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2099059","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"14 1","pages":"1050 - 1054"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87546762","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-05DOI: 10.1080/17539153.2022.2082090
R. Peels
{"title":"Introduction: the philosophical foundations of the study of extremism – A symposium on Quassim Cassam’s Extremism","authors":"R. Peels","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2082090","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2082090","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"92 1","pages":"1023 - 1025"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87334110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/17539153.2022.2094540
Mattias Wahlström
ABSTRACT Violent extremism has internationally become an established and highly prioritised social problem. While there is extensive and ongoing international diffusion and coordination, there are national specificities in terms of meanings conferred to this social problem and to the processes of its establishment in the public sphere. In this article, the trajectory of the Swedish notion of “violence-affirming extremism” is studied through an analysis of the coverage of “extremism” in national media from 1995 to 2019. It is argued that the introduction of the term “violence-affirming extremism” constituted a novel social problem frame established and institutionalised during the period 2008–2019. This process was driven to a large extent by terrorist events domestically and abroad, instilling a sense of drama and urgency. Whereas the new frame merged Islamist, left-wing and right-wing extremism as part of the same phenomenon, there were also differences in terms of perceived causes and solutions. Islamist extremism received the majority of mentions and was associated with the highest proportion of control-oriented solutions, such as legislation, policing and surveillance. These types of solutions remained salient throughout the latter part of the period, while other solution types appeared to lose momentum as the problem became institutionalised.
{"title":"Constructing “violence-affirming extremism”: a Swedish social problem trajectory","authors":"Mattias Wahlström","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2094540","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2094540","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Violent extremism has internationally become an established and highly prioritised social problem. While there is extensive and ongoing international diffusion and coordination, there are national specificities in terms of meanings conferred to this social problem and to the processes of its establishment in the public sphere. In this article, the trajectory of the Swedish notion of “violence-affirming extremism” is studied through an analysis of the coverage of “extremism” in national media from 1995 to 2019. It is argued that the introduction of the term “violence-affirming extremism” constituted a novel social problem frame established and institutionalised during the period 2008–2019. This process was driven to a large extent by terrorist events domestically and abroad, instilling a sense of drama and urgency. Whereas the new frame merged Islamist, left-wing and right-wing extremism as part of the same phenomenon, there were also differences in terms of perceived causes and solutions. Islamist extremism received the majority of mentions and was associated with the highest proportion of control-oriented solutions, such as legislation, policing and surveillance. These types of solutions remained salient throughout the latter part of the period, while other solution types appeared to lose momentum as the problem became institutionalised.","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"46 1","pages":"867 - 892"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74054655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：