Page 9 - Šolsko polje, XXIX, 2018, no. 5-6: Radicalization, Violent Extremism and Conflicting Diversity, eds. Mitja Sardoč and Tomaž Deželan
P. 9
m. sardoč and t. deželan ■ radicalization, violent extremism ...
a set of articles discussing some of the most important empirical, meth-
odological (Knudsen, 2018) and conceptual (Kundnani, 2012, Neumann,
2013) questions associated with this area of scholarly research. Without
sounding as a truism, the unifying assumption of the articles published
in this journal special issue is the complex nature of radicalization, vio-
lent extremism and conflicting diversity [as well as their interwoven rela-
tionship]. While radicalization has become one of the ‘great buzzwords of
our time’ (Neumann & Kleinmann, 2013: 360) and ‘perhaps the most per-
vasive framework for understanding micro-level transitions towards vio-
lence’ (Silva, 2018: 34), pleas for its very abandonment as a useful analyt-
ical category due to some of its ‘conceptual fault-lines’ (Neumann, 2013)
have started to emerge as well.
In order to tackle a sort of conceptual carelessness stemming from
much of the literature on radicalization and violent extremism, Julian
Richards takes a closer look at the concept of radicalization itself and
discusses the main trends, problems and challenges associated with it.
Interestingly enough, some of the recent publications have moved to-
ward the examination of the concept of radicalization itself (Knudsen,
2018; Silva, 2018). Kundnani (2012). Next, Dianne Gereluk and Carol-
Ann Titus look at the role of schools in addressing youth radicalization
as well as in making sense of the alleged paradox between the overall dis-
engagement of youth in contemporary democratic societies on the one
hand and the radicalization of youth [the single most vulnerable group
being exposed to radicalization and violent extremism] on the other. As
they write, ‘[w]hile schools must not be burdened solely to address those
youth who may become radicalized, schools have a significant role to help
support those youth who feel that radicalization is the only way forward
for them’. Furthermore, their emphasis on the role of slogans [and oth-
er buzzwords] on the way we make sense of such complex phenomena is
an illuminating example for future research. The interview with Michel
Wieviorka discusses some of the most pressing issues associated with radi-
calization and violent extremism. The initial section of the interview is de-
voted to the discussion of the main differences between violent extremism
fueled by radicalisation and other forms of terrorism that existed in dif-
ferent European countries back in the 1960s and 1970s. In the central part
of the interview, Prof. Wieviorka reflects on some of the conceptual prob-
lems associated with the ‘standard’ interpretation of radicalization and vi-
olent extremism. The concluding part of the interview takes a closer look
political rhetoric as both the former US president Barack Obama and the Canadian PM
Justin Trudeau made considerable use of it.
7
a set of articles discussing some of the most important empirical, meth-
odological (Knudsen, 2018) and conceptual (Kundnani, 2012, Neumann,
2013) questions associated with this area of scholarly research. Without
sounding as a truism, the unifying assumption of the articles published
in this journal special issue is the complex nature of radicalization, vio-
lent extremism and conflicting diversity [as well as their interwoven rela-
tionship]. While radicalization has become one of the ‘great buzzwords of
our time’ (Neumann & Kleinmann, 2013: 360) and ‘perhaps the most per-
vasive framework for understanding micro-level transitions towards vio-
lence’ (Silva, 2018: 34), pleas for its very abandonment as a useful analyt-
ical category due to some of its ‘conceptual fault-lines’ (Neumann, 2013)
have started to emerge as well.
In order to tackle a sort of conceptual carelessness stemming from
much of the literature on radicalization and violent extremism, Julian
Richards takes a closer look at the concept of radicalization itself and
discusses the main trends, problems and challenges associated with it.
Interestingly enough, some of the recent publications have moved to-
ward the examination of the concept of radicalization itself (Knudsen,
2018; Silva, 2018). Kundnani (2012). Next, Dianne Gereluk and Carol-
Ann Titus look at the role of schools in addressing youth radicalization
as well as in making sense of the alleged paradox between the overall dis-
engagement of youth in contemporary democratic societies on the one
hand and the radicalization of youth [the single most vulnerable group
being exposed to radicalization and violent extremism] on the other. As
they write, ‘[w]hile schools must not be burdened solely to address those
youth who may become radicalized, schools have a significant role to help
support those youth who feel that radicalization is the only way forward
for them’. Furthermore, their emphasis on the role of slogans [and oth-
er buzzwords] on the way we make sense of such complex phenomena is
an illuminating example for future research. The interview with Michel
Wieviorka discusses some of the most pressing issues associated with radi-
calization and violent extremism. The initial section of the interview is de-
voted to the discussion of the main differences between violent extremism
fueled by radicalisation and other forms of terrorism that existed in dif-
ferent European countries back in the 1960s and 1970s. In the central part
of the interview, Prof. Wieviorka reflects on some of the conceptual prob-
lems associated with the ‘standard’ interpretation of radicalization and vi-
olent extremism. The concluding part of the interview takes a closer look
political rhetoric as both the former US president Barack Obama and the Canadian PM
Justin Trudeau made considerable use of it.
7
