The British extreme right, reciprocal radicalisation and the language of self-defence

Research output: Contribution to conference typesPaper

Abstract

A wide range of British (and international) extreme right discourses use a language of defence against attack from an other perceived as radicalised (left, Jewish, Muslim, migrant, political mainstream, etc.) This language of defence can be used to legitimise an ideological positions promoting non-violent and violent radicalised positions Do older British neo-Nazi and fascist messages have a ‘family relationship’ with newer anti-Muslim, ‘counter-Jihad’ discourses? Are the latter more focused on one perceived threat, e.g. Robinson? To what extent are these discourses ‘opportunistic’, as Griffin suggests? Are they tactical or reflections of deeper political views? Should we generalise about how the extreme right engages in ‘reciprocal radicalisation’?
Original languageEnglish
Publication statusPublished - 22 May 2018
EventWorkshop - Cambridge Veterinary School
Duration: 25 Jan 2016 → …

Workshop

WorkshopWorkshop
Period25/01/16 → …

Fingerprint

radicalization
self-defense
discourse
Muslim
language
migrant
threat

Keywords

  • Reciprocal radicalisation
  • fascism
  • extreme right

Cite this

@conference{9aff31b642f44b4786d279d603fe81d9,
title = "The British extreme right, reciprocal radicalisation and the language of self-defence",
abstract = "A wide range of British (and international) extreme right discourses use a language of defence against attack from an other perceived as radicalised (left, Jewish, Muslim, migrant, political mainstream, etc.) This language of defence can be used to legitimise an ideological positions promoting non-violent and violent radicalised positions Do older British neo-Nazi and fascist messages have a ‘family relationship’ with newer anti-Muslim, ‘counter-Jihad’ discourses? Are the latter more focused on one perceived threat, e.g. Robinson? To what extent are these discourses ‘opportunistic’, as Griffin suggests? Are they tactical or reflections of deeper political views? Should we generalise about how the extreme right engages in ‘reciprocal radicalisation’?",
keywords = "Reciprocal radicalisation, fascism, extreme right",
author = "Paul Jackson",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "22",
language = "English",
note = "Workshop ; Conference date: 25-01-2016",

}

The British extreme right, reciprocal radicalisation and the language of self-defence. / Jackson, Paul.

2018. Paper presented at Workshop, .

Research output: Contribution to conference typesPaper

TY - CONF

T1 - The British extreme right, reciprocal radicalisation and the language of self-defence

AU - Jackson, Paul

PY - 2018/5/22

Y1 - 2018/5/22

N2 - A wide range of British (and international) extreme right discourses use a language of defence against attack from an other perceived as radicalised (left, Jewish, Muslim, migrant, political mainstream, etc.) This language of defence can be used to legitimise an ideological positions promoting non-violent and violent radicalised positions Do older British neo-Nazi and fascist messages have a ‘family relationship’ with newer anti-Muslim, ‘counter-Jihad’ discourses? Are the latter more focused on one perceived threat, e.g. Robinson? To what extent are these discourses ‘opportunistic’, as Griffin suggests? Are they tactical or reflections of deeper political views? Should we generalise about how the extreme right engages in ‘reciprocal radicalisation’?

AB - A wide range of British (and international) extreme right discourses use a language of defence against attack from an other perceived as radicalised (left, Jewish, Muslim, migrant, political mainstream, etc.) This language of defence can be used to legitimise an ideological positions promoting non-violent and violent radicalised positions Do older British neo-Nazi and fascist messages have a ‘family relationship’ with newer anti-Muslim, ‘counter-Jihad’ discourses? Are the latter more focused on one perceived threat, e.g. Robinson? To what extent are these discourses ‘opportunistic’, as Griffin suggests? Are they tactical or reflections of deeper political views? Should we generalise about how the extreme right engages in ‘reciprocal radicalisation’?

KW - Reciprocal radicalisation

KW - fascism

KW - extreme right

M3 - Paper

ER -