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’?
|Publication status||Published - 22 May 2018|
|Event||Workshop - Cambridge Veterinary School|
Duration: 25 Jan 2016 → …
|Period||25/01/16 → …|
- Reciprocal radicalisation
- extreme right