Violent Radicalization in Europe: What We Know and What We Do Not Know

Dalgaard‐Nielsen, Anja

doi:10.1080/1057610x.2010.501423

Cited by 225 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…12-13;Brown & Saeed, 2015;Cragin, 2014;Schmidt, 2013;Schuurman & Eijkman, 2013). Also terrorism experts have not been able to specify with any certainty when people form a threat to society (Dalgaard-Nielsen, 2010;Horgan, 2010;Koehler, 2016;Mastroe & Szmania, 2016;Neumann, 2013;Schmidt, 2013;Schuurman, 2017;Schuurman, Eijkman, & Bakker, 2015). Especially when there is no clear evidence of preparation for an attack or incitement to hatred, evaluating the risk an individual poses is a matter of subjective judgment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subjectivity in detection of radicalisation and violent extremism: a youth worker's perspective

Weert

Eijkman

2018

Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the challenges local youth workers face at the intersection of providing social care and detecting violent extremism. Extremism and other radical ideologies are often assumed to be a harbinger of terrorism. Even though both are still a rare phenomenon among adolescents, European states have become highly concerned with being alert to early signs of radicalisation processes. As a result, youth workers as well as other local professionals have been confronted with the task of detecting these early signs. However, despite training and increased knowledge, the question remains whether youth workers are sufficiently equipped to assess potential risks in youth who show no concrete plans for criminal action. In these cases, prevention targets ideas rather than violent behaviour. This article details qualitative results of a case study among Dutch youth workers and suggests that no clear framework exists for detection of radicalisation processes into (violent) extremism. This has two main causes. Firstly, the concepts of radicalisation and (violent) extremism are in practice difficult to distinguish. Secondly, the youth worker's judgement often relies more on individual perceptions rather than evidence-based criteria to identify potential 'risky' persons. This situation may lead to undesired side effects such as executive arbitrariness, prejudice or stigmatisation. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subjectivity in detection of radicalisation and violent extremism: a youth worker's perspective

Weert

Eijkman

2018

Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Universities located in heterogeneous social structures (Amman and Yarmouk) and environment was found to be higher in radicalization compared to universities located in the homogeneous communities (Tafila and Mutah). Similarities in radicalization attributed to gender and college type can be interpreted by the growing readiness of students to pursue and support far-reaching change in society that they conflict with, squeezed in or oppose a direct threat to the existing order that they saw as corrupted (Dalgaard-Nielsen, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radicalizing Arab University Students: A Global Emerging Threat

Al-Badayneh¹,

Khelifa²,

Alhasan³

2016

JMC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the study was to explore the factors mediating college students" radicalization. A sample of 1,116 students was drawn from four different Jordanian universities. The construct validity of the scale was estimated by calculating the correlation between the radicalization items and the negative emotion items. A positive significant relationship was found (0.12, α = 0.000), a sign of validity of the scale. The scale reliability was also strong and was estimated at 0.90 using Cronbach Alpha. Factor analysis produced five factors explaining 45% of the total variance of radicalization. The first factor labeled "political radicalization" explained 18.5% of the variance, the second factor "religious radicalization" explained 12.7%, the third factor "violent radicalization" explained 6.4% of the variance, the fourth "group radicalization" accounted for 4%, and the fifth factor "social radicalization" only accounted for 3% of the total variance. Significant differences in student radicalization were found according to the geographical region of the university (North, Center and South), F = 14, α = 0.000. However, no significant differences were found in radicalization as it relates to gender, and type of college (i.e., Humanities vs. Pure Sciences).

show abstract

“…Despite recent debates on the threat of radicalization and various sources or explanations of radicalization (see Brooks 2011;Dalgaard-Nielsen 2010;McCauley and Moskalenko 2011;Sedgwick 2010) studies on security and surveillance practices that target radicalization have been more difficult. Like many research projects examining the practices of surveillance and security that target particular threats, there are numerous barriers to gaining access to data that can speak to the nature of these surveillance practices.…”

Section: New Discourses Of Threat: Radicalization and Violent Extremismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Security Traps and Discourses of Radicalization: Examining Surveillance Practices Targeting Muslims in Canada

Monaghan

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Security agencies in Canada have become increasingly anxious regarding the threat of domestic radicalization. Defined loosely as "the process of moving from moderate beliefs to extremist belief," inter-agency security practices aim to categorize and surveil populations deemed at risk of radicalization in Canada, particularly young Muslims. To detail surveillance efforts against domestic radicalization, this article uses the Access to Information Act (ATIA) to detail the work of Canada's inter-agency Combating Violent Extremism Working Group (CVEWG). As a network of security governance actors, the CVEWG is comprised of almost 20 departments and agencies with broad areas of expertise (intelligence, defence, policing, border security, transportation, immigration, etc.). Contributing to critical security studies and scholarship on the sociology of surveillance, this article maps the contours and activities of the CVEWG and uses the ATIA to narrate the production and iteration of radicalization threats through Canadian security governance networks. Tracing the influence of other states-the U.S. and U.K., in particularthe article highlights how surveillance practices that target radicalization are disembedded from particular contexts and, instead, framed around abstractions of menacing Islam. By way of conclusion, it casts aspersions on the expansion of counter-terrorism resources towards combating violent extremism; raising questions about the dubious categories and motives in contemporary practices of the "war on terror."

show abstract

Violent Radicalization in Europe: What We Know and What We Do Not Know

Cited by 225 publications

References 17 publications

Subjectivity in detection of radicalisation and violent extremism: a youth worker's perspective

Subjectivity in detection of radicalisation and violent extremism: a youth worker's perspective

Radicalizing Arab University Students: A Global Emerging Threat

Security Traps and Discourses of Radicalization: Examining Surveillance Practices Targeting Muslims in Canada

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About