TY - JOUR
T1 - Being resilient to radicalisation in PVE policy
T2 - a critical examination
AU - Stephens, William
AU - Sieckelinck, Stijn
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors wish to thank Professor Hans Boutellier (VU Amsterdam) and Eleni Christodoulou (Georg Eckert Institute) for their feedback and advice on this paper. This work was supported by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Sport under Grant 326434
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/1/2
Y1 - 2020/1/2
N2 - The problematic nature of certain policies and approaches to preventing and countering violent extremism has been robustly demonstrated; it is clear that rethinking the prevention of violent extremism requires concerted attention. One response to critiques of security-driven approaches has been the adoption of the language of resilience building. However, the turn to resilience has not been matched by a fundamental rethinking of approach, and may often mask troubling approaches in the language of objectivity and positivity. In rethinking the question of prevention, examining the concept of resilience is important not only to address a current trend in policy discourse, but also to benefit from the rich literature on resilience from which valuable lessons may be drawn. A critically informed concept of resilience has the potential to provide a framework of response that recognises individuals and communities as political actors who, rather than being shielded from ideologies, require the resources and channels to challenge violence, discrimination, and injustice, be it state or non-state driven. This article, through examining the current use of “resilience” in PVE policies, makes a modest attempt to draw on lessons from applying resilience in other contexts to articulate possible features of a critically informed approach to preventing violent extremism.
AB - The problematic nature of certain policies and approaches to preventing and countering violent extremism has been robustly demonstrated; it is clear that rethinking the prevention of violent extremism requires concerted attention. One response to critiques of security-driven approaches has been the adoption of the language of resilience building. However, the turn to resilience has not been matched by a fundamental rethinking of approach, and may often mask troubling approaches in the language of objectivity and positivity. In rethinking the question of prevention, examining the concept of resilience is important not only to address a current trend in policy discourse, but also to benefit from the rich literature on resilience from which valuable lessons may be drawn. A critically informed concept of resilience has the potential to provide a framework of response that recognises individuals and communities as political actors who, rather than being shielded from ideologies, require the resources and channels to challenge violence, discrimination, and injustice, be it state or non-state driven. This article, through examining the current use of “resilience” in PVE policies, makes a modest attempt to draw on lessons from applying resilience in other contexts to articulate possible features of a critically informed approach to preventing violent extremism.
KW - countering violent extremism
KW - policy
KW - Preventing violent extremism
KW - resilience
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071423739&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/17539153.2019.1658415
DO - 10.1080/17539153.2019.1658415
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85071423739
VL - 13
SP - 142
EP - 165
JO - Critical Studies on Terrorism
JF - Critical Studies on Terrorism
SN - 1753-9153
IS - 1
ER -