Dissecting Deradicalization: Challenges for Theory and Practice in Germany

IF 0.4 4区 社会学 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
T. Baaken, Judy Korn, M. Ruf, D. Walkenhorst
{"title":"Dissecting Deradicalization: Challenges for Theory and Practice in Germany","authors":"T. Baaken, Judy Korn, M. Ruf, D. Walkenhorst","doi":"10.4119/IJCV-3808","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Compared to the topic of radicalization, deradicalization was long treated as secondary in research, at least until recently. This article outlines the most important findings from theory and practice in three steps by: (1) discussing and reviewing existing classifications and typologies, (2) suggesting a conceptualization of the term “deradicalization” while considering discourses about the roles of ideology, identity and risk, and, based on this, (3) providing an overview of the empirical case of practical work in Germany. It turns out that central actors from practice, academia, (security) authorities and politics not only use different definitions, but there is also little agreement on what deradicalization (practically) means. The German case shows that the landscape of deradicalization, differentiated into four fields of action, is highly diverse. However, the existing hybrid model of state and civic competences as well as the variety of approaches and actors should – with proper accentuation – be seen as an opportunity.","PeriodicalId":45781,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Conflict and Violence","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4119/IJCV-3808","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Conflict and Violence","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4119/IJCV-3808","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Compared to the topic of radicalization, deradicalization was long treated as secondary in research, at least until recently. This article outlines the most important findings from theory and practice in three steps by: (1) discussing and reviewing existing classifications and typologies, (2) suggesting a conceptualization of the term “deradicalization” while considering discourses about the roles of ideology, identity and risk, and, based on this, (3) providing an overview of the empirical case of practical work in Germany. It turns out that central actors from practice, academia, (security) authorities and politics not only use different definitions, but there is also little agreement on what deradicalization (practically) means. The German case shows that the landscape of deradicalization, differentiated into four fields of action, is highly diverse. However, the existing hybrid model of state and civic competences as well as the variety of approaches and actors should – with proper accentuation – be seen as an opportunity.
剖析去极端化:德国理论与实践的挑战
与激进化的主题相比,去激进化在研究中一直被视为次要的,至少直到最近。本文分三步概述了理论和实践中最重要的发现:(1)讨论和回顾现有的分类和类型学,(2)在考虑关于意识形态、身份和风险的角色的话语时,提出“去极端化”一词的概念化,并在此基础上,(3)概述了德国实际工作的经验案例。事实证明,来自实践、学术界、(安全)当局和政界的核心行动者不仅使用不同的定义,而且对去激进化(实际上)的含义也几乎没有一致意见。德国的案例表明,分化为四个行动领域的去极端化形势是高度多样化的。然而,现有的国家和公民能力的混合模式以及各种方法和行动者应被视为一种机会- -适当地加以强调。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
32 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信