War on terror 2.0: threat inflation and conflation of far-right and white supremacist terrorism after the capitol “Insurrection”

IF 1.6 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Jacob Zenn
{"title":"War on terror 2.0: threat inflation and conflation of far-right and white supremacist terrorism after the capitol “Insurrection”","authors":"Jacob Zenn","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2115218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines more than 100 scholarly, think-tank, government, and media reports and three data-sets and finds that since the 6 January 2021 Capitol “insurrection”, War on Terror (WoT) 2.0 is conflating far-right, white supremacist extremism (WSE), and other terminologies, which have superseded “Islamic extremism” on the U.S government’s radar. Further, distinctions are not being recognised between violent and anti-violent far-right/WSE groups, and especially ideologues, and it is far from certain this phenomenon is “global”, “rising”, or comparable to ISIS. Perpetrators of WoT 2.0 terminological conflations and threat inflations are inter-related and mutually reinforcing, be they media, academics, think-tanks, or government officials, and are continuing WoT 1.0’s legacy, which exhibited its own set of inflations and conflations after 9/11. This article employs primary sources extensively and critical approaches to identify and remedy existing problems in studying far-right/WSE terrorism and proposes policies to more effectively address the rare and primarily “lone actor” lethal attacks of such terrorists while reducing potentialities for repeating WoT 1.0’s excesses.","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"24 1","pages":"62 - 97"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2115218","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article examines more than 100 scholarly, think-tank, government, and media reports and three data-sets and finds that since the 6 January 2021 Capitol “insurrection”, War on Terror (WoT) 2.0 is conflating far-right, white supremacist extremism (WSE), and other terminologies, which have superseded “Islamic extremism” on the U.S government’s radar. Further, distinctions are not being recognised between violent and anti-violent far-right/WSE groups, and especially ideologues, and it is far from certain this phenomenon is “global”, “rising”, or comparable to ISIS. Perpetrators of WoT 2.0 terminological conflations and threat inflations are inter-related and mutually reinforcing, be they media, academics, think-tanks, or government officials, and are continuing WoT 1.0’s legacy, which exhibited its own set of inflations and conflations after 9/11. This article employs primary sources extensively and critical approaches to identify and remedy existing problems in studying far-right/WSE terrorism and proposes policies to more effectively address the rare and primarily “lone actor” lethal attacks of such terrorists while reducing potentialities for repeating WoT 1.0’s excesses.
反恐战争2.0:国会大厦“暴动”后的威胁膨胀和极右翼和白人至上主义恐怖主义的合并
本文研究了100多篇学术、智库、政府和媒体报道和三个数据集,发现自2021年1月6日国会大厦“叛乱”以来,反恐战争(WoT) 2.0将极右翼、白人至上主义极端主义(WSE)和其他术语合并在一起,这些术语已经取代了美国政府的雷达上的“伊斯兰极端主义”。此外,暴力和反暴力的极右翼/WSE团体,特别是意识形态团体之间的区别没有被认识到,而且这种现象是“全球性的”、“正在崛起的”,或者与ISIS相比,还远远不能确定。无论是媒体、学者、智库还是政府官员,WoT 2.0术语合并和威胁膨胀的肇事者都是相互关联、相互加强的,并在延续WoT 1.0的遗产,后者在9/11事件后表现出了自己的一套通胀和合并。本文广泛使用原始资料和关键方法来识别和纠正研究极右翼/WSE恐怖主义的现有问题,并提出政策,以更有效地解决此类恐怖分子罕见的和主要的“单独行动者”致命袭击,同时减少重复WoT 1.0的可能性。
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
Critical Studies on Terrorism
Critical Studies on Terrorism POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
41.70%
发文量
62
×
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