Antagonism, Conflictuality and Resilience: A New Model of Societal Radicalisation

• Main Author: Phil Edwards
• Format: Article
• Language: deu
• Published: Daniel Koehler 2019-12-01
• Series: Journal for Deradicalization
• Subjects: antagonism; agonism; conflictuality; resilience; securitization
• Online Access: http://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/285

This paper proposes that, instead of framing radicalisation as a process undergone by individuals, society’s political sphere as a whole should be be considered as a site of radicalisation: a social setting built on discourses which can themselves be characterised by their level(s) of ‘radicalism’. The radicalisation of individuals’ patterns of discursive action needs to be understood in the context of (changing) levels of societal radicalisation. Unless they also address this societal context, efforts to counter or forestall the radicalisation of individuals and groups can have only local and temporary success. Any counter-radicalisation intervention conducted purely on the basis of an individualised ‘contagion’ or ‘strain’ model will be unable to envision - let alone address - phenomena of societal radicalisation. Building on the literature on securitization, resilience and agonistic conflict, this paper offers a model of societal radicalisation and of the social and political conditions likely to foster this process. Societal radicalisation is seen in terms of the corrosion of agonistic politics and its replacement by antagonism; this is related to deficits in societal qualities of conflictuality and resilience, which are discussed. The radicalising drift from agonism to antagonism, when promoted at government level, is further related to the literature on securitisation. Lastly, one possible mechanism for societal radicalisation - ‘antagonistic amplification’ - is identified and directions for further work are suggested.