New Times,
New Thinking.

  1. Politics
18 February 2020updated 09 Sep 2021 4:10pm

Why extremism is a question of psychology, not politics

Extremists do not share a viewpoint or an approach, but they do share a mindset.

By Quassim Cassam

Responding to the revelation that Extinction Rebellion (XR) had been identified as extremists by counterterrorism police, Sara Khan, the government’s chief adviser on extremism, called for a clearer definition of extremism. Khan was quoted as saying that a clearer definition would “help build a whole-society response by providing a better understanding”.

It’s hard to disagree with this but actually developing a clear definition is not easy. The cynical view is that an extremist is simply someone whose political stance I strongly disagree with, and that there is no neutral way of determining who is an extremist. On this account, “extremist” is a term of abuse rather than a serious tool of political analysis. But the notion that there is no factual means of determining whether, say, Isis is extremist seems absurd. Isis really is an extremist group. This is not just a matter of personal opinion. But then we are back to the challenge of defining “real” extremism.

[See also: How the rhetoric of weaponisation is undermining liberal ideals]
Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month
[See also: How to get on with your political enemies]
Content from our partners
The role and purpose of social housing continues to evolve
More than a landlord: A future of opportunity
Towards an NHS fit for the future