No abstract

No abstract

The present paper explores the role of the radical non-violent Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir in retaining long-term member loyalty. More specifically, this study explores Hizb ut-Tahrir's framing of the group and the creation of a deep-rooted social identity that fosters loyalty and long-term membership among its associates. Starting with a review of the relevant scholarship on frames and social identity, this paper explores the origin of Hizb ut-Tahrir's frames-the group's 'Aqeedah (doctrine)-and the consequent set of values that define HT members' social identity. This paper concludes that while frames are essential in the creation of a new social identity that strongly binds the individual to the group, two mechanisms produce HT members' loyalty over the long run: self-efficacy and positive intergroup differentiation.These mechanisms account for Hizb ut-Tahrir's appeal and activities in more than 45 countries around the world, where the group represents the choice of all those segments of Muslim diaspora communities who might agree with Islamist arguments but who strongly reject the use of violence.

‘Islamists’ represent a very complex category of actors mostly associated with research on terrorism and radicalisation. While many studies have investigated the dangers posed by Islamist groups in various national contexts, only a few analyses have explored Islamist views on core concepts, including citizenship. This article examines the concept of citizenship through the lenses of two long-living transnational Islamist groups, i.e. Ikhwan al-Muslimun and Hizb ut-Tahrir. Starting by framing the concept of citizenship within Islamism as an ideology, this article eviscerates the main causes that have led Ikhwan and the Hizb to hold diverse views on citizenship. This analysis concludes that different visions on citizenship are caused by two main factors (terminal and instrumental values), which are defined by the different evolutionary paths undertaken by the groups over the decades. Together, these values define a new social identity each individual develops as a result of his/her membership to the group. This new identity eventually aligns the members’ interpretation of reality and their behaviours with the group’s core values

Extremism in both its vocal and violent forms is a core topic of research, as well as a priority issue standing at the top of national and international security agendas. While most of the literature is still focused on violent forms of extremism, an emerging research trend is looking at vocal extremism and radicalisation as crucial steps to understand, as Neumann said “what happens before the bomb goes off”. Within this new trend, scholars are interested in exploring the ideology of extremist groups (rather than just their methods) and the frames (schemata of interpretation) they disseminate in order to win more followers and fidelise their members. Based on the author’s previous research, as well as on relevant data extracted from the manifestos and relevant publications of emblematic groups of both ideologies, this paper compares Islamists and Eco-radicals as two forms of extremism fighting the Western-sponsored modernisation process. By exploring the meaning of “modernity”, as well as the role played by frames, this research sheds light on three common frames present in both ideologies, i.e., the enemy to fight, the victims to protect, and the change to achieve. These three frames are the linchpin of the discourses of both forms of extremism. By innovatively unpacking these frames from a comparative perspective, this research offers new insights into the impact of modernity on the development of alternative and extremist ideologies.