De-radicalisation interventions as technologies of the self: a Foucauldian analysis

Abstract

De-radicalisation has become increasingly prevalent in the UK as a strategy for tackling the threat of religiously inspired violence/extremism. Recent events, such as the tragic murder of Lee Rigby in May 2013, British citizens fighting in Middle Eastern conflicts, and the emergence of the Islamic State of Iraq and Sham, have rekindled the preoccupation of policymakers with the radicalisation of British Muslims. Indeed, the work of the Prevent strategy in UK counterterrorism post-2011 has primarily been recalibrated towards a greater focus on de-radicalisation interventions, which is perceived by policy-makers to be a more streamlined and effective way of dealing with radicalised/extremist individuals. And, yet, despite the greater attention paid to de-radicalisation, the discourse on de-radicalisation is characterised by the absence of detailed research, little or no empirical evidence for policy development, and confusion surrounding its conceptual framework. This article therefore offers an alternative conceptualisation of de-radicalisation to the one found in the Prevent strategy. Drawing on the works of Foucault, I argue that de-radicalisation is best understood as a "technology of the self". This article will enumerate the interplay between the three major types of technologies that constitute the technologies of the self: discursive, disciplinary, and confessional technology. It is argued that conceptualising de-radicalisation as a technology of the self allows us to reframe it beyond the narrow confines of counterterrorism policy and places it within wider governmental relations.

A conceptual critique of Prevent: Can Prevent be saved? No, but…

“…In the 2015 Counter-Extremism Strategy it is similarly defined as the process where “a vulnerable person will be introduced to an extremist ideology by a radicalising influencer (typically an extremist individual) who in the absence of protective factors, such as a supportive network of family and friends, or a fulfilling job, draws the vulnerable individual ever closer to extremism” (HM Government, 2015b: 21). Although practitioners insist that Prevent recognises the complexity of radicalisation, the current government policy prioritises ideology, with the understanding of an overarching framework within which radical thought presupposes radical action (Elshimi, 2015). The other factors and fractures that an individual might experience as part of radicalisation are understood in this framework as vulnerabilities that allow for the intervention of the extremist ideology upon the subject.…”

De-radicalization in the Implementation of Islamic Education Curriculum in SMA Masamba South Sulawesi

“…De-radicalization is the most important instrument in combating radicalization (Elshimi, 2016). Radicalziation itself appears to be caused by two factors (from within each individual) and external factors (from external factor such as the environment and technological development).…”

Disengagement from Political Violence and Deradicalization: A Narrative-Dialogical Perspective

“…We thereby address an existing lack of knowledge about: "what the process of deradicalisation looks like from the beginning till the end in terms of pathways out of radicalisation," that Elshimi has recently identified. 5…”