The missing spirals of violence: four waves of movement–countermovement contest in post-war Britain

Abstract

Since the Second World War, Great Britain has witnessed a recurring escalation and de-escalation of confrontations between extreme right-wing or anti-minority protest groups on the one hand and, on the other, militant anti-fascist or antiracist groups, and latterly also a number of extreme Islamist groups. In this article, we trace the outline of four waves of these movement -countermovement contests in order to engage critically with ideas of what some academics have called "cumulative extremism (CE)". Contrary to the tenor of much of the public, policy and academic debate around such contests, we draw attention to what we describe as the missing spirals of violence. In order to better explain and accommodate these empirical findings, we argue that it is important to resist the temptation to reduce "CE" to a process of "tit-for-tat" violence. We outline four factors that have been particularly important in shaping patterns of interactive escalation, de-escalation and non-escalation in the case studies described: the broader strategic aims of activist groups; dynamics of intramovement control and leadership; the actions of and activist's interactions with state actors; and emergent movement cultures and identities.

Symbiotic Radicalisation: The Interplay Between Far-Right and Far-Left Activism on Victoria: Literature Review

“…The following section of this literature review focuses on conceptual and empirical scholarship around what has been commonly tagged as 'cumulative extremism' (Eatwell 2006) in recent years. Macklin and Busher [2015] and Carter [2020]). This is not to say that scholars had previously been unaware of the fact that opposing radical movements have adapted strategies and actions in response to their respective opponents.…”

“…This is not to say that scholars had previously been unaware of the fact that opposing radical movements have adapted strategies and actions in response to their respective opponents. Academics such as Macklin and Busher (2015) and Carter (2020: 10-14) remind us of several social movement scholars, such as McAdam (1983) or Zald and Useem (1987), who have -decades earlierobserved dynamic 'cycles of innovation and adaptations involving opposing movements' (Macklin and Busher 2015: 54). However, these dynamics have not received much attention outside social movement scholarship until the 2000s, when they gained wider prominence in academia and political debates (mainly in Britain) in the context of clashes between far-right nationalist and radical Islamist groups.…”

“…Carter's (2020) and Macklin and Busher's (2015) (mostly historical) analysis of manifestations of cumulative extremism have added empirical depth to the concept, and helped sharpen the concept itself. One key argument has been that the usefulness of the term cumulative extremism relies on the acknowledgement that there are complex processes at play that reach beyond simplistic titfor-tat retaliation actions between opposing (radical) groups (Macklin and Busher 2015: 65).…”

Chicken suits and other aspects of situated credibility contests: explaining local trajectories of anti-minority activism

“…Third, a recent turn to the literature on social movements has provided a more theorized understanding of anti-minority activism and a less caricatured account of antiminority activists (Caiani et al 2012;Klandermans & Mayer 2006). It provides insight as to how and why anti-minority activism sometimes veers towards more radical strategies of action (Caiani & Borri 2013;Macklin & Busher 2015); how anti-minority activists respond to and create political or discursive opportunities (Koopmans & Muis 2009); the pathways through which individuals enter and leave anti-minority activism (Blee 2003;Linden & Klandermans 2007); the emotional dynamics of anti-minority politics (Busher 2015;Pilkington 2016;Virchow 2007); and the role of cultural (re)production in promulgating support (Miller-Idriss 2017;Simi & Futrell 2010). Yet with respect to our question, this literature suffers from similar limitations to that on the local dynamics of anti-minority activism.…”

How the “Internal Brakes” on Violent Escalation Work and Fail: Toward a Conceptual Framework for Understanding Intra-Group Processes of Restraint in Militant Groups

“…While terrorism scholars have taken considerable interest in how violence "ends" or deescalates, 4 they have paid less attention to non-escalation or "truncated" processes of escalation. 5 And where they have investigated processes of non-or limited escalation, the primary focus has been at the individual level of analysis. 6 Meanwhile, although peace studies and social movement scholars have explored in detail the transitions between nonviolent and violent tactical repertoires, 7 the dynamics of nonviolent resistance 8 and the upholding of nonviolent discipline, 9 they have dedicated less attention to questions about how those who engage in violence establish and maintain limits on that violence.…”