Suchergebnisse

Within the framework of extremism prevention and the development ofderadicalization programs, but also in science, politics and in the contextof civil society, so-called "counter-narratives" are increasingly given animportant role. While prevention actors are increasingly working withcounter-narratives and are developing model projects, research on counternarrativesremains relatively scarce and its impact has so far been underexplored.In addition, critical perspectives on counter-narratives thatfear a sovereignty of interpretation are on the rise. The article providesan empirical insight into counter-narratives from Salafist profiles in thesocial network Facebook. It emphasizes the potential of counter-narrativesto prevent extremism, but at the same time pleads for a reflected use ofthem. Furthermore, the authors emphasize that the use of counter-narrativesis only one aspect of prevention work and should therefore notbe understood as the sole remedy.

Within the framework of extremism prevention and the development of deradicalization programs, but also in science, politics and in the context of civil society, so-called "counter-narratives" are increasingly given an important role. While prevention actors are increasingly working with counter-narratives and are developing model projects, research on counternarratives remains relatively scarce and its impact has so far been underexplored. In addition, critical perspectives on counter-narratives that fear a sovereignty of interpretation are on the rise. The article provides an empirical insight into counter-narratives from Salafist profiles in the social network Facebook. It emphasizes the potential of counter-narratives to prevent extremism, but at the same time pleads for a reflected use of them. Furthermore, the authors emphasize that the use of counter-narratives is only one aspect of prevention work and should therefore not be understood as the sole remedy.

Recently, radicalism and radicalization have been gaining a great deal of public attention and are considered one of many signs of political crisis. Yet, this belies the ambivalence of these terms. The present article argues for a broader understanding of radicalization in order to explore the entire spectrum of radicalization phenomena: from radicalization without violence to radicalization into violence and radicalization within violence. A broader concept helps to ensure that radicalization is not conflated with situations marked by imminent threats of violence, which too often result in the curtailment of civil liberties and forms of social and political stigmatization. In addition, a broader understanding can open a discursive and regulative space in the area of primary, secondary and tertiary prevention.