Communities as defeating and/or endorsing extreme violence: how do communities support and/or defeat extreme violence over time?

社区击败和/或支持极端暴力：随着时间的推移，社区如何支持和/或击败极端暴力？

• 批准号: AH/J01186X/1
• 负责人: Steven Hewitt
• 金额: $ 2.54万
• 依托单位: University of Birmingham
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2012
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2012 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FJ01186X%2F1
• 关键词: Communities; defeating; endorsing; extreme; violence

Communities, their connections and associated complexities, have been the subject of considerable conversation and debate in the UK, particularly since the terrorist attacks of 7 July 2005 and the English riots of 2011. Much of the conversation has centred on the position of communities as impediments to and assistors of radicalisation and/or intra-communal violence. This discourse has percolated between academe, the media, and government and has been fuelled by government policies and pronouncements, terrorism arrests and general chatter. Most recently, in February 2011, in a speech in Munich, Prime Minister David Cameron signalled a new stage by broadening the focus of government counter-terrorism policy away from violent extremism and toward more general extremism/radicalisation with an underlying suggestion that this might require a greater engagement with some communities or elements within communities. The riots of August 2011 only further emphasized the role of community and `connectors', both negatively and positively, in such outbursts. There is, however, a much longer history around communities, radicalisation and intra-communal violence that requires examination in order to generate historically literate policy in the 21st century. It is remarkable how little past historical examples where these elements are present have been examined despite the relevance to current debates. In the interwar period, for instance, thousands of British citizens across a number of different communities, including in the West Midlands, were "radicalised" and found themselves involved with entities on the far right or far left. In the 1930s, for ideological reasons, nearly 2000 young British men, against the wishes of their government, left their communities to fight, and in some cases die, in the Spanish Civil War. In the same period, five young men (later known as the "Cambridge Five") would be radicalised while at university and, as a result, turn against their country, revealing secrets to the Soviet Union that led to the deaths. Others joined far right organizations, including thousands who belong to the British Union of Fascists, and engaged in intra-communal violence in the 1930s.In previous centuries, other movements, such as the Luddites, have developed in Great Britain which today would be seen as involving elements of radicalisation and violence. Even more relevant to the present have been past radicalised movements associated with religious extremism that included the use of terrorism. Elements within Catholic communities, including in the Midlands, became engaged in a terrorism plot that sought to blow up Parliament in 1605, decapitating the political leadership. The Gunpowder Plot revealed the complexities of the interconnection between communities and radicalisation as key individuals served as "connectors" across boundaries.A scoping study to look at the literature around historical case studies of radicalisation and intra-communal violence and its interaction with communities, including "connectors" within these communities in which both are fleshed out in a three dimensional matter and problematized accordingly is long overdue. Radicalisation and its intersection with community is not a modern phenomenon and it is crucial that its roots be explored so as to inform current policy and debate.

在英国，社区、社区之间的联系和相关的复杂性一直是大量对话和辩论的主题，尤其是自2005年7月7日的恐怖袭击和2011年的英国骚乱以来。大部分对话集中在社区作为激进化和/或社区内暴力的障碍和帮助者的地位上。这种话语已经渗透到学术界、媒体和政府之间，并受到政府政策和声明、恐怖主义逮捕和一般闲谈的推动。最近，2011年2月，在慕尼黑的一次演讲中，首相戴维·卡梅伦（David Cameron）通过扩大政府反恐政策的重点，从暴力极端主义转向更普遍的极端主义/激进化，标志着一个新阶段的到来，并暗示这可能需要与一些社区或社区内部的元素进行更多的接触。2011年8月的骚乱只是进一步强调了社区和“连接器”在这种爆发中的作用，无论是消极的还是积极的。然而，社区、激进化和社区内部暴力的历史要长得多，为了在21世纪制定符合历史的政策，需要对这些历史进行审查。值得注意的是，尽管与当前的辩论相关，但对这些因素存在的过去历史例子进行审查的情况却很少。例如，在两次世界大战之间的时期，包括西米德兰兹郡在内的许多不同社区的数千名英国公民被“激进化”，并发现自己与极右或极左的实体有关。在20世纪30年代，由于意识形态的原因，近2000名年轻的英国男子违背政府的意愿，离开他们的社区参加西班牙内战，有些人在战争中死亡。在同一时期，五名年轻人（后来被称为“剑桥五人组”）在大学期间变得激进，结果背叛了自己的国家，向苏联透露了导致死亡的秘密。其他人则加入了极右翼组织，其中包括数千名属于英国法西斯联盟的人，并在20世纪30年代参与了社区内的暴力活动。在过去的几个世纪里，其他运动，如勒德分子，在英国发展起来，今天被视为涉及激进和暴力的因素。与当前更相关的是过去与宗教极端主义有关的激进运动，其中包括使用恐怖主义。1605年，天主教团体内部，包括中部地区，开始策划恐怖袭击企图炸毁国会，斩首政治领袖。火药阴谋揭示了社区和激进化之间相互联系的复杂性，因为关键人物充当了跨越边界的“连接器”。关于激进化和社区内暴力及其与社区互动的历史案例研究文献的范围研究，包括这些社区内的“连接器”，在这些社区中，两者都以三维形式充实并相应地成为问题，这是一项早就应该进行的研究。激进化及其与社区的交集不是一个现代现象，探索其根源是至关重要的，以便为当前的政策和辩论提供信息。