Richard McNeil-Willson
Dr Richard McNeil-Willson is a Fellow in Global Muslim Studies at the University of Edinburgh and Visiting Professor at Charles University, Prague. His research specialises in critical approaches to extremism and counter-extremism policy.
Former positions include fellowships at the Institute of Security and Global Affairs, Leiden University, Netherlands, the University of Cambridge, and the European University Institute. He is also a former Max Weber Research Fellow at the European University Institute, Florence, and holds a PhD from the University of Exeter, UK.
Supervisors: Olivier Roy, Tahir Abbas, Anna Triandafyllidou, and Donatella della Porta
Address: Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute, Florence
Former positions include fellowships at the Institute of Security and Global Affairs, Leiden University, Netherlands, the University of Cambridge, and the European University Institute. He is also a former Max Weber Research Fellow at the European University Institute, Florence, and holds a PhD from the University of Exeter, UK.
Supervisors: Olivier Roy, Tahir Abbas, Anna Triandafyllidou, and Donatella della Porta
Address: Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute, Florence
less
InterestsView All (21)
Uploads
PhD Thesis
The project took an empirical approach grounded in interaction with members, ex-members and those who operate in and around security – something considered particularly important in the study of an organisation that is semi-clandestine in its operation. This included attendance at demonstrations, public talks, da’wah stalls, Friday prayers and mosques talks, as well as halaqat (private study circles), social events, meetings at coffee shops, family meals, weddings and even participation in football practice, with fieldwork conducted between 2015 and 2018. Conceptually, the thesis is designed to fill gaps in contemporary study of the Islamic Activist organisation Hizb ut-Tahrir, updating the literature on an organisation that study has largely neglected in recent years but has become more relevant with the addition of discourse about ‘extremism’ in European counterterror. However, this thesis aims to offer a basic framework not just for understanding Hizb ut-Tahrir or even Islamic Activism, but for any forms of activism that are problematised under the increasing rubric of ‘extremism’, and explore how different groups from diverse movements change tactics in response to the threat or perception of repression by policies, practices or policing under the counterterror lens.
It suggests the following findings: 1. Increased securitisation has been instrumental in the decline of HT in Britain and Denmark; 2. However, securitisation has had different effects in the UK than in Denmark, leading to adaption and institutionalisation in the British context and a continuation of contention in the Danish context; and 3. This is because different perceptions of repression have been created by the use of different securitising mechanisms, suggesting that the concept of counterterror securitisation needs to be reconsidered as a more interactive and diversified process, to account for the quanta of securitisation and mobilisation responses produced.
Books
Papers
led to a watering down or ‘loosening’ of the concept and implementation, to come to policy agreements between Member States. On the other hand, we have also seen a broadening and expansion of key concepts around VRWE to include more online practices. We argue that this combination of ‘loosening’ the definition of far right, whilst simultaneously ‘broadening’ what constitutes far‐right content, risks the securitisation of vast online practices ‐ muddying the means for developing coherent and effective responses to VRWE in online spheres. This paper aims to explore the framing and securitisation of violent right‐wing extremist content, by tracking the discursive construction of European content moderation policy tools over time.
marked the start of the long War on Terror. The invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq by the US-led Western coalition has left a long-lasting legacy, not just in the form of continued regional destabilisation but in a vast, sprawling set of structures, policies, and interests that uphold a burgeoning counterterror industry across the globe. Despite the massive upheaval wrought on both the international political order and local communities under the auspices of countering terrorism and the on-going ruptures this has caused on local levels, the language of the War on Terror has changed and disappeared from contemporary political parlance. Furthermore, the military operations that characterised the opening stages of the War on Terror have long since finished or been lost. However, has the long War on Terror ended? If so, what marked its end? If not, what would such an ending look like in practise? And where do we stand with regards to the term War on Terror?
The present report investigates in detail the underlying dynamics that directly or indirectly contribute to the rise of anti-Muslim racism in Europe. This extends from Islamophobic statements spread in national media to laws and policies that restrain the fundamental rights of European Muslim citizens and ultimately threaten the whole of society. As a result, the European Islamophobia Report 2021 discusses the impact of anti-Muslim racism on human rights such as freedom of association, freedom of speech, and religious freedom, and the state of law in Europe.
This seventh edition of our report continues to show the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on Islamophobia, and how anti-Muslim legislation and measures in states like Austria and France have developed and been opposed by civil society. The 27 country reports demonstrate the ways in which governments, political parties, and media participate and counteract the reproduction of discourses that put the fundamental rights of European citizens in jeopardy.
This compendium of fact-based and insights and practical data aims to provide European policymakers, institutions, and NGOs with recommendations on how to tackle anti-Muslim racism in Europe systematically and with success.
The project took an empirical approach grounded in interaction with members, ex-members and those who operate in and around security – something considered particularly important in the study of an organisation that is semi-clandestine in its operation. This included attendance at demonstrations, public talks, da’wah stalls, Friday prayers and mosques talks, as well as halaqat (private study circles), social events, meetings at coffee shops, family meals, weddings and even participation in football practice, with fieldwork conducted between 2015 and 2018. Conceptually, the thesis is designed to fill gaps in contemporary study of the Islamic Activist organisation Hizb ut-Tahrir, updating the literature on an organisation that study has largely neglected in recent years but has become more relevant with the addition of discourse about ‘extremism’ in European counterterror. However, this thesis aims to offer a basic framework not just for understanding Hizb ut-Tahrir or even Islamic Activism, but for any forms of activism that are problematised under the increasing rubric of ‘extremism’, and explore how different groups from diverse movements change tactics in response to the threat or perception of repression by policies, practices or policing under the counterterror lens.
It suggests the following findings: 1. Increased securitisation has been instrumental in the decline of HT in Britain and Denmark; 2. However, securitisation has had different effects in the UK than in Denmark, leading to adaption and institutionalisation in the British context and a continuation of contention in the Danish context; and 3. This is because different perceptions of repression have been created by the use of different securitising mechanisms, suggesting that the concept of counterterror securitisation needs to be reconsidered as a more interactive and diversified process, to account for the quanta of securitisation and mobilisation responses produced.
led to a watering down or ‘loosening’ of the concept and implementation, to come to policy agreements between Member States. On the other hand, we have also seen a broadening and expansion of key concepts around VRWE to include more online practices. We argue that this combination of ‘loosening’ the definition of far right, whilst simultaneously ‘broadening’ what constitutes far‐right content, risks the securitisation of vast online practices ‐ muddying the means for developing coherent and effective responses to VRWE in online spheres. This paper aims to explore the framing and securitisation of violent right‐wing extremist content, by tracking the discursive construction of European content moderation policy tools over time.
marked the start of the long War on Terror. The invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq by the US-led Western coalition has left a long-lasting legacy, not just in the form of continued regional destabilisation but in a vast, sprawling set of structures, policies, and interests that uphold a burgeoning counterterror industry across the globe. Despite the massive upheaval wrought on both the international political order and local communities under the auspices of countering terrorism and the on-going ruptures this has caused on local levels, the language of the War on Terror has changed and disappeared from contemporary political parlance. Furthermore, the military operations that characterised the opening stages of the War on Terror have long since finished or been lost. However, has the long War on Terror ended? If so, what marked its end? If not, what would such an ending look like in practise? And where do we stand with regards to the term War on Terror?
The present report investigates in detail the underlying dynamics that directly or indirectly contribute to the rise of anti-Muslim racism in Europe. This extends from Islamophobic statements spread in national media to laws and policies that restrain the fundamental rights of European Muslim citizens and ultimately threaten the whole of society. As a result, the European Islamophobia Report 2021 discusses the impact of anti-Muslim racism on human rights such as freedom of association, freedom of speech, and religious freedom, and the state of law in Europe.
This seventh edition of our report continues to show the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on Islamophobia, and how anti-Muslim legislation and measures in states like Austria and France have developed and been opposed by civil society. The 27 country reports demonstrate the ways in which governments, political parties, and media participate and counteract the reproduction of discourses that put the fundamental rights of European citizens in jeopardy.
This compendium of fact-based and insights and practical data aims to provide European policymakers, institutions, and NGOs with recommendations on how to tackle anti-Muslim racism in Europe systematically and with success.
Ultimately, the ban will likely cause more harm than good – to Muslim communities, to civil and democratic rights, and to counterterrorism itself – and is a likely indication that other non-violent organisations may soon come under the security lens. Its actioning should be understood in the context of a UK Government and a Conservative Party that is itself in decline, and a demonstration that proscription – and, indeed, most of the party’s counterterror policy – is a political act, often less focussed on preventing violence than it is on courting votes.