Violent extremism intervention: the social versus the ideological approach

The approach of this thesis is to compare the ideological and sociological approaches to countering violent extremism (CVE) intervention. The radicalisation of people to violent extremism has been a significant problem for Western governments for several decades. Successful deradicalisation of extremists has not been an easy task, as it requires the person to change their ideology that is often deeply ingrained in their psyche. The traditional approach to deradicalisation has been the use of counter-narratives, which has drawn criticism due to the poor preparation and lack of consultation with religious leaders and academics. Recently there has been a shift towards disengagement from violent extremism, which allows the person to maintain their extremist beliefs, but refrain from engaging in violence. My research begins with an analysis of existing CVE programs, nationally and internationally, to determine what interventions are commonly used. This includes government and non-government operated programs. Grounded theory is used to identify key attributes of successful programs. The research indicates the use of ‘push, pull and personal factors’ in developing interventions has a higher likelihood of success. However there is still a need for the ideological approach, especially when providing advice and guidance, however it should be supplemented with social support for stability.