Thale-Kristin Stalenget

• Kostøl, Elin Marie Frivold; Matre, Marianne Engen; Schønberg, Hilde Wallerud; Øgård, Monika; Lund, Ingrid & Haldammen, Eva Nordby [Show all 32 contributors for this article] (2023). Stopp nedbemanningen i skolen. Fædrelandsvennen. ISSN 0805-3790.
• Stalenget, Thale-Kristin (2022). Discourses about extremism in school after the introduction of the new curriculum LK20 in Norway.
• Stalenget, Thale-Kristin (2021). Ethical-political Bildung in School as a Measure to Prevent Extremism and Extremisation in the Nordic Countries?
• Stalenget, Thale-Kristin (2021). Hva hemmer og fremmer arbeid med utdanning for bærekraftig utvikling? . blogg.forskning.no - Nasjonalt forskernettverk for bærekraft og utdanning.
• Stalenget, Thale-Kristin (2021). Snart 100 år med bærekraft­perspektiver i norske læreplaner. blogg.forskning.no - Nasjonalt forskernettverk for bærekraft og utdanning.
• Beck, Eevi Elisabeth; Stalenget, Thale Kristin; Lie, Elin Rødahl & Steier, Rolf (2020). Being and Not-Being at NERA. Towards Research Practices Responsive to Planetary Capacity.
• Gule, Lars & Stalenget, Thale Kristin (2018). “Right-Wing Radical” Is an Empty Category; The Need for More Precise Terminology in Extremism Research. Show summary

  Two Papers presented jointly: For some time the concept ‘right-wing radical’ has been used as a counterpoint to ‘radical’ or rather ‘left-wing radical’. This has created a nice symmetrical categorisation based on the classical left–right political axis where we have “moderate” or “centrist” positions in the middle of the political spectrum and then populists, radicals and – of lately – extremists on each side. In this paper, it is argued that this is a false symmetry and that it is hard to envisage a right-wing radical position given the etymology of the word “radical” as well as the historical meanings the word and concept has had since its first use in political contexts more than two hundred years ago. In general, terminology that is more accurate will allow for more precise thinking about the mechanisms of the so-called radicalisation. This critique of the notion of ‘right-wing radical’ is informed by clearer definitions of extremism. Furthermore, it adds to the critique of the concept of ‘radicalisation’ as a seemingly neutral concept regarding the political left-right axis. A more precise concept of normative extremism, i.e. strong opposition to human rights and democratic principles, is the basis for the critique of the notion of right-wing radical. This approach reveals that the so-called right-wing radical positions are better termed right-wing extremism. All in all, the paper also illustrates the limits of the left-right axis in serious academic analysis of normative political positions but shows how – within limits – this metaphor still can have some analytical value. There is a need for more precise terminology in extremism research. The concepts of extremism and radicalisation require clarification. The concept ‘radicalisation’ has been controversial and problematic from as it was introduced after the attack on the United States in 2001, both in political and academic contexts. The term and concept aim to capture the process where a person or group develop increasing willingness to use violence to achieve political or religious goals. This implies an understanding that there is a synonymy between the outcome of the radicalisation process – i.e. becoming radical – and the willingness to use violence. This is seen in the expression “radical Islamists”, referring to Muslims who have been so-called radicalised. However, this logical understanding of the connection between the process of radicalisation and its outcome, is then rejected by both researchers and politicians who claim that there is nothing wrong in being radical. Thus, the connection between the term radicalisation and the process it supposedly refers to, is inconsistent or even spurious. The terms “radical” and “radicalisation” have an interesting etymology and a long-standing meaning of fundamental changes or reforms in a progressive direction, and not changes that necessarily implies the use of violence. Thus, the process(es) of moving into extreme positions, including violent extremism, should be named by another term. In this paper the suggested term will be a self-explanatory neologism, “extremisation”. In general, accurate terminology will allow for more precise thinking about the mechanisms behind the so-called radicalisation processes.

View all works in Cristin