Guilty by (policy) association. A critical analysis on the contested notion of 'polarisation' and commonly associated contemporary social illnesses

• In Event: Crime, Science and Politics WG Panel 4: Contestation and Technology in Criminal Justice Policy

Abstract

In recent years, notions of ‘polarization’ have emerged as serious areas of concern in the EU as well as multiple EU-member states, among others the Netherlands. Despite the frequent mention of these phenomena in national and EU policy documents -where they are often, arguably for valid reasons, portrayed as alarming social illnesses and linked to issues such as ‘democratic decline,’ ‘institutional mistrusts’, ‘anti-institutionalism’, ‘social fragmentation’, ‘alienation’, ‘(violent and non-violent) extremism,’ and ‘radicalization’ - there remains a significant lack of scientific and empirical research on these notions.
This socio-legal article aims to critically examine policy discourses surrounding complex notions of polarization, in particular the linkages and associations between polarization and other socio-political phenomena, thereby departing from the question: whose problem is it? Rather than being solely interested in the complex and contested definition of the concept itself, the authors argue that this question of ownership affects how and what associations are made, thereby impacting the lived realities of those shaping and being shaped by notions of polarization. This, in turn, impacts the way polarization is diagnosed and shapes the (security/criminal) policy and legal responses designed to address its potential harms. Adopting a multi-scalar approach, the analysis focuses on both the EU and Dutch national levels.
The article also aims to contrast these policy discourses with rich empirical qualitative data based on in-depth interviews with those labelled as polarised and/or associated contemporary social illnesses (e.g., conspiracy thinkers/sovereign/autonomous/radicalised) as well as the professionals and the national and local level who engage with issues of polarization. This comparative approach seeks to reveal discrepancies between institutional narratives and lived experiences, ultimately contributing to a more nuanced understanding of the evolving phenomenon of polarization.

Authors

• Roxane de Massol de Rebetz, Van Vollenhoven Institute, Leiden University

• Anne Jonker, Van Vollenhoven Institute, Leiden University