Abstract
Frequently, youth radicalization is assessed by exploring online spaces where white cis-hetero patriarchal ideologies are present and are used to recruit young people. Although online spaces are sites of radicalization, Miller-Idriss adds new levels to our understanding of the far-right by inviting us to think about other places where far-right groups recruit young white males. As a Black woman developmental scientist who studies how Black children and adolescents make sense of far-right threats, Miller-Idriss’s Hate in the Homeland provides me a detailed exploration of sites beyond education and online spaces where far-right groups infiltrate.
Miller-Idriss advances theoretical understandings of the far-right by reflecting on the nuances between “space” and “place” by utilizing research studies, popular culture, and examples of violent extremism within the U.S. context and in Europe. She pushes the reader to think critically about where and when radicalization happens, and to see the mundane interactions and sources of radicalization that are right in front of us. Using Yi-Fu Tuan’s 1977 book Space and Place, Miller-Idriss explores how physical and digital spaces can contribute to ideas regarding home and belongingness.
The underpinnings of far-right ideologies play on the perspective that a country and/or place is the homeland, which is a rendered space of belonging. This is an important site of inquiry as young people grapple with who they are and what it means to belong to a community or place. Miller-Idriss describes the fears communicated by far-right groups, specifically the belief that white race will be replaced in their “homelands.” This sense of entitlement and possession over the “homeland” leads to violence towards those most vulnerable.
Throughout the book, Miller-Idriss highlights the importance of understanding both geographical and symbolic aspects of the far-right. In her discussion of the physical locations where these groups operate, she details the multiple places where far-right messages have become normalized. Such messaging is packaged in a way that is aesthetically pleasing for many, and in particular young people. This includes gyms, food, fashion, and music. For example, fashion has increasingly become part of the far-right’s outreach. Fashion for young people is one way in which they can express themselves and it is a way for young people to be a part of a movement particularly in pop culture. With regards to symbolic aspects, she points to the language, logos, and codes that undergird far-right beliefs that appear in these spaces.
Miller-Idriss concludes with a discussion of possible intervention practices that have been used to prevent youth radicalization. In particular, she draws from German approaches of prevention to expand our thinking. For example, in Germany, addressing far-right activity is focused on ensuring prevention as the broader democratic value so educators for instance are given proper training to discuss harmful ideologies.
Miller-Idriss repeatedly makes the claim that a major feature of the far-right is its desire to subjugate people and communities at the margins (women, transgender, nonbinary, and/or queer, and specific religious communities). Further, she reveals the oversight in research on the far-right women who sustain far-right movements by aligning with gender roles in efforts to fuel white supremacist groups. This reveals the complexities and harrowing realities of the when and where far-right ideologies are perpetuated because although women are subject to male supremacist violence, they in turn can help perpetuate that violence when it is normalized. However, as a Black scholar whose work is grounded in the Black feminist theories of intersectionality, I argue that a deeper analysis of power that addresses the intersections of gender and race in the context of the far-right can strengthen these knowledge claims. Scholars should continue to reshape their methods in researching on the far-right to include anti-oppression lenses that encompass critical analyses of racism and sexism, which can give rise to new theoretical understandings of the far-right. Critical theories like Black feminist thought would assists scholars of the far-right in understanding the experience of those at the margins who are impacted by far-right violence.
Though primarily a text for sociologists, the book has clear implications for other fields including anthropology, women’s studies, communications, political science, and my field, developmental psychology. Hate in the Homeland can benefit early career scholars who yearn for ways to improve their research on the far-right by centering space and place in their analysis, youth practitioners who work closely with young people closely who may be at risk for recruitment, and for educators who want to have thought provoking discussions that challenge students to reflect on the harms of extremist manifestations of white supremacy and male supremacy on young people (the book includes discussion questions at the end for educator groups and families).
A major contribution of the book is the skillful discussion of political systems and cultural contexts of far-right influences in both the U.S. and in Europe. In doing so, we see trends and differences across far-right groups, allowing scholars to locate gaps in research on far-right violence. In my view, the most helpful part of the book is the conclusion where Miller-Idriss encourages scholars and policymakers to consider spaces and places as fluid sites that young people occupy and move out of, which may strengthen intervention and prevention tools.