ABSTRACT
The relationship between democracy and terrorism remains a source of significant debate, with academic evidence suggesting that democracy both inhibits and encourages acts of terrorism and political violence. Accepting this apparent contradiction, this paper argues that a more nuanced approach to understanding political systems, focussing on the subjective perceptions of individual actors, may allow these differences to be reconciled. Using regression analysis undertaken with UK data from the European Values Study, the results shows how attitudes to politics may frame assessments of the intrinsic valence – or attractiveness – of political participation, support for terrorism, and the implications this may have for both counter-terrorism and counter-extremism policy.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes on contributor
Dr Mark Littler is a Lecturer in Criminology in the University of Hull School of Education and Social Science. His research interests include terrorism, trust, and hate-crime.
Notes
1 Google Scholar search, 30 August 2016.
2 With roots in the work of Bueno de Mesquita et al. (Citation2003) selectorate theory argues that political leaders aim principally to stay in power, and that to this end make decisions principally to appeal to those whose support makes the difference between retaining and losing power (the winning coalition) rather than benefiting either the broader community contributing to the selection process (the real selectorate) or those eligible but non-contributing (the nominal selectorate).
3 That is to say, the strategic calculus is shaped by the comparative weakness of the attacker, and the comparative strength of the state.
4 The European Values Study is a major population representative survey exploring ideas, beliefs, preferences, attitudes, values, and opinions of citizens from 47 European states. Further information can be found online at the EVS website: http://www.europeanvaluesstudy.eu/.