The myth of the ‘securitised Muslim community'

The academic literature broadly concerned with the ‘social impact’ of post-9/11 terrorism and counter-terrorism in the west is dominated by ‘the securitisation thesis’, at least eight different senses of which are typically employed by exponents in an interchangeable, confused, and muddled manner. ² It is said that: (i) Muslims as a whole feel under suspicion from society merely because they are Muslim; (ii) Muslims as a whole have fallen under suspicion from society for the same reason; (iii) Islam has fallen under suspicion from society; (iv) Muslims as a whole feel under suspicion from the state solely on account of being Muslim; (v) Muslims as a whole have fallen under suspicion from the state merely because they are Muslim; (vi) Islam has fallen under suspicion from the state; (vii) Muslims as a whole are subject to special security and criminal justice measures purely because they are Muslim; and (viii) Islam is subject to special security and criminal justice measures not applicable to other faiths or ideologies. However, much more careful distinctions need to be drawn between these claims, not only for 401analytical reasons, but also because there will otherwise be little hope of solving the social and political problems alleged.