The New ‘New terrorism’?: Continuity and Change in Temporal Constructions of Violence in the US and UK

This article contrasts political discourse on the threat posed by terrorism today from the US and UK. Three arguments are made. First, there is significant overlap in the characterisation of today’s threat as more fragmented, more ideologically plural, less predictable, and potentially more dangerous than that which dominated the immediate post-9/11 period. Second, counterintuitively, this consistent framing of terrorism’s recent transformation is situated within two very different constructions of terrorism’s wider temporalities. In the UK, a model of historical discontinuity dominates in which today’s terrorism is seen as radically different from the violences of the twentieth century and of the post-9/11 period. In the US, in contrast, a model of historical cyclicity sees contemporary terrorism positioned as a return to much older violences including those associated with the Ku Klux Klan. Third, these differences highlight the considerable political significance of constructed temporalities around terrorism, with their capacity to (de-)emphasise ostensibly pertinent similarities and differences, and to legitimise or foreclose policy responses to this threat.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Terrorism and Political Violence
Published
2026-06-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2026.2682421
Primary Topic
Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The New ‘New terrorism’?: Continuity and Change in Temporal Constructions of Violence in the US and UK

Lee Jarvis, Michael Lister, Andrew Whiting
Terrorism and Political Violence
Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
article

The New ‘New terrorism’?: Continuity and Change in Temporal Constructions of Violence in the US and UK

Lee Jarvis, Michael Lister, Andrew Whiting
article en

Abstract

This article contrasts political discourse on the threat posed by terrorism today from the US and UK. Three arguments are made. First, there is significant overlap in the characterisation of today’s threat as more fragmented, more ideologically plural, less predictable, and potentially more dangerous than that which dominated the immediate post-9/11 period. Second, counterintuitively, this consistent framing of terrorism’s recent transformation is situated within two very different constructions of terrorism’s wider temporalities. In the UK, a model of historical discontinuity dominates in which today’s terrorism is seen as radically different from the violences of the twentieth century and of the post-9/11 period. In the US, in contrast, a model of historical cyclicity sees contemporary terrorism positioned as a return to much older violences including those associated with the Ku Klux Klan. Third, these differences highlight the considerable political significance of constructed temporalities around terrorism, with their capacity to (de-)emphasise ostensibly pertinent similarities and differences, and to legitimise or foreclose policy responses to this threat.

Terrorism and Political Violence
Oxford Brookes University (GB), Royal Holloway University of London (GB), The University of Adelaide (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.