Alright, I've narrowed down my potential PhD research program to one of 8 proposals. Like to get some thoughts:
1. How did the National Socialist Underground go undetected for so long? LE and intelligence implications in the wake of the NSU killings.
2. The internationalisation of far-right terrorism in Europe
3. How does far right terrorism and political parties and organisations interact? Institutionalised cooperation or creation of a conducive environment and narrative (re: Paul Wilkinson’s study)?
4. Shifts in public debate as a precursor to far-right violence?
5. Does right wing terrorism have unique strategic characteristics that make it harder to detect and counter (terrorism versus hate crime, rhetoric mirrored by government etc)?
6. Russia’s response to far-right militarism
7. Comparing Germany’s far-right anti-immigration terrorism of the 1990s with today’s terrorism: similarities and differences.
8. Cumulative terrorism? Assessing the validity of the concept and associated risks.
I like number 5. It seems to both be more practical, and I think you'd probably have an easier time with your defense.
Hmm, its not my line of country but 5 does look juicy. Also if it is something you find particularly appealing then you should run with it. I say this as someone who undertook 8 [yes that is eight] years of doctoral research only to realise that if my doctoral thesis was lying at my feet being kicked to death defending it would be amazingly far from my mind that I would almost certainly turn my back and abandon it to its fate with scarcely a backward glance or moment of doubt. I suspect that the necessity of teaching my way through those 8 years may have jaundiced my view of academe, though.
I also like the look of 4, it strikes me as one which would offer career opportunities, just a thought.