In the seminal text on Critical Terrorism Studies, the editors of the volume state first that ‘there are significant weaknesses and problems in current research modes to justify a new approach’; and second, that this ‘necessitates the articulation of a new set of ontological, epistemological, methodological, and research commitments that in combination constitute a new analytical approach to the study of political terrorism’ (Jackson et al. 2009: 4–5). Jackson particularly has challenged how knowledge has been arrived at as well as conceived within orthodox Terrorism Studies (Jackson 2012). More specifically, CTS is wary of orthodox Terrorism Studies’ ‘politica[l] bia[s]’, which ‘performs an ideological function in support of Western states’ (Heath-Kelly 2010: 236). The work on

Thus, this ontological, epistemological and methodological challenge very much considers social scientific approaches that often dominate North American IR and have come to strongly influence, if not dominate, orthodox Terrorism Studies as well (Rapheal 2009: 50). With them they bring the not-so-neutral concept of rationality. CTS aims are seemingly at odds with ‘rationality’, a deeply loaded concept tied to gendered and racialised structures stemming from the Western Enlightenment (see also Heath-Kelly 2010: 239).

Imagine my surprise, then, when, attending a recent Critical Terrorism Studies conference, I heard several papers that called for a reclamation of ‘rationality’ within Critical Terrorism Studies, declaring that this would help us with CTS's stated objectives. While one recent key text looks at a Weberian critique of rationality as essential to a Frankfurtian route to emancipation (Lindhal 2018), it fails to grapple with the discursive structuration of rationality and how embedded it is in gendered and colonial practices. Thus, like previous chapters, it is well and good to critique power structures and hierarchies, but if we cannot articulate what is behind or at the root of the power structures and hierarchies – like gender, race and heteronormativity – then we are bound to repeat the same mistakes as before.