My primary research focuses on two main topics: (i) ideology and mass killing, and (ii) the intensification of ideological competition in global politics.
ideology, mass killing and armed conflict

For most of my career, my primary research has focused on the role of ideology in forms of 'atrocity crimes' such as genocides, war crimes and crimes against humanity. The role of ideology is one of the most hotly debated issues in contemporary research on atrocities. Some scholars (particularly within the field of genocide studies) present ideologies as crucial, providing extremist goals and hatreds that can motivate perpetrators to kill civilian groups. But many other scholars (particularly in the field of conflict studies) are more sceptical, contending that perpetrators of mass killing rarely seem ideologically committed, and that rational self-interest or powerful forms of social pressure are more important drivers of violence than ideology.
My work challenges, though also draws on, both these perspectives. I advance what I term a 'neo-ideological' perspective on mass killing, in which ideology is indeed an essential foundation for such violence, but does not primarily function through extremist goals or hatreds. Instead, I emphasise the way ideology shapes perceptions of 'security politics,' and stress that deep ideological commitments and hatreds are not the only or even primary way in which ideology is linked to violence. I argue that collective violence depends on an underlying 'ideological infrastructure' that generates, sustains and coordinates violent actions through a range of different causal mechanisms - many of which do not depend on deep belief.
My first book, Ideology and Mass Killing: The Radicalized Security Politics of Genocides and Deadly Atrocities (Oxford University Press, 2022) articulates this argument and offers the first dedicated, comparative theory of ideology’s role in mass killing. The book substantiates my theory through four case studies: i) Stalinist Repression in the Soviet Union between 1930 and 1938, ii) the Allied Bombing Campaign against Germany and Japan in World War II from 1940 to 1945, iii) mass atrocities in the Guatemalan Civil War between 1978 and 1983, and iv) the Rwandan Genocide in 1994. It draws on a range of disciplines - including genocide studies, conflict studies, International Relations, political theory, political sociology, intellectual history, social and political psychology, and social epistemology - and offers new ways to think, not only about ideology and mass killing, but ideology's role in politics and violence in general.
My work challenges, though also draws on, both these perspectives. I advance what I term a 'neo-ideological' perspective on mass killing, in which ideology is indeed an essential foundation for such violence, but does not primarily function through extremist goals or hatreds. Instead, I emphasise the way ideology shapes perceptions of 'security politics,' and stress that deep ideological commitments and hatreds are not the only or even primary way in which ideology is linked to violence. I argue that collective violence depends on an underlying 'ideological infrastructure' that generates, sustains and coordinates violent actions through a range of different causal mechanisms - many of which do not depend on deep belief.
My first book, Ideology and Mass Killing: The Radicalized Security Politics of Genocides and Deadly Atrocities (Oxford University Press, 2022) articulates this argument and offers the first dedicated, comparative theory of ideology’s role in mass killing. The book substantiates my theory through four case studies: i) Stalinist Repression in the Soviet Union between 1930 and 1938, ii) the Allied Bombing Campaign against Germany and Japan in World War II from 1940 to 1945, iii) mass atrocities in the Guatemalan Civil War between 1978 and 1983, and iv) the Rwandan Genocide in 1994. It draws on a range of disciplines - including genocide studies, conflict studies, International Relations, political theory, political sociology, intellectual history, social and political psychology, and social epistemology - and offers new ways to think, not only about ideology and mass killing, but ideology's role in politics and violence in general.
ideological competition in global politics

My primary research is now increasingly focused on the broader role of ideological competition in global politics as a political dynamic that can promote conflict, polarization and fragmentation (perhaps as part of a new global 'polycrisis'). I am especially interested in analysing the role of ideological competition in both the original Cold War between in the 20th Century and the potential 'New Cold War' in contemporary 21st global politics. Alongside Mark L. Haas, I co-edited the Routledge Handbook of Ideology and International Relations, which brought together thirty six leading scholars of ideology, across twenty six chapters, to offer cutting edge accounts of ideology's relevance to a broad range of issues, states and regions in world politics.
I am also the founder and convenor of the Contemporary and Historical Ideological Competition in Global Politics (CHIC) Research Network, which coordinates activities amongst a group of over thirty leading scholars of ideology and global politics. This network is funded through a research networking grant from the UK's Arts and Humanities Research Council (on 'A New Cold War?: Contemporary and Historical Ideological Competition in the International System'). We had a first network workshop in July 2024, and plan a follow up workshop in the late summer of 2025. Linked to this project, I am now working on a major paper, 'What's at stake in the New Cold War debate', which seeks to advance the rather nebulous debate amongst scholars and commentators over whether we have entered a new Cold War era, as well as a general theory-building paper, 'Ideology as Infrastructure: A Theory of Ideological Power', which builds on core theoretical and methodological work I conducted for my Ideology and Mass Killing book.
A range of disciplines have each contributed major insights to our thinking about ideology, ideological competition and ideological change, yet holistic, integrative theories of ideology that stretch across disciplines are rare. My work, in tandem with others, argues that this must change - and that a more effective understanding of ideology must integrate, in particular, both psychological accounts of why individuals attach themselves to particular ideologies and more sociological accounts (though including work in political theory and communication studies) of key social processes driving stability and change in the ideological environment of a society. Much of my work on this topic has been in collaboration with
members of the Ideological Conflict Project at the Waterloo Institute of Complexity and Innovation and Balsillie School of International Affairs of the University of Waterloo. Much of this work is now continuing at the Cascade Institute of Royal Roads University, British Columbia, Canada (click on link to find out more about the institute). I am very grateful to Professor Thomas Homer-Dixon for his leadership of these projects.
I have also conducted a major survey of empirical research on ideology's effects on armed conflict - for an annotated bibliography of major works, click here. That survey underpinned my more substantive article on 'Ideology and Armed Conflict', which was a runner-up for the award for the best article in the Journal of Peace Research in 2019.
I am also the founder and convenor of the Contemporary and Historical Ideological Competition in Global Politics (CHIC) Research Network, which coordinates activities amongst a group of over thirty leading scholars of ideology and global politics. This network is funded through a research networking grant from the UK's Arts and Humanities Research Council (on 'A New Cold War?: Contemporary and Historical Ideological Competition in the International System'). We had a first network workshop in July 2024, and plan a follow up workshop in the late summer of 2025. Linked to this project, I am now working on a major paper, 'What's at stake in the New Cold War debate', which seeks to advance the rather nebulous debate amongst scholars and commentators over whether we have entered a new Cold War era, as well as a general theory-building paper, 'Ideology as Infrastructure: A Theory of Ideological Power', which builds on core theoretical and methodological work I conducted for my Ideology and Mass Killing book.
A range of disciplines have each contributed major insights to our thinking about ideology, ideological competition and ideological change, yet holistic, integrative theories of ideology that stretch across disciplines are rare. My work, in tandem with others, argues that this must change - and that a more effective understanding of ideology must integrate, in particular, both psychological accounts of why individuals attach themselves to particular ideologies and more sociological accounts (though including work in political theory and communication studies) of key social processes driving stability and change in the ideological environment of a society. Much of my work on this topic has been in collaboration with
members of the Ideological Conflict Project at the Waterloo Institute of Complexity and Innovation and Balsillie School of International Affairs of the University of Waterloo. Much of this work is now continuing at the Cascade Institute of Royal Roads University, British Columbia, Canada (click on link to find out more about the institute). I am very grateful to Professor Thomas Homer-Dixon for his leadership of these projects.
I have also conducted a major survey of empirical research on ideology's effects on armed conflict - for an annotated bibliography of major works, click here. That survey underpinned my more substantive article on 'Ideology and Armed Conflict', which was a runner-up for the award for the best article in the Journal of Peace Research in 2019.