Click Below

  • On February 25th 2006 AWOT organized a Teach-In against the War on Terror at the CUNY Graduate Center in New York City. Now Streaming...
  • The war on terror is an attempt to make security the highest goal of American life. Our leaders have reduced politics to questions of mere survival, in which even the smallest risks are viewed as overriding threats to national existence. We at Against the War on Terror aim to challenge this view and the apparent need to eliminate fear itself. The preservation of bare life cannot and should not guide our political activity and dominate our public culture. We reject the very premise of the war on terror....Read On
Taking a Break for 2007
In preparation for the New Year AWOT will be posting less often. We are taking time to develop new ideas and new Political events for the spring. Regular commentary will resume shortly.

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Facing our Fears

The issues of fear and risk seem to be fast becoming the critical concepts of contemporary politics. In the early 1990s sociologists such as Anthony Giddens and Ulrich Beck were discussing the 'risk society,' and in the late 1990s the 'culture of fear' was the title of not one but two significant works on British and American society. The war on terror has made the problem even more immediate and pressing. This attention, however, has raised as many questions as it has answered. While our blog aims to produce a principled critique of many of the policies instigated under the rubric of the war on terror, we believe investigating the politics of fear to be an equally important dimension of our project. As Washington Post columnist, Eugene Robinson writes this week "Diagnosis is the first step toward treatment."

Robinson makes a number of other useful points in his subtle contribution to the discussion. He recognizes that, in part, Bush et al are simply responding to something going on in American society whereby anxiety has become a widespread condition. In his mock psychoanalysis of the American people Robinson writes:

"Patient feels vulnerable to attack; cannot remember having experienced similar feeling before. Patient accustomed to being in control; now feels buffeted by outside forces beyond grasp...Patient is by far most powerful nation in world, yet feels powerless. Patient is full of unfocused anger."

While the White House tries to take advantage of this condition, it is also a force beyond their control which can prove problematic. Robinson neatly captures this dynamic when he writes, "if the immigration issue didn't threaten to disrupt so many people's lives, it would be amusing to witness Bush's attempts to calm the irrational fears he has so often encouraged." (He could equally have cited the port security debacle as another example of the logic of fear turning back on Bush.)

Robinson promises to return to this theme again and we eagerly await his further contributions. As the politics of fear defines discussion of wider and wider aspects of society and government we must be innovative in our thinking about the subject.

1 Comments:

Ellen1910 said...

"Irrational fears" are merely the result of focusing the anxieties of modern life on an "other" which is never large enough or powerful enough to justify those fears -- the cats of Paris, the Yellow Peril, Jews, Reds, al-Qaeda; the list goes on. It is the comical inadequacy of the chosen object, its inability to fulfill its role of particularizing or reifying the generalized emotion of anxiety, which allows the observer to diagnose the fear as irrational.

As treatment, the "talking cure" is unlikely to be successful; the "patient" will soon find -- and benefiting elites will surely help him to find -- another hobgoblin to substitute for the "other" of which he has been disabused.

Those wanting to cure the patient should consider relieving him of his anxieties, that is, securing him in his family, job, community, and old age.

1:48 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home