The Post-9/11 State of Emergency: Reality versus Rhetoric

Social Philosophy Today 19:193-215 (2004)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
After the 9/11 attacks the U.S. administration went beyond emergency response towards imperialism, but cloaked its agenda in the rhetoric of fighting ‘terrorists’ and ‘terrorism.’ After distinguishing between emergency thinking and emergency planning, I question the administration’s “war on terrorism” rhetoric in three stages. First, upon examining the post-9/11 antiterrorism discourse I find that it splits into two agendas: domestic, protect our infrastructure; and foreign, select military targets. Second, I review approaches to emergency planning already in place. Third, after reviewing what philosophers have said about emergencies, I recommend they turn their attention to the biases inherent in and misleading uses of antiterrorist terminology.
Reprint years
2003, 2004
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2017-08-24
View other versions
Added to PP

161 (#42,574)

6 months
8 (#65,200)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?