FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W58518049> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W58518049 startingPage "95" @default.
• W58518049 abstract "MODERN SECURITY REGIMES ARE DEFINED BY EXTREMES. PRACTICES OF SPYING, torture, indefinite detention, and preemptive represent favored responses by the United States to the threats of insecurity introduced by terrorism. But insecurity as a unifying concept has expanded vitally since September 11, spreading into domains of public health and disaster management, among others. Interestingly, whether for the mitigation of potential terrorist threats, avian flu pandemics, or hurricanes, executive privilege and individual responsibility prevail as dominant framing mechanisms for necessary response. In addition, responses to insecurity are increasingly technologized and militarized, whether in the form of technological surveillance, command-and-control organizational structures, or pervasive cultures of secrecy. These are not simply discrete actions played out on the level of nation-state policy. Instead, the field for social practice and conceptions of appropriate governance are transforming rapidly in this climate of absolute threats. It is appropriate and necessary, therefore, to assess the implications of security regimes upon public institutions, modes of governance, and forms of life. This article begins this project by analyzing the discourses surrounding torture and disaster preparedness in the United States. Logics of Torture In the U.S.'s protracted war on terror, politicians and the media have mobilized fear of devastating, indiscriminate attack upon civilian populations to justify extreme police actions and security operations, both within and beyond the country's borders. The suspension of law--or technically the movement of ethically ambiguous or morally reprehensible activities to zones outside legal jurisdiction--enables a false semblance of social order predicated upon universal rights, which still exist in principle, while obliterated in practice. The most disturbing incarnations of such extralegal zones are seen in the (almost invisible) practices of extraordinary rendition, or transfer of enemy combatants to prisons in countries where they are tortured in black sites (Cole, 2005). These are concentration camps in the deepest sense of the word: they strip away rights, knowledge, and humanity, reducing people to a state of bare life (Agamben, 1998), whereupon language, consciousness, and civilization cease to exist (Scarry, 1985). This should not be altogether surprising given the more-or-less visible legal and military strategies leading to such camps. The discourses surrounding the treatment of enemies in the war on terror reveal a great deal about the contemporary culture of control. The questions facing policymakers and security personnel include the messy particulars of sordid exceptions: What kinds of torture techniques are permissible, when, where, and applied to whom? Under what circumstances can we assassinate enemies, even if they are not in combat zones? Under what conditions can we detain individuals, perhaps indefinitely, without due process? These are some dominant questions in what Pierre Bourdieu (1977) would call the of discourse. Such questions beg a set of meta-questions, however, that lie outside public debate: What does it mean that these are seen as the questions of today? What do they say about our values, the state of democracy, or our system of governance? What do they indicate about how we perceive and valuate others? How do they serve to rationalize historical and ongoing complicity in terrorist practices by nation-states? Unfortunately, root questions of this sort remain on the periphery of the universe of discourse when policymakers instead concern themselves with rationalizations for torture. The contours of the policy problems concerning the treatment of enemies in the war on terror are well defined in policy reports like Protecting Liberty in an Age of Terror (Heymann and Kayyem, 2005). The content for this policy report was cultivated through closed-door conversations with notable advisors under the aegis of Harvard University's Long-Term Legal Strategy Project for Preserving Security and Democratic Freedoms in the War on Terror. …" @default.
• W58518049 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W58518049 creator A5058820626 @default.
• W58518049 date "2006-03-22" @default.
• W58518049 modified "2023-09-22" @default.
• W58518049 title "Securing the Homeland: Torture, Preparedness, and the Right to Let Die" @default.
• W58518049 cites W1508671760 @default.
• W58518049 cites W1558773931 @default.
• W58518049 cites W1566447476 @default.
• W58518049 cites W1576045867 @default.
• W58518049 cites W1973893364 @default.
• W58518049 cites W1992373299 @default.
• W58518049 cites W2058075934 @default.
• W58518049 cites W2089838285 @default.
• W58518049 cites W2141615425 @default.
• W58518049 cites W2416624507 @default.
• W58518049 cites W244126838 @default.
• W58518049 cites W2798919810 @default.
• W58518049 cites W2951976633 @default.
• W58518049 cites W3126349953 @default.
• W58518049 cites W593810102 @default.
• W58518049 cites W593972408 @default.
• W58518049 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W58518049 type Work @default.
• W58518049 sameAs 58518049 @default.
• W58518049 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W58518049 countsByYear W585180492012 @default.
• W58518049 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W58518049 hasAuthorship W58518049A5058820626 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C169087156 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C169437150 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C203133693 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C506469952 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C528167355 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C544040105 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C66938386 @default.
• W58518049 hasConcept C73484699 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C127413603 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C144024400 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C169087156 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C169437150 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C17744445 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C199539241 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C203133693 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C506469952 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C528167355 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C544040105 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C66938386 @default.
• W58518049 hasConceptScore W58518049C73484699 @default.
• W58518049 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W58518049 hasLocation W585180491 @default.
• W58518049 hasOpenAccess W58518049 @default.
• W58518049 hasPrimaryLocation W585180491 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W137036219 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W1489085862 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W1524244772 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W1572657533 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W167983428 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W1750020739 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W1791615217 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W1972321172 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W225394773 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W2338113191 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W2479668184 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W2500752915 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W2626063181 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W2928941458 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W2992657640 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W3124900810 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W638268422 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W764260711 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W2192509980 @default.
• W58518049 hasRelatedWork W857423881 @default.
• W58518049 hasVolume "33" @default.
• W58518049 isParatext "false" @default.
• W58518049 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W58518049 magId "58518049" @default.
• W58518049 workType "article" @default.