(THE WAR ON) TERRORISM: DESTRUCTION, COLLAPSE, MIXTURE, RE-ENFORCEMENT, CONSTRUCTION

L. A. D. Vries
{"title":"(THE WAR ON) TERRORISM: DESTRUCTION, COLLAPSE, MIXTURE, RE-ENFORCEMENT, CONSTRUCTION","authors":"L. A. D. Vries","doi":"10.2752/175174308X310893","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Thinking back on the globally televised images of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, in which two airplanes flew into the World Trade Center, one aircraft hit the Pentagon in Washington, and another one crashed in a field in Pennsylvania, the questions “whose suicide?” and “the collapse of what?” appear unmistakably straightforward. Nineteen Islamic suicide bombers turned their deaths into weapons, causing the collapse of the World Trade Center. However, taking a broader perspective, it is much less clear who committed suicide and what collapsed on September 11, 2001. This article addresses the question of whether the attacks were a sign of strength, or rather a symptom of ultimate despair. The article first engages with and develops a critique of Baudrillard’s contention that the dominant Western order, which is based on the extrapolation of Good and the fostering of life, cannot survive an attack by radicals who utilize death as a weapon and turn Western globalization against itself. Secondly, the idea that the September 11 attacks are, conversely, a desperate attempt to escape structural crisis, signaling the prelude of Islamic neofundamentalist violence, will be assessed. It will be argued that, rather than the self-inflicted death of the global liberal order by means of irrational destructive terrorism, or the imminent collapse of Islamic fundamentalism, the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the subsequent war on terror exhibit the tensions between a global order characterized by “destructive construction” and the “constructive destruction” that mark contemporary terrorist violence. Their mutual complex interrelations, their reciprocal fascination for one another and the intricate interconnections with processes of globalization – that prevent the death of either one – present a conflict that is of, against, within, and eluding the grasp of the dominant order in a continuous play of antagonism, destruction, mixture, tension, translation, and fissure.","PeriodicalId":413879,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Politics: An International Journal","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cultural Politics: An International Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2752/175174308X310893","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Thinking back on the globally televised images of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, in which two airplanes flew into the World Trade Center, one aircraft hit the Pentagon in Washington, and another one crashed in a field in Pennsylvania, the questions “whose suicide?” and “the collapse of what?” appear unmistakably straightforward. Nineteen Islamic suicide bombers turned their deaths into weapons, causing the collapse of the World Trade Center. However, taking a broader perspective, it is much less clear who committed suicide and what collapsed on September 11, 2001. This article addresses the question of whether the attacks were a sign of strength, or rather a symptom of ultimate despair. The article first engages with and develops a critique of Baudrillard’s contention that the dominant Western order, which is based on the extrapolation of Good and the fostering of life, cannot survive an attack by radicals who utilize death as a weapon and turn Western globalization against itself. Secondly, the idea that the September 11 attacks are, conversely, a desperate attempt to escape structural crisis, signaling the prelude of Islamic neofundamentalist violence, will be assessed. It will be argued that, rather than the self-inflicted death of the global liberal order by means of irrational destructive terrorism, or the imminent collapse of Islamic fundamentalism, the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the subsequent war on terror exhibit the tensions between a global order characterized by “destructive construction” and the “constructive destruction” that mark contemporary terrorist violence. Their mutual complex interrelations, their reciprocal fascination for one another and the intricate interconnections with processes of globalization – that prevent the death of either one – present a conflict that is of, against, within, and eluding the grasp of the dominant order in a continuous play of antagonism, destruction, mixture, tension, translation, and fissure.
(对恐怖主义的)战争:破坏,崩溃,混合,重新执行,建设
回想2001年9月11日恐怖袭击的全球电视画面,两架飞机撞向世界贸易中心,一架飞机撞向华盛顿的五角大楼,另一架飞机坠毁在宾夕法尼亚州的一片田地里,“谁的自杀?”和“什么崩溃?”,显得直截了当。19名伊斯兰自杀式炸弹袭击者将他们的死亡转化为武器,导致世界贸易中心倒塌。然而,从更广泛的角度来看,2001年9月11日到底是谁自杀的,又是什么坍塌的,就不那么清楚了。本文探讨的问题是,这些袭击是一种力量的象征,还是一种极度绝望的症状。这篇文章首先涉及并发展了对鲍德里亚的论点的批判,即基于善的外推和生命的培育的主导西方秩序,无法在激进分子的攻击下生存,这些激进分子利用死亡作为武器,使西方全球化反对自己。其次,另一种观点认为,9·11袭击是为了逃避结构性危机的绝望尝试,标志着伊斯兰新原教旨主义暴力的序幕,这种观点将得到评估。有人会说,不是非理性的破坏性恐怖主义导致全球自由秩序的自我死亡,也不是伊斯兰原教旨主义的即将崩溃,911事件和随后的反恐战争展示了以“破坏性建设”为特征的全球秩序与标志着当代恐怖主义暴力的“建设性破坏”之间的紧张关系。它们相互之间复杂的相互关系,它们对彼此的相互迷恋,以及它们与全球化进程之间错综复杂的相互联系——这些都阻止了任何一方的死亡——呈现出一种冲突,这种冲突是在对抗、破坏、混合、紧张、翻译和分裂的持续游戏中对主导秩序的把握的对抗、反对、内部和逃避。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信