Advertisement

Qualitative Sociology

, Volume 31, Issue 3, pp 271–285 | Cite as

The Moral Accounting of Terrorism: Competing Interpretations of September 11, 2001

  • Laura Robinson
SPECIAL ISSUE ON POLITICAL VIOLENCE

Abstract

Drawing on comparative case studies, the research elucidates competing constructions of justice, responsibility, and victimhood articulated in response to September 11, 2001 on three digital discourse fora in Brazil, France, and the United States. The research extracts the moral metaphors through which Brazilian, French, and American participants judge the terrorist acts. It contrasts the underlying moral accounting schemes employed to legitimize or delegitimize the use of terrorism on 9/11. Two contrasting standpoints on political violence and associated moral underpinnings are elucidated: the morality of retribution and the morality of absolute goodness (Lakoff 2002). One ideological faction uses the morality of retribution to hold the US accountable for inciting the terrorists to act. For these individuals, political violence can be seen as a form of action that upholds a binary framing of moral order in which all moral debts must be paid. By contrast, opposing camps employ the morality of absolute goodness to condemn the terrorists by arguing that terrorist violence is inherently unjustifiable, as it necessarily results in human suffering.

Keywords

Terrorism 9/11/01 Moral accounting 

References

  1. Abdulla, R. (2007). Islam, jihad, and terrorism in post-9/11 Arabic discussion boards. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue3/abdulla.html
  2. Ayres, J. (1999). From the streets to the internet: The cyber-diffusion of contention. American Academy of Political and Social Science Annals, 566, 132–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bhargava, R. (2002). Ordinary feelings, extraordinary events: Moral complexity in 9/11. In C. Calhoun, P. Price, & A. S. Timmer (Eds.), Understanding September 11. New York: New.Google Scholar
  4. Cerulo, K. (1998). Deciphering violence: The cognitive structure of right and wrong. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Collins, R. (2004). Rituals of solidarity in the wake of terrorist attack. Sociological Theory, 22, 53–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eliasoph, N. (1998). Avoiding politics: Producing apathy in everyday life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Gamson, W. (1992). Talking politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Hine, C. (2000). Virtual ethnography. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Kohut, A., & Stokes, B. (2006). America against the world: How we are different and why we are disliked. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
  10. Lakoff, G. (2002). Moral politics: How liberals and conservatives think. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Lipset, S. M. (1996). American exceptionalism: A double-edged sword. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  12. Roger, P. (2002). l’Ennemi américain généalogie de l’antiaméricanisme français. Paris, France: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
  13. Ross, M. H. (2002). The political psychology of competing narratives: September 11 and beyond. In C. Calhoun, P. Price, & A. S. Timmer (Eds.), Understanding September 11. New York: New.Google Scholar
  14. Schultz, T. (2000). Mass media and the concept of interactivity: An exploratory study of online fora and reader email. Media, Culture, & Society, 22, 205–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Spillman, L. (1997). Nation and commemoration: Creating national identities in the United States and Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Van Dijk, T. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Vengerfeldt, P. (2003). The internet as a news medium for crisis: News of terrorist attacks in the United States. In M. Noll (Ed.), Crisis communications lessons from September 11. London: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  18. Wagner-Pacifici, R. E. (1986). The moro morality play: Terrorism as social drama. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  19. Yúdice, G. (2004). US prepotencia: Latin Americans respond. In A. Ross, & K. Ross (Eds.), Anti-Americanism (pp. 69–86). New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Zeruvabel, E. (1997). Social mindscapes: An invitation to cognitive sociology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sociology DepartmentSanta Clara UniversitySanta ClaraUSA

Personalised recommendations