Advertisement

On Ways Forward

  • Damian Cox
  • Michael Levine
  • Saul Newman

Abstract

The previous chapter explored some of the ethical and political tensions central to liberal democracy — tensions highlighted in Ignatieff’s ultimately unsuccessful attempt to reconcile liberal democratic principles and institutions with various forms of state violence and coercion in response to the threat of terrorism. Unlike Ignatieff, we have argued that enhanced security measures and military responses to terrorism, right up to extra-judicial detention, targeted assassination and preventive wars — all of which Ignatieff allows under his ethics of the ‘lesser evil’ — cannot be enacted without doing major damage to the very liberal democratic principles in defence of which these measures are supposedly taken. Neither the slippery logic of the ‘lesser evil’, nor blind faith in judicial scrutiny and adversarial review, gets around this problem. We are left in a quandary: what would be an ethically and politically legitimate response to terrorism?

Keywords

Foreign Policy Civil Liberty Liberal Democracy Hate Speech Democratic Politics 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 2.
    See, for example, S. Overton (2004) ‘The Donor Class: Campaign Finance, Democracy and Participation’, Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 153, pp. 73–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 3.
    M. Hardt (1998) ‘The Withering of Civil Society’, in (eds) E. Kaufman and K. J. Heller, Deleuze and Guattari: New Mappings in Politics, Philosophy and Culture (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press), pp. 23–39, p. 37.Google Scholar
  3. See M. Neocleous, ‘Against Security’, Radical Philosophy, vol. 100, pp. 7–15. Cited in Neocleous (2007) ‘Security, Liberty and the Myth of Balance: Towards a Critique of Security Politics’, Contemporary Political Theory, vol. 6, pp. 131–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 8.
    See N. Chomsky (2006) Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy (London and New York: Penguin).Google Scholar
  5. 11.
    G. Achcar (2006) The Clash of Barbarisms, trans., P. Drucker (London: SAQI Books), p. 154.Google Scholar
  6. 13.
    F. Nietzsche (1989) On the Genealogy of Morality, trans., W. Kaufmann and R. J. Hollingdale (New York: Vintage Books).Google Scholar
  7. 15.
    W. Brown (2004) ‘“The Most We Can Hope For…”: Human Rights and the Politics of Fatalism’, The South Atlantic Quarterly, vol. 103: 2/3 (Spring/ Summer), pp. 451–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 16.
    Ignatieff, quoted in Brown, ‘The Most We Can Hope For…’, p. 457. See M. Ignatieff (2001) Human Rights as Politics and Idolatory (ed.) A. Gutmann (Princeton: Princeton University Press), p. 89.Google Scholar
  9. 21.
    See D. Held and A. McGrew (ed.) (2002) Governing Globalization (Cambridge: Polity Press).Google Scholar
  10. 22.
    There is an extensive literature on the concept of global civil society and its implications for international relations. See, for instance, M. Kaldor (2003) Global Civil Society: An Answer to War (Cambridge: Polity Press);Google Scholar
  11. and M. Frost (2002) Constituting Human Rights: Global Civil Society and the Society of Democratic States (New York: Routledge). See also Simon Caney, who argues for a cosmopolitan notion of distributive justice in (2006) Justice Beyond Borders (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 25.
    J. Habermas (2001) The Postnational Constellation, trans., and ed. M. Pensky (Cambridge: Polity Press), p. 110.Google Scholar
  13. 30.
    The crucial role that right wing media outlets like Fox news played in Bush’s 2000 and 2004 election victories, as well as in selling the Iraq war to the American people, has been well documented. See L. Artz and Y. Kamalipour (eds) (2004) Bring ’em On: Media and Politics in the Iraq War (Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield).Google Scholar
  14. 31.
    See D. Kellner (2001) Grand Theft 2000: Media Spectacle and a Stolen Election (Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield).Google Scholar
  15. See also, Kellner (2003) Media Spectacle and the Crisis of Democracy: Terrorism, War and Election Battles (New York: Routledge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 32.
    C. Crouch (2004) Post-Democracy (Cambridge: Polity Press).Google Scholar
  17. 39.
    See C. Mouffe (2000) The Democratic Paradox (London: Verso), p. 5.Google Scholar
  18. 40.
    See J. Butler (1996) Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative (New York: Routledge), p. 101.Google Scholar
  19. 43.
    See W. E. Connolly (2005) ‘The Evangelical-Capitalist Resonance Machine’, Political Theory, vol. 33, pp. 869–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 44.
    S. Žižek (2005) ‘Over the Rainbow Coalition!’, Lacan.com website. http://www.lacan.com/coalition.htm.Google Scholar
  21. 45.
    See R. Rorty (1998) Achieving Our Country: Leftist Thought in Twentieth-Century America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), p. 104.Google Scholar
  22. 48.
    See W. E. Connolly (1991) Identity/Difference: Democratic Negotiations of the Political Paradox (Ithaca: Cornell University Press), p. 218.Google Scholar
  23. 51.
    W. E. Connolly (2005) Pluralism (Durham: Duke University Press), p. 48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Damian Cox, Michael Levine and Saul Newman 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Damian Cox
    • 1
  • Michael Levine
    • 2
  • Saul Newman
    • 3
  1. 1.Bond UniversityAustralia
  2. 2.University of Western AustraliaAustralia
  3. 3.Goldsmiths — University of LondonUK

Personalised recommendations