Terror And The War On Dissent

Located within wider debates about ‘security versus liberty’ in our post 9/11 world, the book analyses the new landscape of UK counter terrorism powers and offences and focuses upon the deleterious consequences of the so-called ‘war on terror’ on freedom of political expression and association. Questioning the compatibility of recent speech-limiting measures with liberalism’s established commitment to free speech and international human rights norms, the book takes a critical look at new powers to proscribe ‘extremist’ political parties, possession offences and other criminal controls (eg. Official Secrets Act prosecutions) as well as new offences such as ‘glorification’ of terrorism. Less visible, extra-legal forms of censorship are also evaluated. The monograph concludes by asking how a more vigorous defence of unorthodox and unpopular forms of expression might be safeguarded in the UK.

The legacy of the Bush administration and its "War on Terror" includes a new logic of surveillance, suppressing public dissent and mobilizing both "fear" and "faith." In this accessible book, Elmer and Opel show that this new logic stretches well beyond the realm of airport security and international relations into everyday police techniques, including the use of Tasers, the deployment of "stealth" crowd control, the zoning of protestors and the suppression of public dissent. Drawing on social theories and media analyses, this book reveals the underlying "logic of preemption" whereby threats must be eliminated before they materialize. By addressing the implications of this new logic, Elmer and Opel lay the groundwork for more effective resistance.

In recent years, Indigenous peoples have lead a number of high profile movements fighting for social and environmental justice in Canada. From land struggles to struggles against resource extraction, pipeline development and fracking, land and water defenders have created a national discussion about these issues and successfully slowed the rate of resource extraction. But their success has also meant an increase in the surveillance and policing of Indigenous peoples and their movements. In Policing Indigenous Movements, Crosby and Monaghan use the Access to Information Act to interrogate how policing and other security agencies have been monitoring, cataloguing and working to silence Indigenous land defenders and other opponents of extractive capitalism. Through an examination of four prominent movements — the long-standing conflict involving the Algonquins of Barriere Lake, the struggle against the Northern Gateway Pipeline, the Idle No More movement and the anti-fracking protests surrounding the Elsipogtog First Nation — this important book raises critical questions regarding the expansion of the security apparatus, the normalization of police surveillance targeting social movements, the relationship between police and energy corporations, the criminalization of dissent and threats to civil liberties and collective action in an era of extractive capitalism and hyper surveillance. In one of the most comprehensive accounts of contemporary government surveillance, the authors vividly demonstrate that it is the norms of settler colonialism that allow these movements to be classified as national security threats and the growing network of policing, governmental, and private agencies that comprise what they call the security state.

Eight reprinted and 26 commissioned personal and/or professional articles offer critical responses to the US and British governments' agenda. Academics, journalists, lawyers, activists, and campaigners contribute. Distributed in the US by Stylus. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

The rhetorical presumption of war's necessity makes violence regrettable, but seemingly sane, and functions to shame anyone who opposes military action. Ivie proposes that the presence of dissent is actually a healthy sign of democratic citizenship, and a responsible and productive act, which has been dangerously miscast as a threat to national security. Ivie, a former US Navy petty officer, puts a microscope to the language of war supporters throughout history and follows the lives and memories of soldiers and anti-war activists who have dealt with degrees of confusion and guilt about their opposition to war. Arguing that informed dissent plays out largely in the realm of rhetoric, he equips readers with strategies for resisting the dehumanizing language used in war propaganda. Through his careful study of language strategies, he makes it possible to foster a community where dissenting voices are valued and vital.

Dissent in Dangerous Times presents essays by six distinguished scholars, who provide their own unique views on the interplay of loyalty, patriotism, and dissent. While dissent has played a central role in our national history and in the American cultural imagination, it is usually dangerous to those who practice it, and always unpalatable to its targets. War does not encourage the tolerance of opposition at home any more than it does on the front: if the War on Terror is to be a permanent war, then the consequences for American political freedoms cannot be overestimated. "Dissent in Dangerous Times examines the nature of political repression in liberal societies, and the political and legal implications of living in an environment of fear. This profound, incisive, at times even moving volume calls upon readers to think about, and beyond, September 11, reminding us of both the fragility and enduring power of freedom." --Nadine Strossen, President, American Civil Liberties Union, and Professor of Law, New York Law School. Contributors to this volume Lauren Berlant Wendy Brown David Cole Hugh Gusterson Nancy L. Rosenblum Austin Sarat

In this first comprehensive overview of the intersection of immigration law and the First Amendment, a lawyer and historian traces ideological exclusion and deportation in the United States from the Alien Friends Act of 1798 to the evolving policies of the Trump administration. Beginning with the Alien Friends Act of 1798, the United States passed laws in the name of national security to bar or expel foreigners based on their beliefs and associations—although these laws sometimes conflict with First Amendment protections of freedom of speech and association or contradict America’s self-image as a nation of immigrants. The government has continually used ideological exclusions and deportations of noncitizens to suppress dissent and radicalism throughout the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, from the War on Anarchy to the Cold War to the War on Terror. In Threat of Dissent—the first social, political, and legal history of ideological exclusion and deportation in the United States—Julia Rose Kraut delves into the intricacies of major court decisions and legislation without losing sight of the people involved. We follow the cases of immigrants and foreign-born visitors, including activists, scholars, and artists such as Emma Goldman, Ernest Mandel, Carlos Fuentes, Charlie Chaplin, and John Lennon. Kraut also highlights lawyers, including Clarence Darrow and Carol Weiss King, as well as organizations, like the ACLU and PEN America, who challenged the constitutionality of ideological exclusions and deportations under the First Amendment. The Supreme Court, however, frequently interpreted restrictions under immigration law and upheld the government’s authority. By reminding us of the legal vulnerability foreigners face on the basis of their beliefs, expressions, and associations, Kraut calls our attention to the ways that ideological exclusion and deportation reflect fears of subversion and serve as tools of political repression in the United States.