The Rhetoric Of Terror

Communicating Terror: The Rhetorical Dimensions of Terrorism argues that the meaning of terrorism is socially constructed and suggests a new definition of terrorism, chiefly as a process of communication between terrorists and multiple target audiences. Concise yet comprehensive, this up-to-date text examines how acts of "terrorism" create rhetorical acts: What messages, persuasive meanings, symbols, do acts of terrorism generate and communicate to the world at large? These rhetorical components include definitions and labels, symbolism in terrorism, public oratory about terrorism, and the relationship between terror and media. This book examines diverse acts of terrorism, not just September 11th or recent events in the Middle East, to show the history and various effects of these acts as a medium for communication. This unique communication perspective shows how the rhetoric of terrorism is truly a war of words, symbols, and meanings.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, did symbolic as well as literal damage. A trace of this cultural shock echoes in the American idiom “9/11”: a bare name-date conveying both a trauma (the unspeakable happened then) and a claim on our knowledge. In the first of the two interlinked essays making up The Rhetoric of Terror, Marc Redfield proposes the notion of “virtual trauma” to describe the cultural wound that this name-date both deflects and relays. Virtual trauma describes the shock of an event at once terribly real and utterly mediated. In consequence, a tormented self-reflexivity has tended to characterize representations of 9/11 in texts, discussions, and films, such as World Trade Center and United 93. In the second half of the book, Redfield examines the historical and philosophical infrastructure of the notion of “war on terror.” Redfield argues that the declaration of war on terror is the exemplary postmodern sovereign speech act: it unleashes war as terror and terror as war, while remaining a crazed, even in a certain sense fictional performative utterance. Only a pseudosovereign—the executive officer of the world’s superpower—could have declared this absolute, phantasmatic, yet terribly damaging war. Though politicized terror and absolute war have their roots in the French Revolution and the emergence of the modern nation-state, Redfield suggests that the idea of a war on terror relays the complex, spectral afterlife of sovereignty in an era of biopower, global capital, and telecommunication. A moving, wide-ranging, and rigorous meditation on the cultural tragedy of our era, The Rhetoric of Terror also unfolds as an act of mourning for Jacques Derrida. Derrida’s groundbreaking philosophical analysis of iterability—iterability as the exposure to repetition with a difference elsewhere that makes all technics, signification, and psychic life possible—helps us understand why questions of mediation and aesthetics so rapidly become so fraught in our culture; why efforts to repress our essential political, psychic, and ontological vulnerability generate recursive spasms of violence; why ethical living-together involves uninsurable acts of hospitality. The Rhetoric of Terror closes with an affirmation of eirenic cosmopolitanism.

Drawing on psychoanalytic and semiotic perspectives, this book examines discourses mediating the global War on Terror, including governmental speeches, legal documents, print and broadcast journalism, and military memoirs. The book argues that these discourses motivate, and are motivated by, a myth of imminent harm that purportedly justifies a series of "preemptive" measures such as war, torture, and targeted killing, as well as an array of intrusive domestic security procedures such as profiling and mass surveillance. Dominant themes include selective compassion in the mainstream media, the language of war and the sacrificial sublime, asymmetrical warfare and the nostalgia for total war, weaponized drones and just war theory, and the role of American exceptionalism in normalizing endless war. Scholars and students alike will take interest in this original contribution to the fields of cultural studies, psychoanalysis, media studies, rhetoric, critical international relations, and international humanitarian law and ethics.

The first book to offer a rigorous, sophisticated analysis of ISIS's rhetoric and why it is so persuasive ISIS wages war not only on the battlefield but also online and in the media. Through a close examination of the words and images ISIS uses, with particular attention to the "digital caliphate" on the web, Philippe-Joseph Salazar theorizes an aesthetic of ISIS and its self-presentation. As a philosopher and historian of ideas, well versed in both the Western and the Islamic traditions, Salazar posits an interpretation of Islam that places speech--the profession of faith--at the center of devotion and argues that evocation of the simple yet profound utterance of faith is what gives power to the rhetoric that ISIS and others employ. At the same time, Salazar contends that Western discourse has undergone a "rhetorical disarmament." To win the fight against ISIS and Islamic extremism, Western democracies, their media, politicians, and counterterrorism agencies must consider radically changing their approach to Islamic extremism.

"The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, did symbolic as well as literal damage. A trace of this cultural shock echoes in the American idiom 9/11: a bare name-date conveying both a trauma (the unspeakable happened then) and a claim on our knowledge. In the first of the two interlinked essays of this book, the author proposes the notion of virtual trauma to describe the cultural wound that this name-date both deflects and relays. Virtual trauma describes the shock of an event at once terribly real and utterly mediated. In consequence, a tormented self-reflexivity has tended to characterize representations of 9/11 in texts, discussions, and films, such as World Trade Center and United 93. In the second half of the book, the author examines the historical and philosophical infrastructure of the notion of war on terror. He argues that the declaration of war on terror is the exemplary postmodern sovereign speech act: it unleashes war as terror and terror as war, while remaining a crazed, even in a certain sense fictional performative utterance. Only a pseudosovereign--the executive officer of the world's superpower--could have declared this absolute, phantasmatic, yet terribly damaging war. Though politicized terror and absolute war have their roots in the French Revolution and the emergence of the modern nation-state, the author suggests that the idea of a war on terror relays the complex, spectral afterlife of sovereignty in an era of biopower, global capital, and telecommunication."--Publisher's abstract.

Concise yet comprehensive, this up-to-date text examines how acts of "terrorism" create rhetorical acts: What messages, persuasive meanings, symbols, do acts of terrorism generate and communicate to the world at large? These rhetorical components include definitions and labels, symbolism in terrorism, public oratory about terrorism, and the relationship between terror and media. This unique communication perspective (vs. political scienceiminal justice approach) shows how the rhetoric of terrorism is truly a war of words, symbols, and meanings.

Among the many strategies of persuasive speech, biblical prophets often employ a rhetoric of horror. Prophets use verbal threats and graphic images of destruction to terrify their audience. Contemporary horror theory provides insight into the rhetoric of horror employed by the prophets. In this book, Amy Kalmanofsky applies horror theory to the book of Jeremiah and considers the nature of biblical horror and the objects that provoke horror, as well as the ways texts like Jeremiah work to elicit horror from their audience. Kalmanofsky begins by analyzing the emotional response of horror as reflected in characters' reactions to terrifying entities in the book of Jeremiah. Horror, she concludes, is a composite emotion consisting of fear in response to a threatening entity and a corresponding response of shame either directed toward one's self or felt on behalf of another. Having considered the nature of horror, she turns to the objects that elicit horror and consider their ontological qualities and the nature of the threat they pose. There are two central monstrous figures in the book of Jeremiah-aggressor God and defeated Israel. Both of these monsters refuse to be integrated into and threaten to disintegrate the expected order of the universe. She then presents a close, rhetorical reading of Jeremiah 6 and consider the way this text works to horrify its audience. The book concludes by considering fear's place within religious experience and the theological implications of a rhetoric that portrays God and Israel as monsters.

Through the analysis of eighteen years of presidential data, this book shows how Presidents Bush, Obama, and Trump have conducted and framed the war on terror since its inception in 2001. Examining all presidential speeches about terrorism from George W. Bush’s two terms as President, Barack Obama’s two terms as President, and Donald Trump’s first year as President, this book is the first to compare the three post-9/11 presidents in how they have dealt with the terror threat. Presidential Rhetoric on Terrorism under Bush, Obama, and Trump argues that when policies need to be “sold” to the public and Congress, presidents make their pertinent issues seem urgent through frequent speech-making and threat inflation. It further illustrates how after policies are sold, a new President’s reticence may signify quiet acceptance of the old regime’s approach. After examining the conduct of the war on terror to date, it concludes by posing policy suggestions for the future.