Podcast Summary
The post-9/11 era's fear-driven policies and politics: The fear of an existential Muslim threat post-9/11 led to policies accepting war on terror's premises, making them hard to challenge, and fueled birtherism based on Obama's race and faith.
Learning from this conversation with Spencer Ackerman is that the policies and politics of the post-9/11 era, which were driven by a narrative of fear of an existential threat from an undefined Muslim enemy, have profoundly transformed America and are still with us today. This fear led to policies that accepted key premises of the war on terror, giving them a bipartisan seal and making them harder to criticize and change. Birtherism, which emerged in this context, was not just about Obama's race but also his perceived Muslim faith, creating an atmosphere of emergency that saw him as a threat to American identity. The war on terror's legacy continues to shape our culture and politics, and understanding this lineage is essential if we want to question its premises and move on from it.
The war on terror fueled American politics with fear and rage: Trump exploited the fear of external threats to tap into American xenophobia and belief in American innocence, contributing to the unraveling of American democracy and the rise of nativism.
The war on terror and the political force of fear and rage it fueled have been shaping American politics in profound ways. Trump, who capitalized on this fear, understood the political power beneath the surface of war on terror policies better than those who initiated them. He exploited the underlying aggrieved, vengeful patriotism that opened a door to the ugliest currents in American history, including anti-immigrant sentiment and the belief in a clash of civilizations. While the elites involved in the war on terror focused on specific operations and practices, Trump confronted the subtext of American democracy's unraveling and the rise of nativism. The war on terror and Trump share a common foundation in the fear of external threats, which allowed long-standing American xenophobia and a belief in American innocence to come to the fore.
The war on terror fueled Trump's rise to power: The war on terror created a climate of fear, expanded surveillance, and provided context for Trump's harsh rhetoric and policies to gain support.
The war on terror served as a catalyst for the political rise of Donald Trump by creating a climate of fear and emergency that allowed other explanations for his presidency to gain power. The war on terror also led to the expansion of surveillance, with the NSA violating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to collect data on Americans in bulk without individual suspicion or judicial authority. Trump capitalized on this national urgency and used the perceived threat of terrorism to justify his harsh rhetoric and policies. The war on terror did not directly cause Trump's presidency, but it provided the context and conditions that allowed his message to resonate with voters.
Data collection and surveillance in the 21st century: Despite complex relationships between governments and surveillance, the potential for misuse of data collection and surveillance powers raises concerns for privacy and individual rights.
In the 21st century, data collection and surveillance have become integral parts of the economy, often without individuals' knowledge or consent. Companies commodify this data, and governments, such as the NSA and FBI, use it for sophisticated forms of data mining, like 3 hop surveillance. The war on terror provides an atmosphere of emergency, allowing these agencies to collect astronomical amounts of data, sometimes unilaterally and without strict legal constraints. The fear is that this power could be misused by those in positions of authority, such as presidents or senior lawyers, to target critics or opponents. The example of Michael Ellis, a former White House functionary who became the NSA's general counsel, highlights this concern. Barack Obama's relationship to the policy architecture of the war on terror was complex. While he was against the Iraq war and sometimes critical of the war on terror mindset, he still oversaw the continuation of many of its policies during his democratic presidency. This continuity raises questions about the potential for misuse of surveillance powers and the need for robust legal and ethical safeguards.
Obama's War on Terror Legacy: Balancing Interests and Usurping the Judicial Function: Obama expanded the war on terror, grew NSA power, ended torture but allowed extended isolation, destabilized Libya leading to drone strikes, and usurped the judicial function.
During the eight-year tenure of Barack Obama, the war on terror continued to expand, despite his intentions to wind it down. Obama's administration grew the power of the NSA, allowing it to become symbiotic with social media and data giants. He ended torture but allowed for extended isolation, which is considered torture in other contexts. The US destabilized Libya, leading to a new symbol of the war on terror through drone strikes, which often target "military-aged males." Obama aimed to balance competing interests, but his administration also usurped the judicial function by empowering lawyers to determine lawful operations. This legacy, particularly the use of drone strikes, is a profound and often overlooked aspect of the Obama administration's war on terror.
Moral implications of drone strikes in the war on terror: Despite claims of effectiveness and minimized collateral damage, drone strikes in the war on terror raise ethical concerns due to civilian trauma and potential creation of more enemies, with silenced voices adding to the need for a nuanced conversation.
The use of drone strikes in the war on terror, while believed to keep America safe, comes with significant moral implications. The trauma experienced by innocent civilians, such as Fahim Qureshi, who have been affected by these strikes, raises serious ethical concerns. The belief that these strikes are effective in preventing terror attacks and minimizing collateral damage is not universally accepted, and the long-term consequences, including the potential creation of more enemies, are often overlooked. The drone war's impact on people's lives and the lack of consideration for the role the United States plays in generating its own enemies are significant threats that endanger America, regardless of the moral argument. The silencing of voices like Fahim Qureshi in policy circles further highlights the need for a more nuanced and inclusive conversation about the implications of the drone war.
American exceptionalism fuels a dangerous mindset: The belief that America, as the world's superpower, doesn't need to follow international rules and can act without consequence leads to indiscriminate use of force, creating new enemies and instability
The American approach to ensuring safety in the post-9/11 world has been built on the assumption that America's enemies can be eliminated through military force. However, as argued, this perspective overlooks the fact that such policies may inadvertently create new enemies. The underlying cause of this mindset is American exceptionalism, which stems from the belief that America, as the world's superpower, does not need to abide by international rules and can act without consequence. This imperial overreach fuels a sense of imperiled safety that can never be fully satisfied, as it requires an unchallenged global superstructure. Critics argue that a gentler foreign policy might not be enough to prevent actual threats, but indiscriminate use of force, such as the broad definition of imminent attack and the disregard for due process, only creates more animosity and resistance. A more nuanced and balanced approach is needed to truly ensure safety and stability.
The war on terror's complex web of national security measures: The war on terror's measures, while debated for safety, raise questions about democratic accountability and long-term consequences, including inspiring resistance and a permanent state of emergency.
The war on terror, as it has been waged since 9/11, has led to a complex web of national security measures, including kidnapping, torture, missile strikes, drone strikes, and invasions. While some argue that these actions have made us safer, others question their morality and the long-term consequences, such as inspiring resistance and creating a permanent state of emergency. The hidden nature of these operations, shrouded in secrecy and framed as necessary for our safety, raises important questions about democratic accountability and the cost of our actions on the world stage. The ongoing debate highlights the need for nuanced discussions about the trade-offs between security and freedom, and the importance of understanding the root causes of conflict rather than just reacting to symptoms. As the political landscape shifts, it's crucial to consider alternative approaches to foreign policy that prioritize diplomacy, empathy, and a commitment to upholding human rights.
Shifting Political Landscape in Democratic Party on Foreign Policy: The Democratic Party's left wing is pushing for changes to foreign policy and national security, leading to criticism of long-standing policies and tension with the Biden administration. This struggle for influence could result in a reduction of American global hegemony, but challenges remain due to power dynamics and geopolitical competition with China.
The political landscape within the Democratic Party regarding foreign policy and national security is shifting, with a more vocal and influential left pushing for change. This is evident in the growing criticism towards long-standing policies, such as the war on terror and the Israel-Palestine conflict. The emergence of this new force within the party is causing a skirmish with the Biden administration, as seen in the administration's less-than-satisfactory actions on issues like the Yemen war and Afghanistan. The struggle between these forces and the Biden administration is a long-term one, with the battlefield being highly asymmetrical. While there is reason for optimism for those who believe in reducing American global hegemony, the power dynamics within the Democratic Party and the broader political landscape present significant challenges. Additionally, the renewed Cold War-like competition with China is shaping policymaking and could lead to an expansion of the national security state and its war on terror architecture, potentially targeting innocent people under an atmosphere of collective suspicion.
Exploring the use of external enemies for power consolidation: The US employs this tactic in the war on terror due to geopolitical circumstances and anxiety of American power decline. Books like 'American War', 'The Jakarta Method', and 'Overheated' provide insights.
The use of external enemies as a means to consolidate power and control populations is not unique to tyrannical regimes, but is a tactic employed by the United States as well, particularly in the context of the war on terror. This trend is driven not only by geopolitical circumstances but also by an anxiety of American power in decline. Three books that shed light on this topic are Omar El Akkad's "American War," a novel that humanizes those targeted in the war on terror; Vincent Bevan's "The Jakarta Method," which explores the history of CIA-led campaigns of extermination; and Kate Aronoff's "Overheated," which examines the intersection of climate change, capitalism, and the need for alternative solutions. Additionally, graphic novels like Jack Kirby's "The New Gods" and Greg Rucka and Michael Lark's "Lazarus" offer imaginative perspectives on power structures and conflict.
Exploring the Best of Black Panther Comics: Evan Narcisse's 'Rise of the Black Panther' and Spencer Ackerman's 'Reign of Terror' are must-reads for fans of the Black Panther character, offering compelling storylines and unique perspectives on the character and its historical context.
Both "Rise of the Black Panther" and "Reign of Terror" are exceptional comic book series worth checking out for fans of the Black Panther character. Evan Narcisse's "Rise of the Black Panther" stands out for its compelling first year storyline, showcasing the author's deep love and familiarity with the character. The opening page is particularly noteworthy, making it one of the best in comic book history. Spencer Ackerman's "Reign of Terror," on the other hand, offers a unique perspective on the historical context of the Black Panther Party in the US. Both books provide fresh and captivating takes on the Black Panther character and are highly recommended for those interested in the Marvel universe or the history of the Black Panther Party.
