DOCSLIB.ORG

UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, IRVINE Louis Althusser, Leo

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, IRVINE Louis Althusser, Leo UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE Louis Althusser, Leo Strauss, and Democratic Leadership DISSERTATION submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Political Science by Bron Cohen Tamulis Dissertation Committee: Associate Professor Keith Topper, Chair Associate Professor Kevin Olson Professor John H. Smith 2014 © 2014 Bron Cohen Tamulis DEDICATION To Political Scientists of all kinds, but especially to my Committee, without whom this work would not be, and to my family, who endured it. But also to the White Dragon Noodle Bar, who taught me the answer to that pestering question: “why?” And lastly, to all those who refused to forget and who thus deserve to be remembered. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iv CURRICULUM VITAE ix ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION x INTRODUCTION: Political Leadership in the Twentieth Century 1 CHAPTER 1: Reasoned Humility: Strauss, Neoconservatism, and Us 21 CHAPTER 2: Pre-Modern Lessons For a Post-Stalinist Age: Leo Strauss on Machiavelli 72 CHAPTER 3: In Defense of Contemplation 133 CHAPTER 4: Dictatorship, Democracy, and Political Leadership 178 CHAPTER 5: Hearing the Call: Machiavelli, Althusser, and Us 253 CHAPTER 6: Out of Utopia: Althusser’s Solitude 316 CONCLUSION: Navigating the Theoretical Turn 386 BIBLIOGRAPHY 398 iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS When I entered graduate school in Fall of 2007, I left behind a full time, well-paid vocation as a Jaguar technician. As a teaching assistant I earned a $17,000/yr salary, but during this time I had the privilege of interacting with, and sometimes teaching, hundreds of young students at the University of California, Irvine. Unlike the various engines, compressors, and brake systems that I was used to encountering on a daily basis, my students were dynamic, engaging, and unpredictable. Before it was all over I also met and married my wife, Samantha, and fathered two children, Sydney and Kiriaki. While I was undergoing serious changes, so too was the world. The so-called financial crisis of 2008, the largest prison expansion project in the history of the world (in California), the unrest of the “Arab Spring,” the revelations of Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden, the election of Barack Obama as President of the United States, and the current standoff with Syria and Russia represent only a handful of the most memorable events that would shape my graduate career. Politics has not stopped while my nose has been buried in many, many books. But the reason that I decided to switch vocations, to enter the tumultuous world of academia, was that I felt like there was a serious need to develop a better apparatus with which to understand the often perplexing reality we encounter every day. In taking up the vocation of the political theorist, I embarked upon a journey that brought me in contact with a profoundly inspiring lineage. I searched through countless books for components, bits and pieces, of a machine that would help me understand the complexities of the world. That need is as great as it was in 2007. I have resisted the urge to say that it is needed “now more than ever” because that is something that everyone seems to say, especially after such high-profile crises as we have experienced over the last few years. As I have learned more and more about the history that undergirds our constantly changing present predicament, the need to sharpen analytical tools, to reforge concepts and shape discourse, is one that is never going to be diminished by whatever academic exercise I might undertake. Indeed, this terrain is where the discourse of the future is constructed. It is no surprise, then, that it came to be the topic of my dissertation. The history of the 20th Century has been one of constantly recurring crisis—providing ample material for an eager graduate student searching for dissertation topics. As an undergraduate at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst I majored in Social Thought and Political Economy (STPEC), a unique interdisciplinary major in the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences. STPEC taught me something quite rare in today’s educational environment: to think critically about myself, my society, and my world. When I entered graduate school after spending seven years “working for a living,” I was eager to actively engage the world and change it. Naturally, this eager attitude affected my writing. I expected to be working to help make the world a more equitable and just place to live and work, and to use my knowledge in pursuit of these lofty goals. My graduate advisors patiently encouraged me to downplay my polemical attitude iv because they wanted to help me to get a job in what has been by all accounts the worst academic job market in anyone’s memory. But, lucky for me, I did not enter the Political Science department solely in order to get job training. I was after a vocation.1 I centered my sights on understanding the previous century and its profound effect on the world. I became active in the union, helping in the struggle to fight against the draconian measures of austerity that gripped the state of California throughout my time there. I worked to help bring democracy to the day-to- day functioning of the union, even as I kept up my studies. I did, though, come to question what it means to be partisan on the terrain of ideas, what it means to be a committed intellectual in a world that seldom waits for discussion and contemplation. Amidst the bargaining table and the seminar room, I slowly discovered a new version of myself, and thus a new world. Although I did not yet realize it, I had found the perfect place for me. The “ivory tower” is supposed to be aloof from the everyday concerns of mundane beings, but I quickly found out that it was shot through with privilege, ideology, and contradictions. Ideology, though, is like a finely-tuned clock that tells the wrong time—if you ask it to do what it says it is supposed to do—tell the actual time— then it can really unsettle all those folks who have adjusted themselves to the incorrect reading. I asked the University to do what it said it was supposed to be doing—to teach me to understand the world and thereby help me achieve the best possible version of myself. I asked many questions and settled for few answers. In a graduate cohort awash with uncertainty and self-doubt, such noble aspirations were met with quizzical stares or even downright hostility. Some professors took such aspirations as a personal challenge to the discipline and their careers. One went so far as to inform me that plenty of my kind were to be found driving cabs in New York City. Silently, I wondered what was wrong with driving a cab—at least this was a paying job that performed a discernible good for society. Many of my peers seemed bound for desk jobs with the government or adjunct positions with no security and modest wages. With the power of the market reaching unprecedented encroachment upon all aspects of human life, prospects for gainful employment seemed grim indeed: if tenure seemed unlikely then being a public intellectual was more like impossible. It is only a slight exaggeration to say that within the first month of classes I heard more discussion of what jobs were out there than I did about the course readings. My department required its first-year graduate students to take a course in the Foundations of Political Science with Professor David Easton. I found the course stimulating, exciting, and absolutely essential: surely every political scientist would want to know about where the discipline comes from, how it has changed over time, what mistakes have been made, right? Surely everyone would want to clarify the language and terminology that we use so haphazardly—essential concepts like “the state” or “politics.” No. Discussions about such “theoretical” questions were met with frustration and anger amongst my peers. How was this going to help them get a job, they 1. What it means to be a political theorist is, naturally, the subject of much concern to those who allege to practice the profession. I would like to show my appreciation to Sheldon Wolin, in particular for his piece “Political Theory as a Vocation,” The American Political Science Review 63 no. 4 (1969): 1062-1082. In my own small way I hope that I have enlisted myself in the ranks of those who “those who believe that because facts are richer than theories it is the task of the theoretical imagination to restate new possibilities” (1082). I also thank John Gunnell, who wrote: “My immediate concern is with the authenticity of an activity that fails to confront the fact that speaking academically about politics is not the same thing as speaking politically” (“Political Theory and Politics: The Case of Leo Strauss,” Political Theory 13, no. 3 (1985): 340). v wondered. Shouldn’t they be learning methods? Where was the data? I was shocked: why on earth would anyone go looking to academia if they wanted to get a job? Wasn’t this supposed to be about the process of learning—about bettering ourselves and living a monastic life of the mind? Weren’t we absolutely privileged to be as insulated as possible from the forces of the “market?” But, as I quickly found out, my naïve beliefs were out of place. Anxiety, depression, and pernicious guilt were the norms of academic life—for the grad students. True, the professors seemed relatively happy—those that had tenure, anyways.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 4 the Right-Wing Media Enablers of Anti-Islam Propaganda
    Chapter 4 The right-wing media enablers of anti-Islam propaganda Spreading anti-Muslim hate in America depends on a well-developed right-wing media echo chamber to amplify a few marginal voices. The think tank misinforma- tion experts and grassroots and religious-right organizations profiled in this report boast a symbiotic relationship with a loosely aligned, ideologically-akin group of right-wing blogs, magazines, radio stations, newspapers, and television news shows to spread their anti-Islam messages and myths. The media outlets, in turn, give members of this network the exposure needed to amplify their message, reach larger audiences, drive fundraising numbers, and grow their membership base. Some well-established conservative media outlets are a key part of this echo cham- ber, mixing coverage of alarmist threats posed by the mere existence of Muslims in America with other news stories. Chief among the media partners are the Fox News empire,1 the influential conservative magazine National Review and its website,2 a host of right-wing radio hosts, The Washington Times newspaper and website,3 and the Christian Broadcasting Network and website.4 They tout Frank Gaffney, David Yerushalmi, Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer, Steven Emerson, and others as experts, and invite supposedly moderate Muslim and Arabs to endorse bigoted views. In so doing, these media organizations amplify harm- ful, anti-Muslim views to wide audiences. (See box on page 86) In this chapter we profile some of the right-wing media enablers, beginning with the websites, then hate radio, then the television outlets. The websites A network of right-wing websites and blogs are frequently the primary movers of anti-Muslim messages and myths.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy and Dissent: Strauss, Arendt, and Voegelin in America
    Denver Law Review Volume 89 Issue 3 Special Issue - Constitutionalism and Article 6 Revolutions December 2020 Democracy and Dissent: Strauss, Arendt, and Voegelin in America Stephen M. Feldman Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/dlr Recommended Citation Stephen M. Feldman, Democracy and Dissent: Strauss, Arendt, and Voegelin in America, 89 Denv. U. L. Rev. 671 (2012). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. DEMOCRACY AND DISSENT: STRAUSS, ARENDT, AND VOEGELIN IN AMERICA STEPHEN M. FELDMANt During the 1930s, American democratic government underwent a paradigmatic transformation.' From the framing through the 1920s, the United States operated as a republican democracy. Citizens and elected officials were supposed to be virtuous: in the political realm, they were to pursue the common good or public welfare rather than their own "par- tial or private interests."2 Intellectually, republican democracy had premodern roots stretching back to antiquity. 3 As such, republican demo- cratic theorists often conceptualized the common good in objectivist terms, as if there existed a distinct good that could be clearly ascer- tained.4 Equally important, for at least a century, republican democracy seemed to fit the agrarian, rural, and relatively homogenous American society. Thomas Jefferson, for one, insisted that the agrarian economy and widespread rural land ownership promoted a virtuous commitment to the common good.5 And given that, in the nation's early decades, an overwhelming number of Americans were Protestants who traced their ancestry to Western or Northern Europe, the people seemed sufficiently homogeneous to join together in the pursuit of the common good.6 Of course, some Americans did not fit the mold.
    [Show full text]
  • Democratic Vanguardism
    Democratic Vanguardism Modernity, Intervention, and the making of the Bush Doctrine Michael Harland A Thesis Submitted in Fulfillment of The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History Department of History University of Canterbury 2013 For Francine Contents Acknowledgements 1 Abstract 3 Introduction 4 1. America at the Vanguard: Democracy Promotion and the Bush Doctrine 16 2. Assessing History’s End: Thymos and the Post-Historic Life 37 3. The Exceptional Nation: Power, Principle and American Foreign Policy 55 4. The “Crisis” of Liberal Modernity: Neoconservatism, Relativism and Republican Virtue 84 5. An “Intoxicating Moment:” The Rise of Democratic Globalism 123 6. The Perfect Storm: September 11 and the coming of the Bush Doctrine 159 Conclusion 199 Bibliography 221 1 Acknowledgements Over the three years I spent researching and writing this thesis, I have received valuable advice and support from a number of individuals and organisations. My supervisors, Peter Field and Jeremy Moses, were exemplary. As my senior supervisor, Peter provided a model of a consummate historian – lively, probing, and passionate about the past. His detailed reading of my work helped to hone the thesis significantly. Peter also allowed me to use his office while he was on sabbatical in 2009. With a library of over six hundred books, the space proved of great use to an aspiring scholar. Jeremy Moses, meanwhile, served as the co-supervisor for this thesis. His research on the connections between liberal internationalist theory and armed intervention provided much stimulus for this study. Our discussions on the present trajectory of American foreign policy reminded me of the continuing pertinence of my dissertation topic.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    NOTES Introduction 1. Robert Kagan to George Packer. Cited in Packer’s The Assassin’s Gate: America In Iraq (Faber and Faber, London, 2006): 38. 2. Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke, America Alone: The Neoconservatives and the Global Order (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004): 9. 3. Critiques of the war on terror and its origins include Gary Dorrien, Imperial Designs: Neoconservatism and the New Pax Americana (Routledge, New York and London, 2004); Francis Fukuyama, After the Neocons: America At the Crossroads (Profile Books, London, 2006); Ira Chernus, Monsters to Destroy: The Neoconservative War on Terror and Sin (Paradigm Publishers, Boulder, CO and London, 2006); and Jacob Heilbrunn, They Knew They Were Right: The Rise of the Neocons (Doubleday, New York, 2008). 4. A report of the PNAC, Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century, September 2000: 76. URL: http:// www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf (15 January 2009). 5. On the first generation on Cold War neoconservatives, which has been covered far more extensively than the second, see Gary Dorrien, The Neoconservative Mind: Politics, Culture and the War of Ideology (Temple University Press, Philadelphia, 1993); Peter Steinfels, The Neoconservatives: The Men Who Are Changing America’s Politics (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1979); Murray Friedman, The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2005); Murray Friedman ed. Commentary in American Life (Temple University Press, Philadelphia, 2005); Mark Gerson, The Neoconservative Vision: From the Cold War to the Culture Wars (Madison Books, Lanham MD; New York; Oxford, 1997); and Maria Ryan, “Neoconservative Intellectuals and the Limitations of Governing: The Reagan Administration and the Demise of the Cold War,” Comparative American Studies, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • “Democratic Self-Government Or Mass Migration? Choose!” by John Fonte, Ph.D., Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute, Washington, DC, USA
    “Democratic Self-Government or Mass Migration? Choose!” By John Fonte, Ph.D., Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute, Washington, DC, USA. If Migration is the biggest Challenge of our Time---the key Issue is Who will decide this challenge? There are three possibilities: Supranational institutions (let’s call this Davos); the migrants themselves arriving without the consent of the people in the nations that are affected--or the demos, the citizens of democratic nation-states? Whether migration is decided by Davos, by the migrants or by the Demos will determine the direction of the West in the 21st century. The Challenge of Migration is at the heart of the most important question in politics going back to Plato and Aristotle. Who Governs? Supranational institutions or democratic nation- states? Transnational elites—unaccountable--to any democratic people or the citizens of a nation? The President of the United States, Donald Trump, has described the coming conflict as one between patriotism and globalism. Today, sovereign self-government is challenged within the democratic world and within the West by the ideological and material forces of Transnational or Global Progressivism. The Party of Davos-Global Governance-Transnational Progressivism is supported by an interlocking network of transnational elites including international lawyers, judges, bureaucrats, and activists housed at institutions like the United Nations, the European Commission, the European Court of Human Rights, leading global corporations, NGOs, and within the governments of many Western nation-states. These groups have a symbiotic relationship. John Bolton has referred to some of their practitioners as the “High-Minded.” This network promotes two complimentary ideologies: supranationalism abroad and multiculturalism at home.
    [Show full text]
  • Donald Trump, the Changes: Aanti
    Ethnic and Racial Studies ISSN: 0141-9870 (Print) 1466-4356 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rers20 Donald Trump, the anti-Muslim far right and the new conservative revolution Ed Pertwee To cite this article: Ed Pertwee (2020): Donald Trump, the anti-Muslim far right and the new conservative revolution, Ethnic and Racial Studies, DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2020.1749688 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2020.1749688 © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published online: 17 Apr 2020. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 193 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rers20 ETHNIC AND RACIAL STUDIES https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2020.1749688 Donald Trump, the anti-Muslim far right and the new conservative revolution Ed Pertwee Department of Sociology, London School of Economics, London, UK ABSTRACT This article explores the “counter-jihad”, a transnational field of anti-Muslim political action that emerged in the mid-2000s, becoming a key tributary of the recent far- right insurgency and an important influence on the Trump presidency. The article draws on thematic analysis of content from counter-jihad websites and interviews with movement activists, sympathizers and opponents, in order to characterize the counter-jihad’s organizational infrastructure and political discourse and to theorize its relationship to fascism and other far-right tendencies. Although the political discourses of the counter-jihad, Trumpian Republicanism and the avowedly racist “Alt-Right” are not identical, I argue that all three tendencies share a common, counterrevolutionary temporal structure.
    [Show full text]
  • Douglas M. Weeks Phd Thesis
    RADICALS AND REACTIONARIES: THE POLARISATION OF COMMUNITY AND GOVERNMENT IN THE NAME OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY Douglas M. Weeks A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews 2013 Full metadata for this item is available in Research@StAndrews:FullText at: http://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/ Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10023/3416 This item is protected by original copyright This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Radicals and Reactionaries: The Polarisation of Community and Government in the Name of Public Safety and Security Douglas M. Weeks This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews 15 November 2012 Abstract The contemporary threat of terrorism has changed the ways in which government and the public view the world. Unlike the existential threat from nation states in previous centuries, today, government and the public spend much of their effort looking for the inward threat. Brought about by high profile events such as 9/11, 7/7, and 3/11, and exacerbated by globalisation, hyper-connected social spheres, and the media, the threats from within are reinforced daily. In the UK, government has taken bold steps to foment public safety and public security but has also been criticised by some who argue that government actions have labelled Muslims as the ‘suspect other’. This thesis explores the counterterrorism environment in London at the community/government interface, how the Metropolitan Police Service and London Fire Brigade deliver counter-terrorism policy, and how individuals and groups are reacting.
    [Show full text]
  • Al Muhajiroun and Islam4uk: the Group Behind the Ban
    Developments in Radicalisation and Political Violence Al Muhajiroun and Islam4UK: The group behind the ban Catherine Zara Raymond May 2010 Developments in Radicalisation and Political Violence Developments in Radicalisation and Political Violence is a series of papers published by the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence (ICSR). It features papers by leading experts, providing reviews of existing knowledge and sources and/or novel arguments and insights which are likely to advance our understanding of radicalisation and political violence. The papers are written in plain English. Authors are encouraged to spell out policy implications where appropriate. Editor Prof. Harvey Rubin University of Pennsylvania Dr John Bew ICSR, King’s College London Editorial Assistant Katie Rothman International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence (ICSR) Editorial Board Prof. Sir Lawrence Freedman King’s College London Dr. Boaz Ganor Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya Dr. Peter Neumann King’s College London Dr Hasan Al Momani Jordan Institute of Diplomacy Contact All papers can be downloaded free of charge at www.icsr.info. To order hardcopies, please write to mail@icsr. info. For all matters related to the paper series, please write to: ICSR King’s College London, 138-142 Strand London WC2R 1HH United Kingdom © ICSR 2010 1 Summary On 2nd January 2010, Islam4UK, an off-shoot of the extremist Islamist group Al Muhajiroun, announced their intention to stage a procession through Wootton Bassett, a town which is now synonymous in the eyes of the British public with the funerals of UK soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Less than two weeks later the group was proscribed by the British government under the Terrorism Act 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter to PM 2.Cdr
    The European Convention on Liberal Democracy Dear Prime Minister, A revolution has engulfed Syria. On one side are democratic activists being shielded by rebel forces; on the other, a dynastic totalitarian dictatorship that has killed upwards of 6,000 civilians, arbitrarily detained an estimated 37,000 more, and been credibly accused by the United Nations of crimes against humanity. The province of Homs has become a latter-day Sarajevo. The kind of house-to-house raids that Muammar Gaddafi threatened to conduct in Libya are routine practice in Syria, as is the firing of heavy artillery in residential areas. According to human rights monitors, the regime of Bashar al-Assad and its mercenary affiliates have raped young boys in front of their fathers, beat the wounded while they're in hospital, crammed people into shipping containers for transport to detention facilities, and summarily executed soldiers who refuse to fire on civilians. Despite assurances from the Arab League that its fact-finding mission to Syria would spell an end to violence, there is credible evidence that the Assad regime has in fact redoubled its campaign of arbitrary arrests, torture and murder. Recently, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay and French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe have advocated some form of intervention to protect the people of Syria. Russia and China's continued intransigence at the UN Security Council to pass even a watered down resolution condemning Assad's violence, has left the West with no alternative but military intervention. A detailed report published by Henry Jackson Society offers a workable blueprint for intervention that would include the creation of a safe area in the northwest province of Idlib, centred in the city of Jisr al-Shughour, as well as a no-fly zone covering the western corridor of the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter to PM.Cdr
    The European Convention on Liberal Democracy Dear Prime Minister, A revolution has engulfed Syria. On one side are democratic activists being shielded by rebel forces; on the other, a dynastic totalitarian dictatorship that has killed upwards of 6,000 civilians, arbitrarily detained an estimated 37,000 more, and been credibly accused by the United Nations of crimes against humanity. The province of Homs has become a latter-day Sarajevo. The kind of house-to-house raids that Muammar Gaddafi threatened to conduct in Libya are routine practice in Syria, as is the firing of heavy artillery in residential areas. According to human rights monitors, the regime of Bashar al-Assad and its mercenary affiliates have raped young boys in front of their fathers, beat the wounded while they're in hospital, crammed people into shipping containers for transport to detention facilities, and summarily executed soldiers who refuse to fire on civilians. Despite assurances from the Arab League that its fact-finding mission to Syria would spell an end to violence, there is credible evidence that the Assad regime has in fact redoubled its campaign of arbitrary arrests, torture and murder. Recently, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay and French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe have advocated some form of intervention to protect the people of Syria. A detailed report published by Henry Jackson Society offers a workable blueprint for intervention that would include the creation of a safe area in the northwest province of Idlib, centred in the city of Jisr al-Shughour, as well as a no-fly zone covering the western corridor of the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Watches the Watchmen? the Conflict Between National Security and Freedom of the Press
    WHO WATCHES THE WATCHMEN WATCHES WHO WHO WATCHES THE WATCHMEN WATCHES WHO I see powerful echoes of what I personally experienced as Director of NSA and CIA. I only wish I had access to this fully developed intellectual framework and the courses of action it suggests while still in government. —General Michael V. Hayden (retired) Former Director of the CIA Director of the NSA e problem of secrecy is double edged and places key institutions and values of our democracy into collision. On the one hand, our country operates under a broad consensus that secrecy is antithetical to democratic rule and can encourage a variety of political deformations. But the obvious pitfalls are not the end of the story. A long list of abuses notwithstanding, secrecy, like openness, remains an essential prerequisite of self-governance. Ross’s study is a welcome and timely addition to the small body of literature examining this important subject. —Gabriel Schoenfeld Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute Author of Necessary Secrets: National Security, the Media, and the Rule of Law (W.W. Norton, May 2010). ? ? The topic of unauthorized disclosures continues to receive significant attention at the highest levels of government. In his book, Mr. Ross does an excellent job identifying the categories of harm to the intelligence community associated NI PRESS ROSS GARY with these disclosures. A detailed framework for addressing the issue is also proposed. This book is a must read for those concerned about the implications of unauthorized disclosures to U.S. national security. —William A. Parquette Foreign Denial and Deception Committee National Intelligence Council Gary Ross has pulled together in this splendid book all the raw material needed to spark a fresh discussion between the government and the media on how to function under our unique system of government in this ever-evolving information-rich environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Virtual Caliphate James Brandon
    Virtual Caliphate Islamic extremists and their websites Virtual Caliphate James Brandon James Brandon Centre for Social Cohesion A Civitas Project Virtual Caliphate ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS AND THEIR WEBSITES Virtual Caliphate ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS AND THEIR WEBSITES James Brandon 2008 CENTRE FOR SO C I A L C O H E S ION Centre for Social Cohesion Clutha House 10 Storey’s Gate London SW1P 3AY Tel: +44 (0)20 7222 8909 Fax: +44 (0)5 601527476 Email: [email protected] www.socialcohesion.co.uk Director: Douglas Murray The Centre for Social Cohesion is a Civitas project CIVITAS is a registered charity: No. 1085494. Limited by guarantee. Registered in England and Wales: No. 04023541 © Centre for Social Cohesion, January 2008 All the Institute’s publications seek to further its objective of promoting the advancement of learning. The views expressed are those of the authors, not of the Institute. All rights reserved ISBN 978-1-903386-68-2 Printed in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press Trowbridge, Wiltshire “The problem I find is that you start off listening to a speaker that you may not be familiar with, go though two or three lectures maybe. The next thing you find is they condemn the mujahideen here and there or start being apologetic about Terrorism in Islam. For me that’s enough to switch off.”1 Islambase administrator 19 April 2007 http://forum.islambase.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=8&mode=linearplus vi Contents Introduction xi Methodology xiii Glossary of Islamic terms xv CHAPTER 1: Work by jailed, exiled or deported extremists 1 n Abu Hamza
    [Show full text]