Enemies Everywhere: Terrorism, Moral Panic, and US Civil Society
ENEMIES EVERYWHERE: TERRORISM, MORAL PANIC, AND US CIVIL SOCIETY
Abstract
Since the attacks of September 11th, 2001, terrorism has gained prominence in U.S. discourse.
The representations of terrorists and terrorism by news media and politics have contributed to the establishment of terrorism as a moral panic.
This examination explores the social effects stemming from the constructed moral panic surrounding terrorism, structured around Cohen's stages of moral panic.
Analysis includes media depictions, legislative, political, and legal responses resulting in social and cultural changes due to the panic.
The article concludes that media and political representations have led to heightened panic and fear, misguided public consciousness, and problematic legislation with negative social ramifications.
Introduction
The American public has been bombarded with images of terrorism post-September 11, 2001.
Increased perceived threats and security alerts have contributed to a culture of fear.
The tragic events of September 11 were amplified by media and political discourse, revealing a deeper social tragedy.
The concept of moral panic has been prevalent in defining social issues over the past 30 years with references to leading scholars like Becker, Young, Cohen, and others.
The Concept of Moral Panic
Definition: A moral panic is defined as an exaggeration of perceived deviant behavior or criminal activity (Cohen, 1972).
Exaggeration based on the number of participants, violence levels, and resultant damages.
Cohen’s Framework: Cohen outlined how a moral panic develops, influenced by societal reactions to perceived threats, particularly by the media, agents of social control, and public opinion.
The evolution of moral panic can lead to changes in laws and social policies, shaping societal perceptions of threats.
Actors in a Moral Panic
For a moral panic to flourish, the involvement of six sets of actors is needed:
Folk Devils: Individuals responsible for deviant behavior, who become the embodiment of evil.
Rule Enforcers: Police, prosecutors, and judiciary ensure norms are maintained, presenting themselves as protectors of societal order.
Media: The most influential actor, distorting reality and inflating the seriousness of incidents, generating public anxiety.
Politicians: They align with the public and the media to reflect the moral high ground, advocating for punitive measures in response to perceived threats.
Action Groups: Organizations motivated by moral entrepreneurship to address social issues related to the perceived deviance.
Public: The ultimate audience that reacts through discourse shaped by media and political narratives.
Characteristics of a Moral Panic
Goode and Ben-Yehuda (1994) outline five characteristics that differentiate a moral panic from regular societal concern:
Heightened Concern: Increased public dismay about certain groups or behaviors.
Hostility: Increased hostility towards the group defined as deviant.
Consensus: A societal agreement that the threat posed by the group is real and harmful.
Disproportionate Reaction: Over-reaction to the perceived threat in terms of scale and severity.
Volatility: The ability of a moral panic to emerge quickly and often unexpectedly.
Definitions of Terrorism
Definitional Challenges: Terrorism is difficult to define due to its subjective nature and implications of political power.
Common Definitions: Official U.S. documents define terrorism as using violence or threats to achieve political, religious, or ideological goals (White House, 2002).
Chomsky’s Perspective: The definition of terrorism is often influenced by the perspective of those in power, framing the acts of enemies as terrorism while similar acts by allies are viewed as legitimate responses.
Social Construction: The media and politicians generate a socially constructed image of terrorism that influences public perception and responses to violence.
Stages of a Moral Panic
Stage One: Threat Definition
Following September 11, 2001, President Bush characterized the attacks as targeting American values, leading to the framing of terrorists as ultimately evil.
The administration expanded the definition of the enemy beyond Al-Qaeda to encompass broad and evolving categories of groups perceived as threats.
Stage Two: Media Representation
Media representations following 9/11 defined the terrorists and their acts as profoundly evil.
Headlines contributed to the public's perception of terrorism as imminent, with extensive coverage dominating news cycles.
Stage Three: Public Concern and Hostility
Increased public expressions of patriotism and hostility towards perceived enemies led to hate crimes and attacks against Muslim communities.
The administration used fear tactics, linking public dissent to support for terrorists.
Fear was exacerbated by measures such as increased security alerts and suggestions for preparedness against biological threats.
Stage Four: Disproportionate Reactions
Legislative responses included acts such as the USA Patriot Act, expanding government powers without due process.
A call for war was framed as necessary to combat an expansive and undefined enemy.
The war on terror was portrayed as a fight against a multitude of terrorist threats, legitimizing military responses.
Stage Five: Social Changes
Social changes resulting from the moral panic include a significant rise in hate crimes and surveillance of specific communities.
The definition of enemy combatants allowed for indefinite detention without due process, violating established human rights practices.
The legacy of anti-terrorism legislation raised concerns for civil liberties, affecting both citizens and non-citizens alike.
Conclusion
The concept of moral panic effectively frames understanding of societal responses to terrorism post-9/11.
Evidence supports that a moral panic has indeed taken hold: heightened societal concern, increased hostility, public consensus on threats, disproportionate reactions, and significant volatility in perceptions exist.
Future discourse must dissect the propaganda surrounding terrorism to facilitate a deeper understanding of the societal impact and policy implications.