{"title":"美利坚合众国","authors":"A. Winter","doi":"10.4337/9781786434050.00014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the attacks of 9/11, political, public, media and academic focus on terrorism and counter-terrorism has proliferated. According to Crenshaw (2004, p. 82), ‘[t]he attacks of September 11 propelled terrorism from obscurity to prominence in the wider field of international relations and foreign and security policy,’ adding that ‘[s]cholars who had previously ignored terrorism now acknowledged it as a major national security concern’. According to Silke (2008, p. 47), prior to 9/11, the study of terrorism was peripheral in academia, but ‘[s]ince the terrorist attacks of 9/11, interest in – and funding for – terrorism related research has increased enormously’. Yet, he argues that there has been an over-emphasis on al-Qaeda and a lack of historical research (Silke, 2009). In fact, when 9/11 occurred it became difficult for many to remember a time when it was someone other than a Muslim perpetrator. In addition to this, much literature, media attention and counter-terrorism since 9/11 has focused on international terrorism and foreign actors, sources and threats, as opposed to domestic ones. The events of 9/11 not only served to determine the terms of terrorism and counter-terrorism, but also overwrote, if not erased, the collective and institutional memory of pre-9/11 terrorism. According to Singh (2003, p. 52), 9/11 ‘heralded a dangerous and unprecedented chapter in the “American experiment”. 9/11 represented the end of what remained of America’s post-1991 innocence about the severity of global threats’. Former Director of the CIA R. James Woolsey (2002, p. v) argued that ‘[i]f the world did not change on September 11, 2001, at least most people’s perception of it did’.","PeriodicalId":227923,"journal":{"name":"National Accounts Statistics: Main Aggregates and Detailed Tables 2018 (Five-volume Set)","volume":"160 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"United States of America\",\"authors\":\"A. Winter\",\"doi\":\"10.4337/9781786434050.00014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Since the attacks of 9/11, political, public, media and academic focus on terrorism and counter-terrorism has proliferated. According to Crenshaw (2004, p. 82), ‘[t]he attacks of September 11 propelled terrorism from obscurity to prominence in the wider field of international relations and foreign and security policy,’ adding that ‘[s]cholars who had previously ignored terrorism now acknowledged it as a major national security concern’. According to Silke (2008, p. 47), prior to 9/11, the study of terrorism was peripheral in academia, but ‘[s]ince the terrorist attacks of 9/11, interest in – and funding for – terrorism related research has increased enormously’. Yet, he argues that there has been an over-emphasis on al-Qaeda and a lack of historical research (Silke, 2009). In fact, when 9/11 occurred it became difficult for many to remember a time when it was someone other than a Muslim perpetrator. In addition to this, much literature, media attention and counter-terrorism since 9/11 has focused on international terrorism and foreign actors, sources and threats, as opposed to domestic ones. The events of 9/11 not only served to determine the terms of terrorism and counter-terrorism, but also overwrote, if not erased, the collective and institutional memory of pre-9/11 terrorism. According to Singh (2003, p. 52), 9/11 ‘heralded a dangerous and unprecedented chapter in the “American experiment”. 9/11 represented the end of what remained of America’s post-1991 innocence about the severity of global threats’. Former Director of the CIA R. James Woolsey (2002, p. v) argued that ‘[i]f the world did not change on September 11, 2001, at least most people’s perception of it did’.\",\"PeriodicalId\":227923,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"National Accounts Statistics: Main Aggregates and Detailed Tables 2018 (Five-volume Set)\",\"volume\":\"160 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"National Accounts Statistics: Main Aggregates and Detailed Tables 2018 (Five-volume Set)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786434050.00014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"National Accounts Statistics: Main Aggregates and Detailed Tables 2018 (Five-volume Set)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786434050.00014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
自9/11袭击以来,政治、公众、媒体和学术界对恐怖主义和反恐的关注激增。根据Crenshaw(2004年,第82页)的说法,“9·11袭击事件使恐怖主义在国际关系、外交和安全政策的更广泛领域中从默默无闻变得突出”,并补充说“以前忽视恐怖主义的学者现在承认它是一个主要的国家安全问题”。根据Silke(2008,第47页)的说法,在9/11之前,对恐怖主义的研究在学术界是次要的,但“自从9/11恐怖袭击以来,对恐怖主义相关研究的兴趣和资金都大大增加了”。然而,他认为过分强调基地组织而缺乏历史研究(Silke, 2009)。事实上,当9/11事件发生时,很多人都很难记起除了穆斯林行凶者之外还有谁行凶。除此之外,自9/11以来,许多文献,媒体关注和反恐都集中在国际恐怖主义和外国演员,来源和威胁上,而不是国内的。9/11事件不仅决定了恐怖主义和反恐的术语,而且即使没有抹去,也覆盖了9/11之前恐怖主义的集体和机构记忆。根据辛格(2003,第52页)的说法,9/11“预示着‘美国实验’的一个危险和前所未有的篇章”。“9·11”事件标志着1991年后美国对全球威胁的严重性所保持的纯真的终结。前中央情报局局长R. James Woolsey (2002, p. v)认为,“如果世界在2001年9月11日没有改变,至少大多数人对它的看法改变了”。
Since the attacks of 9/11, political, public, media and academic focus on terrorism and counter-terrorism has proliferated. According to Crenshaw (2004, p. 82), ‘[t]he attacks of September 11 propelled terrorism from obscurity to prominence in the wider field of international relations and foreign and security policy,’ adding that ‘[s]cholars who had previously ignored terrorism now acknowledged it as a major national security concern’. According to Silke (2008, p. 47), prior to 9/11, the study of terrorism was peripheral in academia, but ‘[s]ince the terrorist attacks of 9/11, interest in – and funding for – terrorism related research has increased enormously’. Yet, he argues that there has been an over-emphasis on al-Qaeda and a lack of historical research (Silke, 2009). In fact, when 9/11 occurred it became difficult for many to remember a time when it was someone other than a Muslim perpetrator. In addition to this, much literature, media attention and counter-terrorism since 9/11 has focused on international terrorism and foreign actors, sources and threats, as opposed to domestic ones. The events of 9/11 not only served to determine the terms of terrorism and counter-terrorism, but also overwrote, if not erased, the collective and institutional memory of pre-9/11 terrorism. According to Singh (2003, p. 52), 9/11 ‘heralded a dangerous and unprecedented chapter in the “American experiment”. 9/11 represented the end of what remained of America’s post-1991 innocence about the severity of global threats’. Former Director of the CIA R. James Woolsey (2002, p. v) argued that ‘[i]f the world did not change on September 11, 2001, at least most people’s perception of it did’.