Worlds in Collision: Terror and the Future of Global Order

by Ken Booth

Book Overview

Bringing together an outstanding group of thinkers, Worlds in Collision is the essential book for understanding the debate about the future of global order in the wake of international terrorism and the war in Afghanistan. For years to come, if not decades, the 'war on terrorism' will be the defining paradigm in the struggle for global order. When the victim of such horrific terror attacks happens to be the world's only superpower, the agenda is set...

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0333998057
• ISBN13: 9780333998052
• Release Date: June 2002
• Publisher: Palgrave MacMillan
• Length: 376 Pages
• Weight: 1.14 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.1" x 5.4" x 8.4"

Customer Reviews

Ideal polity

1. Edmund Burke said, "No passion so effectually robs the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear" 2. The terrorist had beliefs that gave their lives meaning though what those beliefs were remain contested, theoretically, psychologically, and politically. 3. Some security measures should be taken, for many terrorist are beyond both appeasement and deterrence, but if terrorism is simply matched by escalating violence, then fear will be sovereign in world affairs, and the terrorist will have won some sort of victory. 4. In traditional war, victory is assured by the occupying of ground; in a global war against terrorism not only has territory to be occupied in some sense globally, but also hearts and minds have to be won over. 5. Terror networks need more than weapons: they also need bases, and this is why the US used force against the Taliban government that maintained a close alliance with al-Qaeda. 6. The Caspian sea has become a new vision of a new Saudi Arabia. 7. 9/11 and the global war on terror has not fundamentally altered the dynamic interplay and territoriality and transnationalism. 8. The worlds of force and law collide in ways that are comparable to terror and dialogue. One difference is that the terrorist are always unlawful and there are times when force may be used to disarm and defeat the terrorist. The great danger is that fighting terrorism might provoke ruthless behaviors that represent some sort of victory for the terrorist. The prevent a slide into unlawful violence, a number of condition must be met: 1. all pacific forms must be address to find resolution 2. there must be no doubt about the justice of the cause 3. those responsible for the conduct of the war must act within the restraints established by the laws of war. 9. Terrorism is a method of political action that uses violence against civilians and civilian infrastructure in order to influence behaviour, to inflict punishment or to exact revenge. The goal is to make the target group afraid of tomorrow and each other. Terrorism is an act, not an ideology. 10. One of the tragic paradoxes of the twentieth century is that those states which have most closely self-identified with the path of enlightenment have committed acts of barbarism that no modern terrorist group has yet been able to match. 11. Poverty is the state that causes terrorist to act. In and ideal polity, political action is based on dialogue, one which participants rationally seek to persuade other of the universal validity of their moral beliefs. 12. Terrorism is an abberation without long term disruption.

Incredible

As an author myself, I highly recommend that you purchase this book. "Worlds in Collision" is an enlightening resource, towards the realization of European Cultural will towards domination, etc. I got my copy. Author. "Knowledge For Tomorrow" Quinton D. Crawford

A Very Distinguished Collection.

The horrors of September 11th 2001 have resulted in terrorism and political violence as an area of study becoming increasingly topical. In terms of publishing output this has been a mixed blessing. The area has become "fashionable" but quantity has not always been matched by quality. The past year has, quite frankly, seen a lot of rubbish published - from both ends of the political spectrum.This book goes some way towards redressing the balance. It is essentially a series of essays by various academics on various aspects of the "War on Terrorism". There is something for everyone here. You will almost certainly find something you agree with, but equally you will doubtless find something that will infuriate you! The book purposely draws on academics with unashamedly differing world views (many of whom are EXTREMELY distinguished - a real A list bunch). A chapter by the Marxists' favourite Noam Chomsky shares space with a chapter by the British uber-realist Colin Gray and another by that master of fair and balanced analysis, Lawrence Freedman (why has John Keegan got a knighthood when Freedman hasn't?). Kenneth Waltz and Robert O'Keohane both feature, as do half the International Politics department of Aberystwith University. You really would be hard pressed to find work by so many quality people in one place elsewhere.There's somebody for everybody here - corny but true. These are the people who have been setting the standards for the debate - not the left wing editorials of the European press and the right wing columnists in the American print media that both sides seem to get so worked up about these days.If you're interested in the debate on the "War on Terror" post September 11th, this book deserves to be on your shelves.