To read this content please select one of the options below:

September 11 as “Machiavellian State Terror”

The Hidden History of 9-11-2001

ISBN: 978-0-76231-305-1, eISBN: 978-1-84950-408-9

Publication date: 14 July 2006

Abstract

Pyrotechnic effects and spectacular death belong to the symbolism of terror and political assassination – bizarre techniques of miscommunication through fear practiced on the innocent and designed to effect social change. While focusing on the use of terror in 9-11, this article deals with both terror and political assassination as closely related communicative practices of death. It outlines a theory of terrorism that suggests September 11 may be an example of expedient terrorist destruction ordered from within the state, a macabre instance of a state protection racket. Commentators on the left tend to see terrorism as a blow extended by the oppressed against exploiters. However, terrorism is much less likely to be a manifestation of a revolt by – or on behalf of – the underprivileged than a demonstration of brute force by the state or its agents. Machiavellian state terrorism is terror/assassination performed for reasons different from the publicized ones; often initiated by persons or groups other than those suspected of the act; and – most important – secretly perpetrated by, or on behalf, of the violated state itself. Machiavellian state terror advances the ruling agenda, while disguising itself as the work of individuals or groups opposed to the state's fundamental principles. As an example, the article reviews a mysterious 1971 assassination in Paris that obliquely foreshadows some critical elements of the official story of 9-11. The article underlines the importance of oppositional theorizing: questioning government and looking for connections between events are critical features of what it means to be vitally active in the political universe.

Citation

MacGregor, D. (2006), "September 11 as “Machiavellian State Terror”", Zarembka, P. (Ed.) The Hidden History of 9-11-2001 (Research in Political Economy, Vol. 23), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 189-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-7230(06)23006-2

Publisher

:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2006, Emerald Group Publishing Limited