Plus20 and Get Up! held a workshop on re-framing national security on October 17, 2005
The notes from that workshop are below. Please feel free to post a comment below, or email miriam AT tsd.net.au with any questions.
How is the issue being framed by conservatives?
The ‘just war’ frame:
‘War on terror’
With us or against us
Clash of civilisations
Fighting extremism
Violence to be met with violence
Protecting ‘people like us’ against ‘people like them’:
Protecting our way of life
Defending freedom
Right to security
Australian values
Necessary measures for extraordinary times:
Threats at home and overseas
Extension of previous powers
Judicial review, sunset clause, competent authorities
‘We just follow advice’ (from intelligence orgs)
‘We can’t tell you what we know but if you knew you would agree with us’
Strength vs weakness – “tough new laws”
(implied) willingness to be ruthless, to “do whatever it takes”
What are the assumptions behind this frame?
- We are facing a new and unique threat
- There are ‘experts’ on terrorism and we should do whatever they say
- There are costs of ‘safety’ that must be paid
- You may get blown up. The more power the government has the less likely you are to get blown up.
- Battle between good and evil
- Battle between Order and disorder
- ‘Australian values’ exist and are under threat
How is the issue being framed by progressives?
‘We’ are partly to blame:
The actions of Western countries have fed support for terrorism
Western countries – especially the US have contributed to the arming and training of terrorists
Terrorism is partly a consequence of economic and political conditions, not just ‘religious extremism’
We need to hold on to and defend:
Human rights
Civil liberties
Rule of law
Transparency and accountability
Freedom
Legal principles
Criticism of implementation:
Racism in who is being targeted & the way the problem is described
Disproportionate measures
‘Giving them what they want’
Ill-considered
No public debate
Vagueness & ambiguity of measures
Too hasty – need to slow down
What are the assumptions behind this frame?
State power will be abused
Root causes matter
The level of threat has been exaggerated for political reasons
Based on what progressives say, what would a progressive response to terrorism look like?
- Better regulation of terrorist financing & materials
- Independence of intelligence agencies
- More money for intelligence – not more power
- Independent foreign policy – respect for self-determination
- Proper review of effectiveness of current criminal law
- Human Rights Act/Bill of Rights
- Massive aid program – contribute to Millenium Development Goals
- Clear defence against executive power
- Support for multiculturalism
Challenges
The progressive response tends to:
- Ask people not to “think of the elephant” – trying to shift the focus to issues other than terrorism and safety
- Reflect the divide between liberalist and social-democratic philosophies (part of the left has been historically sympathetic towards some forms of terrorism)
- Focus more on abstract concepts such as ‘human rights’ and the ‘rule of law’ than on concrete proposals for preventing acts of terrorism
- Be dismissed by conservatives as protecting ‘them’ rather than ‘us’.
Points of intervention – what would challenge the assumptions behind the conservative story?
Their response is misguided and selective. Ours is comprehensive and effective.
Their response only looks at one corner of the puzzle. Ours is strategic.
By taking away our freedoms, their response is attacking our way of life.
By demonising refugees and young muslims, they are creating resentful citizens.
They are making terrorism worse because they don’t understand its root causes.
- We need to protect our way of life: respect for difference, pluralism, justice (including presumption of innocence)
- We need to engage with ideas, not censor them
- We need to build a society based on trust
- We need to use the law as an instrument for creating trust
- We need to decrease resentment by demonstrating justice
Leave a Comment so far
Leave a comment
Plus Twenty 