Globalisation, Citizenship and the War on Terror

Globalisation, Citizenship and the War on Terror

Edited by Maurice Mullard and Bankole A. Cole

This book explores globalisation and the war on terror in a world that is becoming increasingly and significantly polarised and in which dialogue is undermined. The authors contend that citizenship does not obey a static definition, and that its meaning is located in changing economic, social and political contexts. Equally, civil, political and social rights are continually being politically defined. The war on terror has, the book argues, influenced issues of civil liberties and prioritised the need for ‘security’ over and above the protection of human rights: it has redefined the meaning of the rule of law.

Chapter 6: Citizenship After the Death of the Public Sphere

Stefan Skrimshire

Subjects: law - academic, human rights, politics and public policy, human rights, international politics, international relations, terrorism and security


Stefan Skrimshire INTRODUCTION: THE GREAT PERSUADER AND THE VULGAR MASSES A Prince should take great care, therefore, that nothing issues from his mouth which is not imbued with the five aforementioned qualities. To see him and hear him, he should seem all-merciful, all-trustworthy, all-integrity, all-humanity, allreligion. Nothing is more important to seem to have than this last quality. Generally speaking, men judge more by the eyes than by the hands, because everybody can see, but only a few can feel. Everyone sees what you seem, few feel what you are like . . . for the common people are always impressed by how things seem and by the way things turn out, and in the world there is nothing but common people. When the many are comfortably settled, the few will find no way in. (Machiavelli, 1995, p. 98 used by Edwards, 2003b)1 The day after Tony Blair delivered his impassioned speech to parliament calling for MPs to endorse an Anglo-American war on Iraq in March 2003, Britain’s newspapers were unanimous in describing the speech as a defining moment in restoring the credibility and integrity of the prime minister and democracy. The Daily Mirror, for example, despite being in full swing of its anti-war ‘phase’, wrote: [W]e do not question [Blair’s] belief in the rightness of what he is doing. It is one thing to have principles others disagree with, another altogether to have no principles . . . Mr Blair and Robin Cook have helped to restore the integrity of parliament at...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information