's effort to drum up a coalition of the willing in a war against terror relied upon a number of myths and misapprehensions as well as on what now look to have been outright lies. Some of these exploited the slipperiness of the language, and above all the currency of the word terror as indicating either an objective agent or an emotion, or both at once: a terror is what causes us to feel terror. Working within a contemporary language culture and a media consensus in which the word terrorist has been almost wholly applied to enemies of the state rather than to the operations of the state itself -where it began (in revolutionary France) and where it is still arguably routine, given the overwhelming possession of the power of terror by the militarised nation states -the Bush administration was able to convince most of the people most of the time of a causal connection between two rather different ideas: that terror was the exclusive property of the enemy-other, and that their own psychic insecurities, manufactured of course, could be assuaged by making war on that enemy. So powerful was this conflation that it survived the seemingly implausible substitution of Saddam Hussein for Osama bin Laden as the agent of objective terror and the designated enemy, even as it was becoming clearer and clearer that the events of 9/11 were almost certainly unrepeatable as such.This much is history, but it is a history with very deep roots that are worth recovering. The currency of terror as an aesthetic experience was well-established in English by the early 1700s, in part thanks to a propensity to translate Aristotle's phobos (paired with pity as a constitutive response to tragic drama) as terror rather than fear. Since tragedy is a spectacle on the stage, the emotion one feels is embodied in something one sees: an agent outside ourselves which causes us to feel intensely within ourselves. Being terrified at terror goes all the way back to the Greeks. But there is another formative tradition that has contributed to the present state of the common language, which probably owes rather little to Aristotle and his kind: translations of the Bible into English. The English Bible, before the relatively recent spate of efforts at user-friendlier versions, usually meant the King James or
Aider une personne ou un groupe à exprimer son agressivité et à la recanaliser «constructivement» risque d'être une intervention répressive et démobilisatrice. Tout comportement a des causes sociales et politiques que les dominants ont intérêt à éluder. Quand on a un rôle d'autorité, se dire apolitique et non directif est protéger le statu quo social. Refuser d'intégrer dans son intervention la dimension du pouvoir, c'est travailler au profit des dominants et au détriment des dominés. Nous avons nous, les intervenants, le pouvoir de définir les règles du changement individuel ou social. Le cacher rend ce pouvoir inattaquable. Devant le potentiel de répression qui est inhérent à toute valeur dominante, nous proposons la tolérance à la confusion, la déstabilisation des leaderships, et l'apprentissage à la mobilité du pouvoir.To aid an individual or a group to express agressivity and to re-channel it «constructively» runs the risk of being a repressive and de-mobilizing intervention. All behaviour has political and social causes which those in power have an interest in evading. To say that one is apolitical and non-directive when one has a role of authority, is to protect the social status quo. To refuse to integrate the notion of power into one's intervention, is to work to the profit of those in power and to the detriment of the dominated. We, as intervention agents, have the power to define the rules of individual or social change. To hide this renders this power unchallengeable. In the face of the potential for repression inherent in all values of the dominant, I propose tolerance of confusion, the destabilization of leadership, and the learning of power mobility
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.