Won’t Get Fooled Again
The Paranoid Style in the National Security State
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6267333 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Thomas C Ellington (corresponding author) |
| Year | 2003 |
| Volume | 38 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 436-455 |
| Publication date | 2003-01-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Government and Opposition (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0017-257X • E-ISSN: 1477-7053 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1111/1477-7053.t01-1-00023 |
| OpenAlex | W2089046329 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
In meeting the threat posed by terrorism, the democratic state also faces a paradox: those practices best suited to defending the state are often least suited to democracy. Such is the case with official secrecy, which has received renewed attention. Military and intelligence operations frequently depend on secrecy for their success. At the same time, democracy depends on openness, a fact too often neglected by democratic theory. Official secrecy subverts citizen autonomy and in so doing creates fertile ground for paranoid-style thinking. For the United States, a history of secrets and lies has left a legacy of distrust and paranoia
Autocracy · Autonomy · Democracy · Distrust · Law and economics · National security · Openness to experience · Paranoia · Political economy · Political science · Secrecy · Sociology · State (computer science · Style (visual arts · Terrorism · Computer Science · History · Intelligence, Security, War Strategy · Law · Psychology · Social Psychology
| Citations per year | 0.05 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2005 - 2005 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |