Introduction INTRODUCTION WHY TOURISTS ARE TARGETED BY TERRORISM? Although the concept of mobility is hard to grasp, over decades it gained further legitimacy within academic circles and popular opinion. Nowadays, “Being Mobile” represents a sign of status for “chosen peoples”, who situated themselves in opposition to others who had not met such a right (Sassen, 1990; Sheller and Urry, 2006; Cresswell, 2010). Associated to other words as progress, knowledge, or advance, mobility as a neologism, no less true, has opened a new debate as a conduit of globalization over recent decades. In this vein, supporters of mobility explain that global societies are more open to otherness (Mo, 2009; Evans, 2009; Kagan and Hahn, 2011; Florida, 2014) with possibilities to develop creative atmosphere of inclusion, or platforms which are conducive to reduce ethnic violence (Pinker, 2011; Amar, 2011; Vannini, 2012). As Steven Pinker puts it (in his book The Better Angels of our Nature), the mainstream values of enlightenment as well as the cosmopolitan spirit fostered by travels and the globalization has paved the ways for violence and conflict plummeted. This decade (in the inception of XIXth century) seems to be a most peaceful time in humanity’s existence. Two major assumptions are of vital importance for us in this review. Firsts and foremost, civilizations expand their hegemony by the impositions of discourses. These narratives are aimed at silencing or embellishing bloody past-time events in forms of heroic epics. Our heroes not only were cruel persons who have killed thousands of other warriors, but 1 Tourism and Terrorism also struggled in appalling battlefront to impose their interests. This is the first point of entry in this discussion because we tend to think current times are more violent than earlier ones, but exactly historical evidence suggests the opposite. Secondly, sometimes statistics are analyzed following a much deeper emotional logic that distorts the outcome. It is not far-fetched to confirm that XXth century was a bloody century since two world wars have taken place but Pinker adds, humankind has witnessed other genocides and slaughters in earlier centuries. This begs a more than pungent question, why is violence declining? For Pinker, Hobbes was in the right direction at time of exploring the roots of plunder. Peoples attack other by fear, pride or eagerness. The goals for fighters are related not only to predation, but honor. In middle age, plunder and conquests posed as the only manners of upward mobility in societies where classes do not exist. In perspective, in traditional societies where peasants and warlords are attached to their lands, conflict is the only valid mechanism to expropriate the others from their possessions. At the time, trade was introduced as a form of negotiation among peoples and officialdoms, violence plummeted. The use of money not only replaces the needs of war but globalizing the exchange of goods resulted in an efficient way of deterring predation. Over recent years, we have found some civil conflicts in the world that leads readers to question the idea of civil democratic peace. Is democracy effective to struggle against terrorism? Far from being a detractor of democracy, Pinker clarifies that “decent governments” (p. 313) are reasonably democratic because there are prone to trade and market-oriented. Being open to globalized economy, foreign investment or liberal trade helps reducing the conflicts or their severities for peoples. This means that the liberality the system needs for financial investments seem not to be direct with the free movement of peoples, which should be considered an unalienable right. The main thesis of this titanic project 2 Introduction is that the ideals of Enlightenment or the Kantian hopes in a universal peace are possible if nation-states adopt democracy as their primary form of government and endorse to the values of liberal market. Following this axiom, US-led invasions to Middle East’s nations as Iraq or Afghanistan would be considered legitimate preventive acts for a democratic power against undemocratic societies. This decline of violence is not eternal, and it has been experienced in earlier times. The ebbs and flows of civilization far from being unilineal reach different levels depending on the sociocultural conditions of societal order. The ten chapters that form this fascinating book propose a liberal vision of the world which places the belief of a more hostile society under the lens of scrutiny (Pinker, 2011). Although Pinker was widely criticized by his statistical sources and the ways he interprets violence is declining (Epstein, 2011), it is interesting to discuss the reasons why material asymmetries between classes has enlarged. In sharp contrast with Pinker, this suggests that while less violent, capitalist world still remains more unjust than other times (Korstanje, 2016). At a first glance, we agree this is an impressive work that compiles methodologically vast ranges of studies and samples alternating quantitative with qualitative approaches. We even share with Pinker, violence is in decline. In order for monopolizing the means of production, financial elite needs from peace, mobility, tourism, democracy and commodity-exchanges. What violence decreased is not good news simply because capitalism proved to be a machine to create material asymmetries. As Bauman (2011a,b) puts it, the problem of capitalism rests on the belief that few deserve much, while the rest are on the ruin. Almost 2% of global population concentrates 90% of produced wealth. In a recent book, Maximiliano Korstanje (2015) explained that this postmodern world can be compared to the film Hunger Games, or the reality show Big Brother. In both settings, participants are dominant of their conciseness because they remain unfamiliar with the real probabilities to fail. These competences, 3 Tourism and Terrorism like liberal market, are based on the premise of social Darwinism that claims for “the survival of strongest”, which means that the glory of only one equals to the failure of the whole rest. Participants not only over-valorize their own skills, but are confident of their strongholds. The stimulation of competition in the labor market, emulated by entertainment industry, resulted in two interesting dynamics. On one hand, the industrial order faced what Robert Castel dubbed “the rise of uncertainty”. The vulnerability of rank-and-file workers associated to the decline of well-fare state facilitated the capital-owners to increase their profits and wealth, at the time, risk was adopted as a new value for modern workers. As Richard Sennett (2011) observed, the idea of risk implies that workers are co-managing their own fate, they not only are responsible by their decisions, but it avoids elite from their responsibility to create the conditions for a fairer wealth distribution. This gives capital further freedom to move worldwide. Paradoxically, on another hand, we, in terms of realism, are safer than other earlier cruel times, though audiences are bombarded by abstract risks. In this context, democracy is the legal and ideological platform that facilitates the expansion of latecapitalism. In ancient Greece, as Castoriadis (1996) widely demonstrated, democracy was a legal resource (which comes from demos) where lay-citizens can derogate a law if this was unjust or affected the interest of someone. Modern democracy, far from channeling rights in this direction, creates a gap between citizens and officials. This gap is fulfilled by trade and businesses corporations which support financially to potential candidates to presidency. The original concerns exposed by Jean Baudrillard (2006) echo not only on the thesis of simulacra, but to the possibilities of operating from future to change present. At the time, some policies are politically applied to solve some problems; their real reasons are covered to protect the interests of status quo. Risks are phantoms that keep workforce immobile. As example, Baudrillard (2006) brings into question the legitimacy of democracy by introducing the figure of precogs, (in the film Minority Report). These agents worked jointly 4 Introduction to police to forecast the crime before it is committed. As a result of this, police arrested to suspected criminal, not for what it has been done, but for future crimes. This, to my end, is a brilliant and beauty metaphor how modern world works; a point that Pinker and followers would think twice. Violence has declined in view of what reality has set the pace to pseudo-reality. On another hand, detractors of mobilities alert that on risks generated by the climate of “destructive creation”, stimulated by the needs of change, or social upward, this discourse of mobility engenders (Cusack, 2010; Virilio, 1989, 1997, 2005; Kaplan, 2006; Bauman, 2011a,b; Sennett, 2011, 2015). While some first class citizens can travel worldwide without any restriction, which suggests the fact is that mobility is only a privilege right for few ones; the rest of humankind is subject to immobility and territory. In this introductory chapter, we will explore the legacy and contributions to sociologists as John Urry who pivoted in the study of mobilities, in a moment where this was an emergent issue. Following this, Urry was convinced that modern industrial world not only exploits social relations as subordinated to productive system, but accelerates movement (as leisure travels) a state of hyper-consumption by the introduction of mobilities as main value. The growth of travels worldwide, Urry adds, are valid indicators of expansion for capitalist system. This belief leads John Urry to proclaim overtly that we live in a mobile world. What would be more than promising to discuss is the connection of people with their institutions. A closer look reveals that lay people is subject to immobility while only the surrounding institutions are ongoing recreated to channel the personal drives. Far from being mobile, we wonder to what an extent we really move forward or backward. Rather, the current sense of mobility consists in trends that generate turn-around displacements only. In a more than interesting manuscript, published at Environment and Planning, Caren Kaplan (2006) traces an historical dichotomy in the attempts of US to monopolize air power, and 9/11 as a defiance 5 Tourism and Terrorism act to that hegemony. She argues convincingly that the allegories of war, which are centred on views of airspace, intersects with nationalist discourses in post 9/11 contexts. The metaphors of mobilities as signs of Warfare were initiated by Paul Virilio in his different texts. He understands that the concept of reality diluted into a pseudo-spectacle produced by the media. The acceleration of speed as well as the complex of communication created a gap, which, resulted from the leisure time people have, is fulfilled by the media. Over centuries, humans yielded the war against their neighbours from the shelter of their cities. While globalization expanded to the four corners of the globe, there was not safe place to hidden, at the same time, terrorism surfaced as an internal manifestation of violence (Virilio, 2005). Undoubtedly, Virilio was widely criticized by his radicalism, he sheds light on the fact that war on terror, as a political concept obscures more than it clarifies. Last but not least, Diken and Lausten (2002) discuss to what extent terrorism accelerated the passage from “disciplinary” societies to societies of control. In the contemporary city, the already-existent conflict among citizens sets the pace to a new all-encompassing discourse, terror which is functional to the production of states of emergencies to impose a unique rule. It is evident that we cannot understand terrorism placing asunder “the meaning of mobilities” as well as the archetype of “otherness”. As Howie (2010) claimed, one of the immediate effects of terrorism consists in dividing the world in two, us and them. This differentiation is vital to understand the roots of terrorism. The question whether governments use “the discourse of terrorism” tomark off “all enemies of democracy” remains open in right-wind scholars who ignore that terrorists fit with nationalist expressions of fascism which once ignited are very hard to stop. The culture of witnessing, where West erected its hegemony, is now the same that wreaks havoc mining the tenets of democracy. “In the present wave of terror, they and then have invariably been terms applied to Muslims, especially those living in diasporic 6 Introduction communities. Sometimes, it has involved picking a side is the war on terror as former president George Bush demonstrated when immediately after 9/11, he said that you are “either with us, or you are with the terrorist”. (Howie, 2010: 21). In the following section, we will place the argument of Urry under the lens of scrutiny, to reconstruct a fresh alternative that helps readers to revisit the meaning of terrorism (as well as mobilities). THE CONCEPT OF MOBILITY IN JOHN URRY In consonance to medical discourse, the medical gaze discovers “the truth” through the lens of pathology, which means a radical change that separates normalcy from deviance. Once the pathology is found, it is extirpated from the organism. In developed-societies, doctors revise their patients oriented to find a problem, which should firstly be diagnosed, secondly corrected. The medical eye (gazing) needs to find a lack so that its proposition of cure to be widely accepted. Not surprisingly, westerners, far from their aversion to death, have developed an attachment to “gaze”, as a mechanism to control “external objects”. The doctrine of “ocular-centrism” that was created through capitalist logic has successfully achieved a higher life expectancy over recent years. In doing so, the rise and advance of epidemics or illness were radically controlled by physicians. In a similar way, the world of mass consumption is based on the needs of “gazing others”. While we travel to visit beautiful landscapes, natives are controlled by our gaze, simply because we travel to gaze, and what is gazed becomes in our possession. However, far from being scattered or disorganized to individual subjectivity, these practices this seems to be likely the main contribution of Urry- are embedded with a much deeper cultural matrix that precedes human will. For fieldworkers who are obsessed to understand issues of society, there is no opportunity to study social reality beyond these gazes (Urry, 2002). In Urry account, tourism and capitalism are inextricably intertwined. 7 Tourism and Terrorism As previous backdrop, tourism not only depends on displacement which draws the involving territory, but appeals to introduce a rupture between routine and key-factor. This leads Urry to recognize not only tourism is a postmodern activity, combining leisure and labour, but helps expropriating others by excess of rationality. As a commodity, people are valued and exchanged in function of a matrix, which is reified through consumption. To put this in bluntly, Urry understands that the current state of hyper-mobility opens the doors for a paradoxical situation between have and have-not nations. With the benefits of hindsight, he emphasizes on the ciphers of global tourists which rises to 600 million or arrivals annually, whereas this number was limited to 25 million in 1950; but the same reality does not explain why 23 million of peoples are desperate migrants escaping from poverty, oppression and other social ills (Urry, 2007). One of the unresolved problems of exegetes of mobilities consists in a dichotomy between two types of mobilities. While tourists coming from developed countries are welcomed migrants are suspected to be potential terrorists. Ones become in victims, the others in evildoers. Since the centre-periphery dependence has been strengthened, no less true is that peripheral workers go to central economies in quest of better opportunities. Here is where the problem of mobility surfaces. Those governments in central nations that promote liberal policies and free trade to periphery to better their condition of production are unable to provide hospitality to their workforce. As Korstanje observed, there is no detail as Pinker said, we live in a less violent world, but what was clear is this world is more unjust than other times (Korstanje, 2015). In view of that, tourist-experience should be framed under the logic of escapement, where travellers are in quest of something exceptional they are unable to find at home. In this vein, Urry argues that tourism appeals to creativity to reform the routing, commoditizing boredom into forms of entertainment which are centred on aesthetics. As he noted in The Tourist Gaze, behaviours and practices are not classified by other thing than the 8 Introduction expectances created by the market about landscaped and visited destinations. Neither tourists are conquerors of paradisiacal periphery as post-Marxian scholars preclude, nor alienated peoples travelling for feeling authenticity. Rather, tourists are citizens who subjected to a much deeper matrix consume the others by the introduction of gazing. Radically, Urry divorced from the thesis of MacCannell, that tourism serves as a mechanism to alleviate the effects of alienation in citizenry. This idea is better explained in a co-authored book with Scott Lasch, The Economies of Sign and Spaces, a sophisticated text urged by the needs of reinterpreting modern economies and their intersection to tourist-gaze. Throughout this book Lash and Urry acknowledge that mobilities should be interpreted as a result of modernity, endorsing identity to nations. To put this in other terms, multiculturalism engages cultures in view of their capacity of consuming, not production. Since the current state of economy is exhausted, we are not exchanging goods as in other earlier times, but signs which are negotiated and consumed according to above mentioned cultural-matrix. All the skills workers acquired are associated to their capacity to move ahead to produce “a climate of omnipotence” (Lash and Urry, 1993). The trajectory (exchange) of goods and humans (by the commerce or tourism) has created an empty space accelerating the decline of trust and social bond among persons. They appeal to the maussian development of gift’s theory to explain why trade affects seriously the human reciprocity. Most certainly, the economy coupled to the power of sign and image to blurs the geographical boundaries of space. Taking its cue from Nietzchean influence, Lash and Urry admits that the role of subjectivity is being changed to new institutions, hierarchies, and orders, where top-down authority sets the pace to more horizontal forms of power. The hegemony of allegory has accelerated a fusion between hegemony and tradition. This created a sentiment of conflict, between first and third world, where risks operates as a mediator between consumers and their institutions. 9 Tourism and Terrorism In the age of terror, tour-operators are the necessary agents that people come to plan their holidays. This happens because risks posed as a necessary platform where citizens interact (in view of the decline of authority). The tension between “the nets of experts and lay-people” is resolved in the “hegemony of experience”. During XIX and XXth centuries, a new type of reflexibility has been established in capitalist society, which suggests that citizens are equal in terms of the risks they face. The possibilities for tourists not to be attacked in Middle East depend on its capacity to be protected, or even avoid this battleground area. Whatever the case may be, schedules of travels are reproduced now to avoid the “presence of others”, to be simple commodities to be gazed without limits and risks (Lash and Urry, 1993). Since the tourist-gaze is based on the coalescence of three elements, the re-enchantment of consumption, time-space dimension, and visual of performing arts. Therefore, travels re-symbolize spaces at the time they are transformed in commodities. The potential consumers, tourists are bombarded of image, advertising and visual stimuli to interpret these landscapes in a specific way. The decentralized control of space is accompanied with the needs to ask for loans to international financial corporations. The neoliberal policies consisted in deepening the financial dependency of economies respecting to capital, deregulating the already-existent forms of authority. As a result of this, capitalism leads towards a new stage where not only past and future are merged, but people are commoditized to “the dictatorship of gaze” (Lash and Urry, 1998). Although, neither Urry nor Lash is interested in responding why tourists are now targeted by terrorists, they left a fertile ground to find new alternatives to respond this question definitively. THE CONCEPT OF MOBILITY RECONSIDERED For Oswin and Yeoh (2010), the sense of mobility seems to be intersected to the scaffolding of nationhood. As explained in earlier sections, the concept of mobility negotiates an existential 10 Introduction configuration which is framed in a specific territory. The ways of gazing not only depend on the degree of mobility, but the current technology used for that. As Lash and Urry reminded, mobility should be deemed as a cultural project which was politically manipulated to enlarge between the gaps between have and have-nots, or between rich and poor nations. In this token, Marc Auge envisioned that aesthetics played a vital role by the excess of advertising, which was prone to erode tradition (Augé, 1996). The events are interpreted according to the way environment is perceived. The modernity creates an immediate present where the other and its territory are assimilated. Unlike other times, late-modernity attracts in the largest cities many tourists because the other is sold as a spectacle (Auge, 1998). In a seminal work, Tzanelli (2014) describes how modernity has commoditized “trauma”, towards the “theatre of disaster” in order to give an ideological discourse to workers. The suffering of “others” which is often recreated by traumatic events paves the ways for an allegory of death, expressed in the growth of new segment of ThanaTourism. In lieu of doing a collective awakening respecting to arbitrariness suffered during Colonialism, now dark tourism offers a biased explanation why disasters happen. From Auschwitz, to terrorism, dark tourism recycles from the liberal logic of market, the pain, into a commoditized product other like to get. The inflation of different risks which oscillates from natural disasters to terrorism, evinces that the holiday-making and leisure practices as tourism are next to disappear but paradoxically, dark tourism still revitalizing the gift-exchange process that made capitalism feasible. In retrospect, the instrument of surveillance orchestrated by capitalism appeal to the metaphor of undesired guests where working-migrants are stereotyped as zombies, monsters, terrorists or even viruses which may very well threaten the current civilized social order. Since the concept of risk which is theatricalized by the film-related industries allows the imposition of allegories to see the capitalist ethos as one of the best possible worlds, entrepreneurship surfaces as a vehicle to invest first world citizens of an exceptional aura. Therefore, dark 11 Tourism and Terrorism tourism as it is detailed in second chapter takes part of a communal “memory-work” as a life lived in conditions that give others a pretext to feel superior, in terms of Tzanelli a life lived in the periphery. Dark tourism serves as the locus “of a polyphonic hermeneutics” which is based on a multiple sense of places, anticipating the “end of tourism”. Whether neoliberal programs pose in tourism a fertile instrument to enhance the governability of nations, many questions remain open to understand why genocides, political instability and inter-ethnical wars are its immediate consequences. Additionally, as Tzanelli puts it, imagination adjoins to the power of capital to exert a considerable influence over citizens in molding hopes, fears and desires of daily life. Slum and dark tourism are central places where spectorship aesthetically enlarges the gap between have and have-nots. Expiating their burdens to be part of a society which exploited “Others”, dark tourists reify a commoditized version of colonialism tailored for white and western subjectivities (Tzanelli, 2016). THE MEMORIES OF DISASTERS The obsession of tourists who often travel to spaces or sites where death remains as main criterion of attractiveness has recently baptized as “thana tourism” or dark tourism. These types of products oscillate from spots whipped by terrorism towards post disaster contexts (Strange and Kempa, 2003; Kang and Lee, 2011; Britton, 2014; Tzanelli, 2016). Some of these sites have been previously determined by a traumatic experience which perpetuates through the threshold of time. Citing Tumarkin, Luke Howie calls to these experiences as “traumascapes”. Unlike other authoritative voices, he understands terrorism operates from the symbolism of icons as buildings, planes which are used for another purpose than originally created. Planes were historically fabricated in order for transporting passengers, though 9/11 gave another meaning to this, it transformed a means of transport in a real weapon. Since it paves the ways for 12 Introduction the formation of trauma-escape, by an absent, which is fulfilled by the hegemony of the image, consumption is tilted at evoking memories while the real reasons of disasters are hidden. “Traumascape is a location, a geographically defined space, that is infused with memories and histories of trauma. They are locations that are known more for their violent and traumatic past than for the prosperous present or hopeful future. Trauma escape is solemn, emotional and regretful places” (Howie, 2010: 39). This point contradicts the argument of Joy Sather-Wagstaff (2011) who in a seminal book (Heritage that hurts), questioned the idea around dark tourism as a site of indifference. The risks of forgetting the real causes of disasters are not given by dark tourism as an issue that makes humans more humans, but in the needs of political power to change the content of the message to protect their interests. This opens an interesting debate to what extent dark tourism should be considered “as an act of empathy” with other’s pain, or a type of exploration, or simply an “attitude” mainly associated to sadism. This section will discuss in what way, disasters and the spectacle of disasters are used by late-capitalism to disorganize the social ties producing a gap which filled by the allegory of consumption. Besides, one might speculate that recent terrorist attacks on Paris as well on Mali shows two earlier assumptions. At a first glance, targets of terrorism have selectively changed from important Police Chief Officers or Officials to lay-people. Secondly, ISIS and other terrorist cells, as Al-Alqaeda earlier than them, vulnerated site of mass-consumption and tourism which are often characterized by little presence of police and security forces. Since peoples make tourism to relax or escape from their daily routines and daily rules, it is very important the presence of state was minimal. At beaches or museums, visitors or holiday makers feel mistrusts whether the strategies for securitizing the zone are intrusive (Tarlow, 2014). In this respect, as Korstanje puts it, tourism seems to be the perfect target for terrorists 13 Tourism and Terrorism simply because it creates political instability. Not only neighbouring states are affected because the tourist fluxes opt for other destinations, but also the legitimacy of nation-state declines. At some extent, Occident expanded worldwide according to a Eurocentric view of security in which case, identity was woven in opposition to Otherness. The concept of us, the good people is pitted against them, the evildoers. The hobbesian logic of security, which is enrooted in the concept of nation-hood, represents a fertile ground for terrorism in many senses. Paradoxically, we feel free from terrorism living at safe places, but nothing is known on unsafe sports. In recent years, terrorism attacked the core of industrial nations, (New York, 2001 – Madrid, 2004- London, 2005 – and now Paris 2015). Since the attacks were perpetrated through periphery at luxurious tourist destinations, popular opinion remained with certain indifference (Egypt, Buenos Aires, Bali and so forth). The problem was that sooner or later, attacks were replicated in the most industrial cities at North (Korstanje, 2015). As Gilbert Achcar (2002) noted, at the time the imperial centre is under attack, the periphery feels a type of narcissist commiseration that sympathizes deeply with victims. Far from being a genuine sentiment, this allows peripheral nations to be emotionally closer to imperial centre. In this token, mass-media plays a vital role drawing an extreme attention to some attacks while others are left behind. M. Eid (2014) has recently argued that mass-media and produced information provides with the oxygen of terrorism. “Meanwhile, in order for both to survive, terrorists seek to garner public attention and the media seek to find top-stories to sell. In a sense, both parties target wide-ranging audiences (although for different purposes); hence, they interact in a highly toxic relationship that involves a process of exchange necessary for their survival. The exchanging process contributes to the survival of each party; acts of terrorism provide media stories that result in more broadcasting airwaves, press texts, and digital data bytes, while the media coverage brings public attention to terrorists—the oxygen necessary for their existent” (Eid, 2014, p. 24). 14 Introduction Furthermore, after 9/11 and the construction of American allegories respecting to terrorism, the current state of capitalist production has certainly found a new segment for maximizing profits, dark-tourism. From the commodities circulating in economy, death and suffering are two that have no cost for producers. Far from adjusting their production to save the planet, or reducing the emission of gases to atmospheres, many central economies appealed to recycle sites of disasters by introducing an “allegory”, as visit the place hit by Katrina!, or any other traumatic event as Ground Zero in NY. In this respect, dark tourism serves to revitalize communities accelerating the times in recovery process, but never things are as earlier the event. Many neighbours are pressed to live in new homes situated in the periphery of the city, while the center is reserved for big business or international capital investors. This process of gentrification in post disaster contexts, far from solving the situation of affected peoples, aggravates it. In some conditions, even states are in compliance with the market fixing higher taxes peoples are unable to pay. As a result of this, they are pushed to sell their households to other richer groups. It is unfortunate, dark tourism is functional to the logic of exploitation of liberal market in these types of tragedies simply in days of Thana Capitalism, death presented as a new more mobile commodity to exchange. Therefore, today new forms of tourism associated to pain and suffering surfaced in post Katrina contexts. One of the aspects that defined this site seems to be the commoditization of history and racial class relationships. African American culture is visually offered to thousands of bus tours (Hartnell, 2009). The controversy triggers a further discussion to what extent victims whose houses have been destroyed, have the right to become in a commodity for witnessing. Nonetheless, tourism may help to recover not only the material losses, but to forge a common identity that surpasses the disaster pre levels of materiality (Robbie, 2008). Some scholars argued that tourism showed to be a resilient activity that mutiplicated the consuming demand after small-run period of time (Mansfeld, 1999). Nonetheless, less attention 15 Tourism and Terrorism is drawn on the fact that survivors who have adopted tourism to symbolize their tragedies had fewer opportunities to learn from disasters than others groups where tourism is rejected. This is the case of Republica de Cromañon in Argentina, which was widely discussed and explored by Maximiliano Korstanje and Geoffrey Skoll in different ethnographies. In this made-man disaster where 194 youth lost their lives, survivors and victims` parents neglect tourism because they feel it vulnerates the memory of their sons and daughters. Though tourism is not the primary option for Cromañón Sanctuary, no less true is that they have a clear message on the reasons why their relatives died. Not only this happened simply because officials were unable to introduce or manipulate the message of this shrine, but also parents developed a much deeper rejection of politicians (Korstanje and Skoll, 2015). We are living through a new capitalism which not only ignores the alerts of disasters (as global warming or the non-renewable resources), but profits from disasters. Naomi Klein dubbed these new trends as enmeshed into the shock doctrine, which was used by officials in order for citizens to accept policies otherwise would be neglected (Klein, 2007). For these critical voices, disasters and even terrorism produced a great shock in society which unless recycled in forms of spectacles or cultural consuming, would place the legitimacy of elite in jeopardy. In view of that, dark tourism places offered a good alternative for consumers to expand their current understanding of reasons why disasters happened, but as Korstanje adds, the message is based on a biased diagnosis on what the event happened. This leads not only to an ethnocentric discourse because survivors are over-valorized over witnesses, but society does not obtain a good lesson from disasters. It represents the end of resilience paving the ways for the next similar disasters appear (Korstanje, 2011a,b). In this respect, dark tourism was originally conceived as a new segment of tourism whose main attractiveness is death. Those visitors who inspect these sites find spaces of mass-death, or extreme 16 Introduction suffering such as spaces of obliteration post disasters, or sites that suffered terrorist attacks (Stone and Sharpley, 2008). As P. Stone pointed out, dark tourism should be considered a valid instrument in order for lay people to connect with their own death by what “Others” have experienced. This suggests that visitors of these sites imagine death through the lens of others (Stone, 2006, 2014). It is often said that dark tourism has woken up a hot debate in recent years. While some experts have focused attention to the phenomenon as a sign of cultural entertainment based on repressed sadism (Bloom, 2000; Baudrillard, 1996; Koch, 2005), others emphasized the mediated nature of tourism so that visitors may understand their own death (Lennon and Folley, 2000). Beyond this debate, Dark-tourism sites denote territories where mass-death or suffering have determined the identity of a community but no less true is that under some conditions these sites are commoditized to sell the other´s death as a product (Chauhan and Khanna, 2009). In this respect, Stone and Sharpley (2008) address the need of distinguishing dark tourism form other similar issues. The curiosity or fascination of death seems to be one of the aspects that define thana-tourism, or dark tourism. But it is important not to lose sight of how these experiences are framed under shared values that tighten the social bond (Stone and Sharpley, 2008). From a conceptual viewpoint, Dark tourism may be defined as a pilgrimage or an experience but what seems to be important to remember is that it can be an attempt to contemplate death of the self, by sightseeing the other dead (Stone, 2012). Like heritage-seekers, dark-site visitors like to expand their current understanding of history. The epistemological limitations of research are given by the ignorance of site-interpretation experienced by tourists or visitors. To study the motivation of dark-seekers one might ask to reconstruct the subject experience. At a closer look, dark tourism not only entails fascination for death as a primary reason of attraction but a quest for authentic experiences (Biran, Poria and Oren, 2011; Cohen, 2011; Sather17 Tourism and Terrorism Wagstaff, 2011). However, a closer look reveals a hot debate in view of how the message dark tourist sites offer, is constructed, designed and disseminated through population. I, personally, am in doubt visitors to ground-zero really understands the key factors that determine terrorism, or even the responsibilities of America in promoting some jihadists groups (Johnson, 2000). Is tourism a mechanism towards resilience? Though over recent decades, the concept of resilience, which was originally a term coined by psychology, was widely applied to disaster post recovery process (Haigh and Amaratunga, 2010), Dark tourism, offers an inefficient instrument that obscures more than it clarifies. Not only visitors of these sites have little knowledge of real reasons that ushered to tragedy, but they ignore the allegory was politically tergiversated by officialdom. How much would we know on effects and reasons of Shoa (or any other genocide), only by visiting a museum? This is a snapshot comparable by understanding The Conquest of Americas taking a specialized book, but only reading the introduction and conclusion. One of the aspects that difficult the correct understanding of disasters, is the role played by survivors during the first facet of the event. After the landscape of obliteration or mass-destructions, survivors develop psychological mechanism of defence to accept the losses their suffered. As victims, the lives of friends, relatives or even offspring have gone. This exhibits a great suffering which may be reminded. However, after all, they feel not everything is lost, they have survived. This second stage paves the pathways for the creation of an ethnocentric discourse, where survivors think they have been protected by fate, destiny or Gods. A midst of mass destruction, they are enthralled as smarter, stronger and virtuous to give a message to the world. Though this facet is necessary in order for the group to enhance the self esteem, it should be duly regulated and limited in timeframe; unless this occurs as noted, expressions of xenophobia, message of hate against Otherness and chauvinism may very well 18 Introduction emerge. A sense of supremacy monopolizes the collective soul of affected community to the extent, their sense of reality is seriously affected. Unless otherwise resolved, survivors believe they are special and the only way of reaching happiness is by means of suffering. Expressions of this nature were documented by Korstanje during the Chile’s earthquake in the Triathlon Chile Ayuda a Chile. Although interesting sums of investors devoted considerable financial resources in order to help Chilean cities to recover, less attention was given to bribes suspicions and proceedings against real-estate businessmen who sold common skyscrapers and buildings as antiseismic. The spectacle of disasters sublimated the liabilities of some actors were covered. The media, instead of focusing on the responsibility of business corporations, opted to cover on the effects of this disaster. A second issue centred on the nationalist discourse echoed by Chileans during these festivals. They alluded to cultural values associated with strongholds, virtue, and bravery to show the witnessing world, they after all were on feet (Korstanje, 2014a,b). May readers consider this as the end of resilience? Following Klein, capitalism has been expanded in view of its efficacy to disorganize social bondage. This disorganization produces a gap which is fulfilled by a narcissist viewpoint of the world where the “Other” should be subordinated to my desires (Lasch, 1991). The culture of narcissism not only is useful to subordinate citizens to the market, as Z. Bauman noted, but also undermines the existent levels social trust (Bauman, 2013). The last stage consists in the construction of an allegory, which confers a symbolism to disaster. In this vein, it entices the visit of thousand of other peoples (tourists). However, for the site to be consolidated as an attraction, the political power should invest material and symbolic resources in order for message not to cause social fragmentation, or the lack of their legitimacy. Though necessary, it obscures the real reasons of tragedy, cementing the possibility to prevent a similar disaster takes place in a long run future. Capitalism has developed a great capacity to 19 Tourism and Terrorism captivate audience even in context of disaster, but declining the process of resilience that helps learning of such experiences. This connotes a paradox which is stimulated by disaster cultural consumption, in which case, the society had problems to understand further on their disgraces. Otherwise, it presents a serious obstacle for the process of resiliency in the times of fear, where tourism plays a crucial role by engaging death and consumption. Anesthetization of pain is conducive towards pseudo-resilience where the disaster is a matter of time (Korstanje, 2014c,d). (IN)MOBILITIES IN TIMES OF THANA CAPITALISM In recent studies we coined the term, “thana capitalism” to denote a new stage of capitalism where death plays a vital role as the configurator of social order. Terrorism as many of other representational of risks is “commodities” produced by Thana Capitalism to endorse “Anglo-Saxons” an aura of exemplarity over other cultures. Let us explain this concept with clarity in the next. Recently, some specialists agree on the emergence of new tourist destinations where death is “the star”. Those scholars interested in dark tourism issues agree that visitors are aimed at experiencing new sensation, or are in quest of novel experiences, where the “Death of Others” serves to shed light on their own lives (Seaton, 1996; Stone, 2006; Stone and Sharpley, 2008, 2011; Cohen, 2011; Strange and Kempa, 2003; Buda and McIntosh, 2013; Korstanje and George, 2015). In this respect, Seaton defines Thana tourism as the travel dimension towards thanaptosis understood this as a trip to a site wholly or partially motivated by the desire of meeting death (Seaton, 1996). Others of the authorative voices of this topic, P. Stone addresses this meaning anew taking into consideration the wider role of media, in covering not only spots of disaster as ground-zero or New Orleans but other interesting sites as memorable prisons as Alcatraz or Auschwitz. The complexity of this issue leads Stone to 20 Introduction see Dark tourism under the lens of a spectrum which oscillates from lightest to darkest dimensions. For Stone´s account, dark tourism represents an anthropological need to anticipate the own death by means of Others´ death. In retrospect, this deep-seated issue mediates in ways of filter between life and death crystalizing a modern symbolic platform so that the self to negotiate the ontological meanings of its own mortality (Stone, 2012). Rather and Cohen (2011) dangled the possibility dark tourism works as a mechanism of education that learn to next generations further on those events that caused a great trauma to society. In view of that, Cohen divides in populo site, which signalled to those sites where disaster took hit, from, re-created sites more oriented to exploit profits from a sad event. The concept of authenticity delineates the borders of visitor´s experience to the extent to generate different types of reactions. For Cohen, Dark tourism epitomizes an instrument which very well can be used for educative purposes. From the outset, the specialized literature in dark tourism issues was strongly influenced by the paradigm of education. Dark-site consuming or slumming corresponded with individual attempts to situate in the other´s world. Exegetes of dark tourism as a topic embedded with heritage and education hold the thesis that the allegories transmitted by monuments or dark shrines are individually accepted or reject according to an earlier cognitive structure. This suggests that dark-tourism consuming centres on individual “experiences”, which bespeak from the biographies of subjects. Given this, as Biran, Poria and Oren (2011) agreed, current literature in dark tourism should explore the problem adopting tourist experience as a key factor in the fieldwork. The relations of discourse, symbolic meaning and experience are vital to expand the current understanding of thana-tourism. With focus on Auschwitz-Birkenau, researchers highlight that that involving visitors experience empathy with the others` suffering as well as traumatic events. This begs a more than interesting question, is Thana tourism a type of new education for people to understand tragedies in the past? 21 Tourism and Terrorism From a sharp viewpoint, we discuss the concept of Thana Capitalism as a reified version of the society of risk which is characterized by the obsession for others´ death. We realized that the old pattern of holiday consumption started to change gradually but over the recent decades the apollonian concept of beautiness has been radically changed. Whether our parents and grand-parents enjoyed their vacations in paradisiacal destinations or gazing impressive landscapes, now consumers are strongly interested in visit places of total obliteration, or mass-death. This tendency which was baptized as “Thana or Dark Tourism”, was addressed by an incipient number of scholars but disorganized to propose an allencompassing theory. Quite aside from this, the quest of witnessing disasters or spaces of suffering is not only limited to tourism, it can be found in Cultural Entertainment industries as TV, or Cinema. Newspapers, TV programs, movies and Channel stations as Assassination discovery cover scenarios where death is the main player. Observations of this nature led me to coin a new term “ThanaCapitalism”, which is defined as a new facet of capitalism where production and consumption has death as primary commodity. Of course, in times of thana-capitalism education faces serious disruptions which deserve to be discussed. This world rests on the metaphor of life, but a condition only reserved for few souls. Most likely in a climate of social Darwinism where Noah´s ark is one of the most popular stories. The survival of the strongest entails the destruction of the rest. At time of witnessing others´ death, through TV programs, dark tourism or elsewhere, citizens feel they are living. The death is gazed to enhance the ego, since after all it confers the possibility to be in the game. The term thana-capitalism as it was formulated in this book, stems from “thanaptosis”, which was a term originally coined by Willian Cullen Bryant (1948) to describe a state of nostalgia to see life through the eyes of death. It signaled to the needs of recycling life through death and vice-versa. In other terms, we are not born to 22 Introduction live, because we are dying while growing. This neologism comes from the word Thanatos (Greek) which means death. In the psychological fields, one of the pioneers to discover the force of Thanatos to sublimate our desires was Sigmund Freud. Across over the psychological structure of individuals, two in-born drives coexist: Life and death drives (German, tribes). The death drive can be understood as a bodily instinct to return to a state earlier our birth. Whether Eros was orientated to protect life through sexual energy, Thanatos appealed to the (self) destruction (Freud, 1920). In this token, modernity and death seems to be inextricably intertwined. Phillipe Aries calls the attention to the fact that in Middle Ages peasants were subject to countless dangers and real death was just around the corner. With the expansion of life expectancy, modern citizens expanded their hopes to live but undomesticated the death producing a paradoxical situation. Effects of disaster or mass-death will resonate in modern capitalist society higher than in medieval times (Aries, 2013). In a world full of social inequalities, not surprisingly, death corresponds with a criterion of exclusion but what is more important; in the current times, deathseekers not only are moved by Thanatos or a death-drive, but are in quest of reinforcing their ego by the Other´s death. Only in this way they feel unique, exceptional or beyond the law. These cultural values which are new for many social scientists, has revolutionized the already existent notion of beautiness. As Auge put it, travellers over past centuries were captivated by the reading of novels which engaged the reader with the next trip. The role of imagination was a powerful instrument to imagine “the other”, whereas modern tourism was introduced to neglect and subordinate the position of the others. In consequence, lay-people do not make the decision to travel elsewhere; rather, the image of travels at dream destinations is imposed to consumers (Auge, 1997). Nonetheless, the World described by Auge is pretty different than this. Those landscapes, which some time ago, inspired poems, writers and poets set the pace to the advance of 23 Tourism and Terrorism news, or TV programs that tell us how “Others” die, or zones effaced by natural disasters. This is one of others indicators that evinces we are inevitably passing from risk capitalism to Thana-capitalism. To understand the reason of their own life, death-seekers (within Thana Capitalism) need to experience death through the eyes of “Others”. To put this in bluntly, modern citizens need to gaze how others die in order to have a meaningful live. In medieval age, peasants were physically constricted to move freely but their imagination took often them to places where others cannot easily go. Religion and the belief in a better world hereafter configured a social ethos that makes medieval man happier. In modern times, mobilities played a vital role expanding the boundaries where geographically a citizen may travel but its imagination declined to a small-world. In a realm, where God has died, the consciousness resists to die accepting in terms of Riesman an Other-directed view of life (Korstanje, 2015). In his classic work, The Lonely Crowd Riesman was the first to note economy and social organization are inevitably inter-linked. The good-exchange delineates the cultural institutions to forge a common “character. In Ancient times, tradition-directed character imposed to an economy of subsistence, where tradition and lore plays important positions as organizers of social life. With some economic changes brought by mercantilism, the tradition oriented trait set the pace to a new one, inner-directed development. In times of Reform, puritanism appealed to the law-abiding and self-conformity. After WWII, American society experienced the change to “other directedness” where people are in quest of events that occur beyond their immediate scopes. This other-directed personality not only allowed a state of exchange and wealth accumulation but also paved the ways for the advent of globalization. The interests for others which can be expressed in modern tourism or even in journalism are a direct effect of this trait. The problem of a society attached to spectacle was originally addressed by Guy Debord in 1967, in his masterful work The Society of Spectacle. Following Debord, one might realize that daily life is being degraded by the imposition of 24 Introduction representations, stereotypes, and images to the extent that “the being” embraces merely appearing instead of other values. As commodities, micro-social relations are emptied according to representational landscapes that are dramatically exposed. Unless otherwise reversed, the society of spectacle irremediably will usher humankind in an atmosphere of inauthenticity, and fetishism (Debord, 1967). The epicenter of Thana Capitalism comes from the attacks to World Trade Centre in charge of Al-Qaeda, an event occurred 11 September of 2001. This shocking blow represented a turning point where Islam radicalism showed not only the weaknesses of West, but also how the means of transport which were the badge of US, were employed as mortal weapons directed towards civil targets. Educated and trained in the best wester universities, jihadist showed the dark side of the society of mass-consumption. Many of the steps followed by Al-Qaeda were emulated from a Management guidebook. All these discussed indicators set the pace to a more complex scenario, where economy turns chaotic (unpredictable after financial stock and market crisis in 2008) where the atomized demands become in a competence of all against all (in the Hobbesian terms). The Darwinist allegory of the survival of strongest can be found as the main culture value of Thana-Capitalism in a way that is captivated by cultural entertainment industries and cinema. Films as Hunger Games portray an apocalyptic future where the elite govern with iron rule different colonies. A wealthy capitol which is geographically situated in Rocky Mountain serves as an exemplary centre, a hot-spot of consumption and hedonism where the spectacle prevails. The oppressed colonies are rushed to send their warriors who will struggle with others to death, in a bloody game that keeps people exciting. Although all participants work hard to enhance their skills, only one will reach the glory. The same can be observed in realities as Big Brother, where participants neglect the probabilities to fail simply because they over-valorise their own strongholds. This exactly seems 25 Tourism and Terrorism to be what engages citizens to compete with others to survive, to show “they are worth of survive”. In sum, the sentiment of exceptionality triggered by these types of ideological spectacles disorganizes the social trust. Last but not least, capitalism signals to the constructions of allegories containing death prompting a radical rupture of self with others. Whenever we see ourselves as special, put others of different condition asunder. In a context of turbulences, the imposition of these discourses is conducive to the weakening of the social fabric. Thematising disasters by dark-tourism consumption patterns, entails higher costs the disaster repeats in a near future. The political intervention in these sites covers the real reasons behind the event, which are radically altered to protect the interests of status quo. The political and economic powers erect monuments to remember sudden mass-death or trauma-spaces so that society reminds a lesson, which allegory contains a biased or galvanized explanation of what happened. Though at some extent, community needs to produces these allegories to be kept in warning, the likelihoods the same disaster takes hit again seems to be a question of time (Korstanje, 2014). In this vein, Thana-Capitalism offers death (of others) as a Spectacle not only revitalizes the daily frustrations, but enhances a harmed ego. Visiting spaces of disasters during holidays, or watching news on terrorist attacks at home, all represents part of the same issue: The advent of new class death seekers. Some philosophical concerns arise around the role played by technology in this process. As Richard Hofstadter puts it, not only did capitalism make use of profits, exploiting the workforce, but also introduced successfully “social Darwinism”, which reinforced the axiom of the survival of fittest as a new ethics. In other words, we “play the game” because the opportunities to defeat our opponents are exaggerated (Hofstadter, 1963). The competition fostered by the ideology of capitalism offers the salvation for few ones, at the expense 26 Introduction of the rest. To realise the dream of joining the “selected people”, we accept the rules. Whenever one of our direct competitors fails, we feel an insane happiness. I argue that a similar mechanism is activated during our visit to dark tourism sites: We do not strive to understand, we are just happy because we escaped death and have more chances to win the game of life. In this respect, George H Mead, one of the founders of symbolic interactionism, criticized that many readers show an unpleasant experience at the time of reading bad news in newspapers or magazine, but despite to of this, they were unable to stop to do it. He assertively concludes that the self is configured through its interaction with others. This social dialectic introduces anticipation and interpretation as the two pillars of the communicative process. The self feels happiness through the other’s suffering - a rite necessary to avoid or think about one’s own potential pain. Starting from the premise that the self is morally obliged to assist the other to reinforce a sentiment of superiority, avoidance preserves the ethical base of social relationships (Mead, 2009). Nonetheless, this in-born drive has been manipulated beyond the limits of a reasonable narcissism. After all, Mead´s reflections could be applied to the act of visiting dark tourism shrines. To understand this, we can revert to the myth of Noah and its pivotal role in the salvation of the world in Christianity. Slavoj Zizek agrees that Christianity needs from to pose a message of self-destruction which is emulated by Christ to become God. In the core of Christendom is enrooted a lesson that encourages the betrayal as a guiding value (Zizek, 2003). Not surprisingly, modern capitalism has expanded by the social Darwinism old ideologies made possible. Whatever the case may be, Noah´s ark situates as one of the most influencing myths over the last decades. This legend tells us that God, annoyed by the corruption of human beings, mandated to Noah to construct an ark. Noah’s divine mission consisted of gathering and adding a pair per species to his ark so as to achieve the preservation of natural life. The world 27 Tourism and Terrorism was destroyed by the great flood, but life diversity survived. At first glance, the myth’s moral message is based on the importance of nature and the problem of sin and corruption. But when examined more carefully, the myth poses the dilemma of competition: At any “tournament” or game, there can be only one winner. In the archetypical Christian myth, Noah and the selected species stand as the only witnesses of everything and everyone else’s death. We argue that the curiosity and fascination for death comes from this founding myth, which is replicated in plays to date, stating that only one can be crowned the winner. Even, the “Big Brother” show, which was widely studied by sociologists and researchers of visual technology, rests on this principle. Only few are the selected ones to live forever on the screen, as is the case in religious myths such as those of Protestantism and Catholicism (both based on doctrines of salvation and understandings of death). In fact, the dark tourist experience is conditioned by a similar premise: A reminder that we, the survivors, are in the race and our sole purpose is to finish our journey. Still, there is much discussion on the influence of religion in capitalist ethos. In two must-read books as Consuming life and Liquid Fear, Zygmunt Bauman reminds that life has not possibilities to emancipate or gaining further meaning without the presence of death. For him, the capitalist ethos has changed the mentality of citizens, who do not even fulfil the function of production automata any longer. As commodities, workers are today exploited to sustain the principle of massive consumption, which is encouraged by capitalism. The “Big Brother” is such an example of how people enter competitions as commodities, to be selected and bought by others. Participants in this reality show know that only one will win, and the rest will “die”. “Big Brother”, for Bauman, emulates life in capitalist societies; it does so by enhancing the lifestyle of the few by “producing” pauperization for the rest. The modern state keeps in pace with the liberal market to monopolize people’s sense of security. This does not mean that states are unable to keep security, but that the market is controlling consumption by the imposition of fear. If 28 Introduction human disasters such as Katrina show the pervasive nature of capitalism, which allows thousands of poor citizens to die, the “show of disaster” releases it from the responsibilities of the event. The sense of catastrophe, like death, serves to cover the inhuman nature of capitalism (Bauman, 2007, 2008). In retrospect, the current spectacularised society has only one answer to crisis, when its economic system is at risk. The real causes of the disaster are ignored thanks to the spectacle of death, which is reproduced in the media and famous TV series. What do we really know about the real causes of Auschwitz or 9/11? Could a museum explain the complexity of human nature? Bauman would say it would not. Any attempt to sacralise dying as a spectacle is the prelude of its neglect. Dark tourism is not different from spectacles such as those of the FIFA World Cup, and reality shows, such as “Big Brother”. All of them proclaim ideologically that only one may be crowned winner (Korstanje, Tzanelli and Clayton, 2014). Education in times of thana-Capitalism goes in this direction… encouraging a combination of narcissism and invidualism which places the net of experts asunder an all-encompassing understanding of events. The sense of reality as formulated by Enlightenment divided into many worlds, where things are adjoined to stimulate the psychological desire. It engages the civilized self with a much deeper matrix of hyper consumption. To cut the long story short, the idea of a Thana-Capitalism was inspired in what Baudrillard dubbed as “The Spectacle of Disaster”, as the main criterion of attraction. However, he did not five further references respecting to the rise of a new capitalism. He only was limited to explore the leading position of the media as a producer of “pseudo-realities”. Rather, we go in another direction. At a closer look, Disasters provides to Thana-Capitalism with the commodity to disorganize the social ties among workers in order to introduce an atmosphere of social Darwinism where all competes with all to survive. This can be observed not only in cultural entertainment 29 Tourism and Terrorism industries but in other institutions as well, as a new trend in tourism to visit spaces of mass death and mourning. Far from being pursuing educational aims, rather, these sites are aesthetically designed to make feel visitors they are special. In a secular society where Gods have gone forever, life is imagined as a long race where only few are mythically empowered to win. The death of others represents a new opportunity to feel one is still in the trace. This confers an aura of superiority that leads individuals to narcissism. As a result of this, mistrust paves the ways for the social tie decline. The psychological effects of dark tourism, disaster-cinema, Newspapers covering tragic events, local crime or even programs as Assassination Discovery or Criminal Minds are not pretty different to what a survivor experience in post-traumatic contexts. Secondly, witnessing death represents a sentiment of narcissism that helps visitors to strengthen their own ego. Death-seekers are not interested in heritage or in any other stories of victims; instead, they need to feel their supremacy over others who had not shared the same luck. If the sense of protection marked the pace in the society of risk, now witnessing the Other´s death (even Thana-Tourism) posed as the main cultural value of Thana-Capitalism. This seems to be the main reason, despite the cruelty of scenes covered the media in hot spots of terrorism; we do not let consuming this tragic news. Although this book explores our obsession for terrorism, it is not limited to such theme, but it opens the discussion in many directions. At a closer look, what this discussion on dark tourism sites as Ground-Zero, hints are that terrorism and tourism seems to be inevitably entwined. STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK Unfortunately, a book which centres on terrorism focus (in rare occasions) contains key information to prevent the next attack. However, it should be aimed in shedding light on this deep-seated issues in order for policy makers understand to what they are 30 Introduction struggling. Howie (2012) in his work, Witnessing Terrorism reminds the importance to study this matter beyond the hegemony of media, escaping from the monopoly of screen, where many “pseudo-experts” have fallen. It is a truism that those urban dwellers, who are not involved in hot spots as Middle East, are prone to experience panic. This suggests that fear stems from an absence, a symbolic absence which should be rememorized. Following this argument, what is important to discuss is not why us?, or why my Lord?, but crystalizing our existential doubts more concrete question. At a closer look, terrorists kill (even sacrificing their life) because death turns out a frightening issue for capitalist societies, which means at the time, secularized societies abandoned the sacred-law of religion, hospitality started to be offered only to those who can pay for that (Korstanje, 2015). Though readers who open the pages of this book will read 7 independent chapters, the common thread argument prevails, in the following axiom: Since terrorism appeals to the instrumentalization of the weaker other, its roots have not to be found in Middle East, but in the influence of Western societies in Middle East. This does not mean that terrorists are the “good boys”, but the impossibility for Capitalism to prevent what at the bottom it should feed. Tourists are attacked not only because they are ambassadors of their respective nations, but because tourism represents a disciplined version of terrorism. Some mainstream values as extortion, surprise-factor, and instrumentality which are defined as significant aspects of progress and development, are the same that determine the rise and unparalleled evolution of terrorism worldwide. Throughout the first chapter, we lay the foundations of terrorism combining different angles, some of them even contrasting viewpoints in order to provide the readers with an all-encompassing model of what terrorism means. As Professor Luke Howie noted, one of the 31 Tourism and Terrorism key factors of terrorism is a lot of people watching. This point suggests that terrorism should not be defined as a “consequence” as media did it, a consequence of hate against democracy, a consequence against Whiteness, or even to sublimate a life subsumed in poverty. Terrorism is a political instrument captivated by western rationality but amplified by the needs of witnessing, which is enrooted in the core of our civilization. This argument is critically discussed in an analysis the recent combined attack in the night of Paris (2015). Far from being an activity orchestrated in undemocratic nations, terrorism is part of what Korstanje dubbed “the rationality of extortion” which is founded on the core of capitalism. The third and fourth chapters dissect the dilemma of terror to prevent the mobilities of thousands of exiles, refugee and peoples who desperate needs from movement not to die. Placing Derrida under the critical lens of scrutiny, this chapter offers an interesting pungent discussion respect to the role played by Western nations in preventing the entrance of Syrian refugee after Aiylan`s case (a 3 years old boy found death at the coast of Turkey). Although the enthusiasm of human rights activists reached its zenith whenever Europe authorised further quotas of migrants, this closed with the attacks on Paris nightclubs and restaurants, where one of the suspected killers arrived to France as refugee. This begs a more than interesting point, is terrorism eroding the basis of hospitality as it was formulated in Ancient Europe?. To respond these questions, chapter fifth and sixth allude to the growth of dark tourism as a new segment where visitors inspect sites whipped by disasters or terrorism. Although some experts showed their enthusiasm since it exhibits a great opportunity for tourist destination to recover event after a terrorist blow, no less true was that visitors are not interested in knowing further on the suffering of victims, but in reinforcing “a sadist happiness”, which is orchestrated by the rise and expansion of a new type of capitalism, Thana Capitalism. At the time, tourism revitalizes sites where 32 Introduction innocents were killed by terrorist cells, as Ground Zero, one might speculate tourism and terrorism are inextricably intertwined. As the previous argument given, it is important to explore the history of anarchism in Modern Capitalism to understand that some of labour acquisition as less worker hours, paid holidays, or even tourism resulted from terrorism (in hands of anarcho-syndicalism). Modern capitalism not only disciplined terrorism into inoculated forms, but gave to workers their right to strike. If we pay heed to the commonalities between terrorism and strikes we found three interesting points of convergence, a) key factors, both are planned in order to be suddenly implemented in order for causing political instability, b) the instrumentality of “the other” to achieve the own goals and c) a third part which often is weaker is posed in the middle in order for union leaders or terrorist to negotiate with state. The last chapter, the most polemic to our end, validates what Geoffrey Skoll called “the culture of fear” of English speaking countries. Skoll assertively suggests that terrorism is not new, but the problem comes from a culture of fear, used by elite to indoctrinate the workforce. This disciplinary mechanism which is conformed by fear, has historically cemented in American culture from the colony to date. Americans feel proud of their technological superiority, adjoined to their respect for democracy in homeland, but it runs a serious risk when they should abandon their home. The state of exception endorsed on nationalist discourses that presents US as an up-hill nation, which should rule over others, becomes in panic at the time borderlands should be crossed. This chapter is based on a radical criticism of a book authored by anthropologist Robert Temple (1961) American Abroad. From our viewpoint, the point of entry in this discussion lies in the fact that “the war on terror” does not instil panic in American society, but it was hidden in society long time before. At some extent, the sentiment of “being different” which leads to narcissism, the climate of panic, the rise of death seekers as a new emergent class and our incapacity to let witnessing terrorism 33 Tourism and Terrorism (despite its negative effects on public opinion) are inextricably intertwined. This book is brought into the fore by “an alien”, a SouthAmerican scholar, a stranger who precisely in his situation embraces objectivity in his observations. This research does not represent an attack to Americans, nor to their culture, but provides with cultural theory to expand the current understanding of terrorism and its connection to leisure, mobility and tourism. 34 Discussing Terrorism 1 DISCUSSING TERRORISM INTRODUCTION Over the recent decades, westerners witnessed how what they considered distant threats, which ranged from undemocratic countries to terrorist cells operating at the borderlands of states, become in a real nightmare. C. Johnson (2000) envisaged terrorism as the necessary “blowback” resulted from direct interventions conducted by United States in Middle East, while Jean F Revel called the attention to the antiimperialist discourse, which was historically promoted by some European powers as France to blame others from the proper internal policies and political frustrations (Revel, 2003). Whatever the case may be, what was clear that after 9/11, terrorism situated as the main threat for governments, policy makers and experts specialized in international affairs (Keohane and Zeckhauser, 2003; Korstanje, 2015). The terms of geopolitics as they were formulated by founding parents of neo-pragmatism which stipulated the needs of disciplining the so called “rogue states” as a precautionary principle to keep peace in the globe, sets the pace to a new ideology where the sense of uncertainness prevailed. After 9/11 and the attacks to United States, what analysts understood was that nobody will feel safe anytime and in any place (Biddle, 2005). However, as Luke Howie (2012) puts it, terrorism not only showed 35 Tourism and Terrorism the vulnerability of West to prevent attacks, despite its hightechnology, but paved the ways for the rise and expansion of a new era of terror that changed our style of life as never before. “Witnessing is far more than merely watching or seeing. Witnesses are never passive. Witnessing is active, performed and embodied, even when it occurs at a distance. Terrorism, and the so-called global war on Terror depends on near and distant witnesses for its success as a tactic of message sending and manipulation of target audiences” (Howie, 2012: 155) In this vein, Howie adds, terrorism is not oriented to obliterate entire civilizations as journalism precludes, but at administering terror in order for their claims to be unilaterally accepted. In the post 9/11 contexts, witnessing terror was the main commodity in western societies, which suggested an intersection of terrorism with the mass media. This chapter explores the ebbs and flows of modern terrorism as well as the current families of theories which thematise on this much deep-seated issue. Basically, aside from the number of books, conferences and Ph. Doctorate thesis after September 11, which were originally published in English, there is a clear misunderstanding of what terrorism is or the social background necessary for its proliferation. In this book, though we move back in many directions, the chapters share a common-thread argument. Based on the instrumental needs of extortion, which is based on Western rationale, terrorism has been inextricably interlinked to “mobilities”. A couple of decades back, terrorist attacks were perpetrated against celebrities, Chiefs of police, or top-ranked politicians for example, in times of anarchism in US, William McKinley former president was killed by an activist (1901). But now things come from worse to worst, lay-people or mobile travellers as businessmen, tourists, journalists are hosted and killed in order to instil panic in their respective societies. Al Baghdadi and ISIs declared their “jihad” against “modern tourism”, and the international leisure consumption spots as luxurious hotels, beaches 36 Discussing Terrorism or international tourist destinations (Korstanje and Clayton, 2012; Tarlow, 2014). Asal et al. (2009) understand that tourists are considered as “soft target” representing low risks and costs for tourists; and of course, this was the reason behind the attacks to hotels and mega resorts. The process of selection is carefully achieved taking into consideration the rational evaluation of potential costs as well as its impacts on social imaginary. Following the contributions of W. Enders and T. Sandler (2011) who envisaged that terrorists are not emotionally determined by hate or hatred-filled maniac desires, but they are in quest of achieving their goals starting from a rational paradigm, many of the already existent specialized literature suggests that hurting lay people causes a panic-flight in society at lower costs for perpetrators because of two main reasons. At a first glance, citizens experience emotional neglects of risk probabilities, where they feel a new blow can take hit in any place. Secondly, it shows a vulnerable state which is hand-tied to protect its citizens. As this backdrop, in the next section I will discuss the roots of terrorism by the formation of a conceptual platform, framed into many contrasting voices. This will help readers to forge an allencompassing model to what terrorism really means. WHAT IS TERRORISM? Although the number of terrorist attacks has decreased over the recent years, the cruelty as well as the needs of captivating the attention of audience has notably increased (Moten, 2010). Kenneth David Strang (2015) published a valuable manuscript where he retains concern on the fact that literature as well as pundits fail to gather information enough to struggle against terrorism. Beyond its reality, terrorism is a global threat which affects not only US but many other countries too. Some regions that seem to be peaceful are fertile grounds for potential attacks. However, specialists and colleagues are prone to put the horse before the cart, confusing not 37 Tourism and Terrorism only the conceptual elements but those methods distinguish Al-Qaeda from IRA. Strang considers that not all terrorists are in pursuit of killing innocent people. While some perpetrate attacks against infrastructure such as oil tankers, banks, warehouse or technology, others prefer to host celebrities and important persons. Although it is almost impossible to sum up hundreds of studies and definitions into some lines almost 3 families of theories prevail: Individual (emotionally-driven), individual criminals (instrumental) and sociopolitical (ideologised activist). Some frustrating experiences occurred in daily life may very well lead towards individual (emotionally driven) subtype where the subject sublimates their pain through the hostility against “others”. Rather, “instrumental criminals” are motivated by criminal ends as the example of hostage-taking for ransom or many other profit-oriented goals. Lastly, ideologised terrorists move in groups in quest of abstracts claim which are very hard to meet by governments. It is not accident that tactics tend to be crueller depending on the degree of insensitivity to attacks. While citizens accustomed to consume news of terrorism through TV, it resulted in more violent attempts in order for audience to be re-captivated (Zizek, 1996). Undoubtedly, one of the paradoxes of terrorism seems to be its dependency on mass media, which needs from terror to produce its content. Interesting studies showed how the violence used by terrorist attacks is directly proportional to “the indifference of audience” respecting to what terrorists claim for, as well as the degree of terror instilled for these claims to be heard (Altheide, 1987, 2007; Dowling, 1986; Eid, 2014). In this vein, Mythen and Walklate (2006) argue convincingly that the ethical dilemma of democracies consists in how news of terrorist attacks is communicated. The problem of censorship, adjoined to the right of information, seem to be two alternatives which culturally pave the pathways for the rise of terror. Based on the conceptual platform of risk society (in Beck, 1992) and the precautionary principle (Sunstein, 2003), they held the thesis that 38 Discussing Terrorism “communication on the risk of terrorism” is embedded with a culture of fear where media representations reinforce simplistic stereotypes respecting to non-white (European) worlds (Mythen and Walklate, 2006). In this respect, Jonatan Simon (2007) in his book Governing through Crime, explain that one of the concerns of founding parents of American democracy was the fact only few hands concentrate a whole portion of power. To prevent a situation of this nature, they carefully developed a conceptual model where branches and agencies to be independent from the influence of other external institutions. This real check-and-balance culture pivoted in sanitizing politics far from corruption, but at higher costs. Since policy makers failed to introduce their policies to prompt social change, government appealed to use the tactic of fear of crime in order to subordinate those institutions to conduct radical changes in the programs of social health, security and international relations. As a result of this, officials realized not only the power of fear, which oscillated from communisms to modern terrorism, as a fertile ground for imposing polices otherwise never would accepted by the system. By the role played by prosecutors, government found the necessary allies to conduct a plan of securitization to discipline the world (Simon, 2007). Matt Grossman (2014) confirms that Americans should revisit their conception of democracy, since many of programs for development, or policy to make the life of people better, are rejected by status quo justifying the decision on “the division and autonomy of branches”. Despite Abraham Lincoln´s vision that our government is of the people, by the people and for people, there is little evidence that the most important outcomes of the policy process follow uniformly from the opinion of American public of their expressions in elections. Instead, these inputs matter for policymaking only alongside factors like research and interest group lobbying, each under a limited set of circumstances. Policymakers can and do collectively ignore public opinion and the direction of elections result, sometimes by enacting 39 Tourism and Terrorism contrary policy but most often by making no change at all.” (Grossman, 2014: 9). Though this system evinced some limitations since it takes a conservative spirit, Grossman said, the main goals of democracy was oriented to prevent any person or party concentrates too much power to subjugate the rest. This system, which paradoxically was based to protect the interest of status quo, crystalized after 1945 with the WWII end. The preliminary chapters of this book discuss the best methodological options to study policy-makers as a net as well as the necessary sources of information used in the research. Grossman acknowledges that one of the conceptual limitations of the specialized literature consists in a lack of understanding how policies are formulated, negotiated and achieved. In so doing, he makes a criticism over the four most-used theories in political science today (agenda setting, Macro politics, Issue typologies and Actor Success models). At a first glance, Agenda Setting seems to be oriented to explore the role of media as meaning producers that sooner or later determine the understanding of the citizenry. As noted, American democracy was cemented on a complex multilayered system where many agents exert counter-balanced pressure to avoid media populism. Rather, the second family of theories, Macro Politics model emphasizes on the ideological control of government to sanction laws that protect their interests. From the intersection of election results, ideologies and public opinion is a much wider agreement surfaces. The third position aims to the role played by social change results from the temporal consensus reached in some areas of politics while others are left behind. Last but not least, the axiom of Actor Success sets forward a conceptual corpus which understands that the influence exerted by some actors depend on their probabilities of success. This represents a serious risk for democracy due to the following reasons. At a first glance, this climate of preservation for elite paves the ways for using fear as the only method to introduce fast changes. 40 Discussing Terrorism Secondly, if this happens, governments are next to dictatorship because it will feed from the doctrine of emergency over the world of law. In one of the best books we have read, Cropf and Bagwell (2016) edits a series of valuable chapters where they explore the conceptual limitations, adjoined to some ethical issues around the notion of “the state of emergency”. If the right of citizens is not dully regulated, democracy cedes to fear, increasing the possibilities for the rise of a dictatorship. The use of current digital technologies to monitor lay persons or activists is one of the aspects that triggered a hot-debate in Europe and US. After Snowden`s case, citizenry not only realized the dark side of government, but how slowly democracy is dying. Whether the security of citizens corresponds with some of the sacredduties of any government, but at the same time, privacy or private life represents one of the rights that citizens who should be protected. How both contrasting values can be organized in democracy? Although this question is almost impossible to respond in these terms, what is clear is that any “state of exemption”, regardless the nation, allows some restrictive policies otherwise would be neglected such as torture, e-surveillance, and other human rights violations (Croft and Bagwell, 2016). With the benefits of hindsight, 9/11 has exerted a strong influence in published papers, which were based on terrorism as main focus, up to the dark night of Paris. This recent attack reminded the dangerous nature of hospitality, as well as posed ISIS in the tapestry. Unlike 9/11, Paris reminds that Europe how dangerous the law of hospitality may be. For some voices, Europe should carefully revise its rational discourse of hospitality, hosting exiles coming from Middle East humanitarian disasters. At the time Europe opened the doors for thousands of migrants (thrilled by Aylan´s case, who was a Syrian boy found dead at the coast of Turkey), IS jihadists announced a secret infiltration of some of their members within waves of refugees. International newspapers covered the news that French police suspects on the participation of some Syrian-born refugees in the 41 Tourism and Terrorism bloody massacre hit Paris a couple of months back. This suggests that the ancient concept of hospitality, as it was enrooted in Europeanises, is in jeopardy. What the three events have in common seems to be the intersection of terrorism with tourism. This chapter is aimed at reviewing the ebbs and flows of tourism literature with focus on terrorism according to new tactics, ideologies and technologies adopted by international terrorist cells. Kidnapping sets the pace to suicide bombs as well as other finely-ingrained tactics of extortion. In next research-horizons, what would be more than interesting to discuss is to what extent a much deeper process of desensitization in audience calls for more appalling and cruel methodologies in terrorist minds, in which case one might speculate that modern hot-spots dedicated to entertainment, leisure, consumption, relax and tourism are being selected to instil a much deeper fear in the population. In this bookwe will explore the evolution of specialized literature in regards to the intersection of terrorism with tourism. Each generation as well as the authorative voices focused on terrorism was influenced by a collective discourse determined by a major event. To cut the long story short, one might speculate that terrorism inscribes in the fields of political violence taking into consideration not all forms of violence represents “acts of terrorism” (Flynn, 2012). Liberal scholar Michael Ignatieff (2013) reminds that violence is not good nor bad, it should be legally limited into a conceptual frame that prevents “the war of all against all”. Starting from the belief, torture to terrorists is the lesser evil Ignatieff adheres to the doctrine of imminent causes, legalized in the constitution, to divide what is legal from illegal forms of violence. The function of state is oriented to protect the lives of citizens, when this right is vulnerated, legal torture would be an option, not preferably, to restore the peace, and put the suspects of terrorism intro a just trial. Rather, Howie (2012) adds, surmises, but it administers a whole portion of terror in order for their claims to be unconditionally accepted. Although at some 42 Discussing Terrorism extent, state struggle against subversive cells to keep the social order, many human right violations surfaced. It has been discussed by Korstanje in which case, he considers terrorism should be deemed as dialectics of hate between separatist dissidents and nation-state (Korstanje, 2015). The process of radicalization suffered by candidates has been brilliantly examined by McCauley and Moskalenko (2008) and Moskalenko and McCauley (2009). The key factor to form terrorist consists in instilling a negative image of the world that is reinforced by a physical isolation in small groups, which helps reducing the ideological dissidence. This micro interactions, far from what many people preclude, is based on emotional factors. Candidates are not only in quest of self-esteem enhancement but also are recruited following the initiatives of relatives, peer’s networks or friends. This reminds the importance of group processes in the formation and training of terrorists (Wilson, Bradford and Lemanski, 2013). Over recent decades, more radicalized cells adopted new tactics to cause political instability. If IRA, Hezbollah or ETA planned to vulnerated great targets selecting on celebrities, Chief Polices officers or politicians today it set the pace to “innocent” civilians as tourists, travellers, journalists and so forth. Last but not least, Korstanje, Skoll and Timmermann argue that historically tourism and terrorism have inextricably intertwined from the onset of industrialization. The process of unionization which pressed capital owners to confer working benefits resulted in the advance of technological breakthrough and working enhancements. Not only mass-tourism outpoured as an efficient mechanism to reduce social conflicts in the core of industrialized societies, but the main cultural value of terrorism was adopted by capitalism, extortion. Far from being a religious problem of compatibility, terrorism is enrooted into the politics of West (Korstanje, Timmermann and Skoll, 2015). As discussed throughout this book, terrorism is defined as dialectics of hate between a state unable to keep stability and a group of insurgent that appeals to struggle and violence to impose their claims. At the time, the government never knows where the next blow will take 43 Tourism and Terrorism place,tortures (even the violation of human rights) plays a vital role feeding up the flame of terrorism. TERRORISM AND THE DIALECTICS OF SOCIAL THOUGHT What sociology is debating today relates to the influence of 9/11 to the migration from neo radical conservatives towards Bush and Obama´s administrations. Left and right-wing sociologists agree that 9/11 has changed the ways of politics inside US and abroad (Korstanje, 2013). What detractors or adherents to “war against terror” ignore is that perhaps “the spirit of terrorism”, as formulated Baudrillard (2003), is not enrooted in the West, as formulated the French philosopher, but in the value-laden concept of dialectics. In this new book, Professor Geoffrey Skoll presents a fresh innovative thesis respecting to the dialectics of agency and society. No matter the status of two agents, or the value each one gains in the market, the fact is that both are determined by the social dialectics that precede them. Beyond the society, the agent has not any significance, while the society loses its reason to exist without human agency. What this book discusses is the functionality of both elements to the extent to delineate their respective importance for the system. Rich people need from the low-status workers as the latter ones need from capital-owner. To overcome the conflicts the dialectics wake up, Skoll suggests that the social order is based, following Simmel, to a triadic nature. The process of negotiation between two or more parts alludes to the existence of a third-leg where the dialectical relationship is based by negotiations. The first chapter, therefore, is fully reserved to discuss not only the legacy of dialectic in social sciences, but to what an extent, social is enrooted in the dialectic. Skoll proposes that the social “thought” as a text, shed light on the world employing Hegel´s dialectic, simply because the concept of social is dialectic by its nature. Two of the senior 44 Discussing Terrorism scholars who have realized on this were S. Freud and K. Marx who have devoted considerable time and effort in elucidating the invisible ties that keep united the society. From diverse views, both acknowledged and accepted the “reification of reason” as the primary goal of social scaffolding. Though in different times, whilst Freud emphasized on the neurotic self-deception, Marx focused on the mystification of political economy (third-object). As the society, the constitution of self corresponds with a reflection between rules and drives. Most certainly, it is safe to say Ego is for Freud, what Capital for Marx. What is the ghost machine of capitalism? At a closer look, capital mediates between production and workers, at the same line; ego corresponds with the interplay between repression and reason. The main thesis of this brilliant work is that social diagnosis on the problems of reproduction is biased by dialectics since it is social. At time two individuals interact, this dynamic is impossible to be studied. This begs a more than pungent question, how can society being a unified object?Are human being social in nature?. The sociology, over the years, attempted to respond these questions alluding to the figure of a city as the recipient of human relations. Any metropolis condensates the accumulation of human resources, capital and production, and for that, it expresses the dialectics of machine and its work-force. What Skoll explain is that, the social as construal is based on the dialectic-thought from its inception. With a great erudition, the radical development through this book reveals two interesting concerns. First and foremost, dialectics of triadic thought was applied for “social understanding” in all social thinkers from pragmatism to nihilism. Secondly, this modern social order based on the dialectics generated the monopoly of meaning of capitalism juxtaposing two modes of thinking. At the bottom, social sciences delineated the original adoption of capitalistview which exploits agency to an irreversible stage of collapse. 45 Tourism and Terrorism From deep criticism to Marx as it has been formulated by Skoll in the preliminary sections, passes to the epistemological problems in Hegel and Freud (third chapter). One of the aspects that characterized the psychoanalysis was the belief that behaviour is the expression from unknown spheres of humanity, unconsciousness. Far from being subject, subject, that way, becomes in “object” to be placed under the lens of expert´s scrutiny. The lay-person is educated not to understand itself, lest through the mediation of therapists. This type of commoditization –ossification- consists in getting away the autonomy of agency in view of other much deeper forces. Similarly to this, the reading of fourth chapter suggests that pragmatism adopted the same argument by confirming that the world is a simulacrum which rests on the interaction of actors. The fifth section considers the dialectics situated between culture and society, as it has been imagined by Simmel, Harvey and Debord. The inter-war period paved the ways for the advent of Frankfurt school which generated a real revolution in West. In perspective, this school employed the dialectics of history to expand its understanding of revolts and social breaks. Once again, the social scientists influenced by post Marxian legacy questioned directly to the capitalist system but adopting its primary epistemology. Last but not least, Skoll recognizes that phenomenology, addressed in chapter 8 and 9, cannot persist without the use of dialectics as it has been discussed in this review. Precisely, this led to analysts to ignore three main social problems, ecology, terrorism and economy. If the terrorism can be understood as a “commoditization of fear”, the exhaustion of local resources by capitalism creates the condition for the current condition of crisis. As a third-escapement object, terrorism diverts the attention of real problems produced by capitalism and its inevitable collapse. As a concept which can be manipulated, fear may be commoditized not only to break the law, but also exerts a disciplinary mechanism for citizenry accepts policies otherwise would be neglected. These abstractions can be drawn according to the interests of status quo. 46 Discussing Terrorism “Security and terrorism are bound together in a dialectical process of mutually defining each other; they create each other in economic and environmental turmoil. What the process produces is the national security state, continual terrorist incidents, and an ever growing market for security goods and services. Despite its apparent selfgenerating dynamic, the terrorism dynamic is part of a larger whole with links to the economic process and the biophysical environment. Terrorism, like anti-Communism and crime fighting are political faces of larger social processes”. (p. 116) The commoditization of communism (like many others) embedded with the neo-conservatism in Reagan epoch. Unlike Bauman and Lyon (2013) who envisage the decline of social bond and sociology as academic discipline as the primary reason of current crisis, what Skoll brilliantly explain is that this parlous state of disorder was ideologically possible by the introduction of a triadic concept as it has been created by the needs of social, this means by the introduction of sociology as a producer of knowledge. Well, to here we have described Skoll´s argument as objective as possible. His erudition and penetrating sight makes of this book a seminal work which will illustrate next generations. A more than an interesting masterful guide is that which helps readers understanding the present. TERRORISM AND THE MASS MEDIA One of the concerns of modern sociology with focus on terrorism appears to be “communication”. As Teresa Sabada puts it, while the bombing in Atocha represented the end for a Government, 9/11 was the onset for a new one. This means that framing and the ways news are covered play a vital role in the ideology government needs to construct. Understanding that 9/11 called the attention to the barriers, borders and the vulnerability of capitalist societies, Sabada presents an illustrative book where she eloquently observes that, terrorism escaped the conceptual dichotomy of Cold War, where 47 Tourism and Terrorism countries were classified by their security. Some pour peripheral nations were considered “unsecure” because they failed to develop democratic institution to ensure the rights for all citizens. As a result, these cultures were fraught of civil wars, political discontent, and terrorist cells that operated to engender political instability against government. Using poverty as a commodity, these governments appealed to fear to dissuade the internal agent the current state of injustice is the best of feasible worlds. Rather, 9/11 not only showed there is a safe place in the world but “the jihadist” may escape to any control planning an attack in the core of West. Although during years, media built a pejorative image of Muslims, framing a sense of reality that coincides with those beliefs of travellers in 19s century, in regards to non-European cultures, no less true is that nowadays it is necessary to reconsider to what extent news are covered and framed according to interests of political status quo. The novels of former centuries conditioned the eyes of travellers into a closed idea of “otherness”, while modern journalism developed “staged” realities to resonate in an international globalized audience. If we agree, media exerts influence on the social imaginary, the impact depends on many factors, which ranges from culture, history towards the tolerance of uncertainty of each country. After 9/11 violence situated as a criterion of attention causing a deep emotional impact on witnesses, at the same time that Atocha triggered a hot debate respecting to the ethics of government to manipulate news. With this historical background in mind, Sabada examines the arguments of Garfinkel, Goffman and Bateson precluding structural psychology’s pretensions which has historically emphasized the idea of a universal conscience. The main thesis of this insight project is that the meaning of events is oriented to a cognitive structure-ofmind which allows people redirecting internally similarly-minded events and discarding others; anyway, this is not lineal. To be honest, classical hypodermic theory should be re-visited because purposes in a communication process are manifold and Mass-audience seems 48 Discussing Terrorism not to be so-easily manipulated as popular wisdom imagined. However, insofar Mass Media contributes to depict a false image of reality in a Mass-audience seems to be a slippery matter. The discussion is given by two contrasting sides. On one hand, some voices consider that journalism tergiversate reality, selecting events as part of the facts, people accept in a unidirectional way. On another, other scholars believe that news is subjectively negotiated according to individual desire to consume some news while others are simply discarded. Following this diagnosis, she considers that the process of framing consists in three stages, A) Diagnosis B) Forecasting C) Motivation Whenever the state of security is at stake, not surprisingly, journalism is pressed to keep events in secrecy. Far from being part of the solution, under some circumstances, journalism creates panicflights which are based on the neglect of risk probabilities. At a closer look, the stage of diagnosis refers to the needs of explaining audience why facts happen. During forecasting, media will ask pundits and experts to present alternative solutions to be heard by politicians. Lastly, motivation signals to the necessary synergy unfolded by media to cause political commitment or activism. While some journalists appeal to cover news without any intention to move people on the streets, others news resonates heavily in popular opinion to the extent it moves toward protest and civil disobedience. Underpinned in the proposition that Mass media gained more acceptance and credibility in popular wisdom than institutions of other nature, in moments of instability its profession should be practiced with responsibility. For further understanding, Sabada puts as an example the historical reaction of people in Spain after the assassination of Miguel Angel Blanco–National deputy of Popular Party- in 1977. Truthfully, not only Blanco’s tragedy shocked whole Spain but also reinforced the 49 Tourism and Terrorism solidarity against a same enemy: Terrorism. Citizens, wherever the parts of Spain come from, congregated to claim a radical solution for Basque pro-independence supporter’s trouble. Inasmuch as a person has not a direct experience with similar events, more likely its dependence of journalism’s manipulation. For instance, in a straightforward comparison between the coverage and Political intervention of 11-Sept events in United States with the attack to Atocha´s station dated on March-11, Sabada concludes that even if Spaniard Mass media tended to perpetuate a mythical archetype based on tragic facts of World Trade Center, social and political contextualization in both countries varied on. In perspective, Madrid had very hard to create a coherent-framing that monopolized the figure of culprit on otherness whereas Washington not only manipulated immediately journalism in the centralization of one voice that American people hear but also generated a more degree of legitimacy and cohesion against terrorism and Islamic World. Otherwise, in Spain things appeared not to come out good as officials expected; by blaming Basque guerrilla, Aznar´s efforts in monopolizing the support of citizens in the on-going election process were definitely spoiled. Once and once again throughout the book, Sabada emphasizes on how difficult may be the application of what intellectuals know as Agenda Setting theory as well as discrepancies and contradictory point of views they show on the debate of this issue (Sabada, 2007). This explain why while Atocha pressed Aznar to be defeated in elections, George W. Bush achieved a re-election thanks to “the war on terror”. The same event, two contrasting reactions! Doubtless, terrorism and media are inextricably intertwined. Professor at University of Ottawa, Canada, Mahmoud Eid introduces a neologism to understand the complex world of the media and its connection to terror. He says that we need from a new term “terroredia”, which express the intersection of journalism with terrorism. Not only terrorists have fluency in English to disseminate 50 Discussing Terrorism a message to audiences (even many of them are English native speakers which reveals a crisis in the modern world), but also they are cognizant with the digital technologies as websites, Facebook and other social networks. This type of coexistence not only is not new, but has been expanded its influence over peoples at time the new digital technologies were developed. In this vein, the Eid dissects terrorism within other forms of violence, which are not objectified by the needs of being public. Since its outset, terrorism seems to be intended to media exposition. To what extent terrorism and media are two sides of the same coin is examined in this interesting section. Rather, section 2 focuses on the changes of making wars and the targets of terrorists. The discourse post 9/11 rests on a tendency to demonize the “Other” while the human right violations are not denounced. This creates a paradoxical situation since media, which are originally aimed to report events to citizenship, is being manipulated to tell partial truths. The third and fourth sections are oriented to study not only the forms but the tactics of terrorism in a hyper-mediated world. Starting from the premise that fear and risk perception vary on nation and culture, depending on its linguistic affiliation, newspapers have developed diverse strategies to cover the same event. This raises a more than interesting question. Is media technology an instrument to promote liberal democracy in Middle East?, or simply a disciplinary mechanism of control?. In what I consider the best chapter of the book, Samuel Winch observes, “In terms of media coverage of protest movements, we could expect ruling class interests to include maintaining the status quo, and therefore, efforts to marginalize dissent and dissenters, attempts to make them seem deviant and strange. Likewise, American Middle East foreign policy has long been criticized for the tendency to support corrupt autocratic dictators friendly to elite capitalists (particularly oil companies)”. (p. 222) 51 Tourism and Terrorism The main outcome of this research reveals that in one decade, photographers have faced new sensitive to the spectacle of drama. Negative emotions as anger, violence and tragedy are valorised over other cultural aspects of Arab Spring coverage. In the last section, the problem of responsibility is placed under the lens of scrutiny. Terrorism has become in a commodity which gives further legitimacy to professional politicians. The war on terror, post 9/11, attempted to confront with the needs of struggling against an invisible enemy. As a result of this, terrorism engulfed as a part of postmodern politics. The US obsession for terrorism, as well as its tactics in counterterrorism seems to feed back an unending atmosphere of fear. The struggle against terrorism should embrace ethics as the main flagship. As the previous snapshot given, one of the merits of this book consists in unveiling the sacralised image of media and journalism. As Mahmoud Eid puts it, we are educated to imagine terrorism is a criminal act while media are a positive phenomenon. Both sides are being helped each other, simply because the treatment of media facilitates the terrorist to achieve their goals, while the perpetration of attacks gives substantial content and debate to journalism. Understanding terrorism as a try of communicating a violent message, this project exerts a considerable criticism to free-value media. The medialization of terrorism corresponds with a tactic further beneficial for terrorists than governments. The main thesis in Eid‘s book is that terrorism and media’s swamp is explained by the co-dependency to fabricate “oxygen”. Without terror, both parties would be never benefited as now they are. In this vein, Editor writes, “Meanwhile, in order for both to survive, terrorists seek to garner public attention and the media seek to find top-stories to sell. In a sense, both parties target wide-ranging audiences (although for different purposes); hence, they interact in a highly toxic relationship that involves a process of exchange necessary for their survival. The exchanging process contributes to the survival of each party; acts of 52 Discussing Terrorism terrorism provide media stories that result in more broadcasting airwaves, press texts, and digital data bytes, while the media coverage brings public attention to terrorists—the oxygen necessary for their existent” (p. 24). In other terms, the question whether media plays a crucial role in disseminating the fear that terrorism engenders, terroredia is created by the dialectics of fear and violence. At time media covers explanations on how terrorists plan their attacks, global audiences devote considerable attention in this issue. Paradoxically, this attention paves the ways for “terror-inspiring” messages (p. 25). To my end, although an edited book, which often contains a lot of arguments, chapters and authors, is very hard to follow into onesided argument, Exchanging Terrorism Oxygen for Media Airwaves keeps a coherent view of the issue. Among its strengths, Mahmoud Eid and his colleagues not only situates a neologism Terroredia as a key point of discussion in these type of issues, but also it represents one of the best attempts (I have read) to explain why we are obsessed with terrorism. The co-dependency brilliantly discussed by Eid reveals coherence with Korstanje`s argument respecting to the connection between labour organization and terrorism. In earlier works Korstanje argued that industrial revolution has expanded in Europe first but in US later because of two relevant aspects, extortion and the disciplined violence. While thousand European migrants arrived to US, Capital-owners resisted the claims of unions to confer further rights and benefits to work-force. In an atmosphere of tension, some anarchist newcomers saw the opportunity to instil their ideologies in this new world. The first anarchists not only perpetrated violent attack against politicians and police, but also were labelled as terrorists. Traced, exposed and even imprisoned by State, a wave of anarchists appealed to organize the incipient worker unions, abandoning the violent struggle. As a result of this, unionization not only brought further benefits in the reduction of working hours, leisure practices, tourism, a purchasing power enhancements, but 53 Tourism and Terrorism pressed state to allow legally the right to strike. The force of production, workers, and its counter-forces, tourists were inextricably intertwined to terrorism from the outset. This concept was vital to understand how capitalism adopted ideologically the roots of anarchism while terrorism was repressed towards the contours. What beyond the borderland was “terrorist attack”, homeland was dubbed as “strike”. In the bottom, both shares similar conditions, which are explained below: At a closer look, strikes and terrorism need from surprise factors to cause a substantial damage in the government or corporations. In this token, both manipulates the “Others” to achieve the own goals. Although the degree of violence is different, no less true is that strikes (like terrorism) keeps insensible to the other suffering. The disciplinary mechanism of states that repressed terrorism, adopted its own ideology to be part of capitalist ethos (Korstanje and Skoll, 2013; Korstanje, 2015; Korstanje, Skoll and Timmermann, 2014). This explain satisfactorily why global tourists are targeted by international terrorism worldwide. What would be important to discuss is to what extent, forms of imperialism engages with climate of fear. DANCERS AS DIPLOMATS The roots of imperialism have historically debated by many social disciplines ranging from philosophy to anthropology. While some voices understand that empires expand by the economic needs of indexing new territories, others prefer to explain this issue as a cultural project based on an earlier sentiment of exemplarity, uniqueness respecting to other cultures. However, little attention has been paid to the role of danc and ballet companies, which are often used in the configuration of ideologies that lately facilitate imperialism. 54 Discussing Terrorism In this valuable book, Clare Croft introduces readers in the world of cultural exchange as well as the history of American choreographers, who were financially supported by US government to travel worldwide. In the middle of mayhem that represented Cuba Crisis, Cold War or even 9/11, America situated its dancers as real diplomats who ideologically disseminated a political message in the countries and cities they visited. This means that at the same time, they performed on stage the mainstream values of capitalism, no less true is that they exerted a radical criticism to policies of central administrations. As autonomous agents, artists express their feelings but keeping the ideology of the nation they represent. Paradoxically, this explain how American politics work. In this respect, Croft argues that dancers‘ recognition of cultural hybrids was originally associated to constructand negotiated identities which leads towards a broader understanding of other cultures. Their rhetoric obscured the real policies their government was conducted abroad or even inside against Black population. The message was clear respecting to the fact though America was fraught of material asymmetries, freedom and democracy granted free speech, even when executive branch were targeted. The first chapter reserves to the experience of New York City Ballet through Russia during Cuba missile crisis. Although American ballet was influenced by Russians, which devoted a great sentiment of admiration that nuanced the rivalry between American and Soviets, tension divided culturally both countries beyond Atlantic Ocean. The lack of fluency in Russian prevented the Martha Graham Dance Company and other ballets to face panic while abroad. Most certainly, language played a vital role configuring a symbolic barrier in communicative process which immunized American Dancers in Russia. The second chapter explores the connection of Black dancers while traveling abroad and their struggle to gain further rights and recognitions in US. The paradox lies in the fact that Afro-community was historically debarred in US, but this did not impede their dancers 55 Tourism and Terrorism to criticize the policies of American government. This happens simply because dancing and dancers were carefully manipulated to vanish the face of the country in foreign relations. “The introduction of people, rather than art object, created an even greater space in which diplomatic tours could simultaneously support the government`s motives and challenges them. People, unlike art objects, can (literarily) speak – speaking their minds and sometimes changing others `minds (of their own” (Croft, 2015: p. 73). As this argument given, it is interesting to discuss to what extent dancers did the correct things in expanding the horizons of arts, escaping to stereotypes and prejudices, but in so doing, they fall in the fields of ideology, showing not only why America is the greatest nation, but also why capitalism should be esteemed as the best of possible worlds. The anathema of democracy as a cultural project to be exported to the world was in fact, one of the aspects that legitimized the hegemony of US over the last decades. The labour of Martha Graham Company was widely recognized in 1974, when secretary of state H Kissinger wrote a memo to President Ford to award Martha Graham for her great political work, in expanding the culture of self-determination and liberty to the rest of the globe. Not only the solicitude was accepted but also this ballet was foundational within the fields of American modern dance. The intersection of red-scare with the free speech is adamantly addressed in fourth chapter. The fifth and sixth chapters dissect the implication of contemporary American dance in building international alliance to defeat “terror and hate”, to the extent the old conception of nationstate should be reconsidered. Nowadays, communism as the main threat of Western democracy sets the pace to a new more radical enemy, Muslim terrorism. Undoubtedly, 9/11 and the attacks to World Trade Centre was a founding event that diluted the old friction between America and Russia, into a more unpredictable scenario, where enemies are hidden within society. 56 Discussing Terrorism “This exploration might seem a reversal of Cold War policies based on exporting American values as though a set of values could be tied to one nation above others, but this second era of dance-in-diplomacy programs is reflective of twenty-first-century notions of nation-states as more porous and globally connected entities” (p. 145) The cosmopolitan fantasies of globalization are limited to make believe the periphery they stand closed to central nations, whereas financial inequalities between two worlds persist. This is exactly the role played by New York City as the epicentre of victimhood to be hit by terrorism but exemplary resilient to cultivate the germen of tolerance. Even if those chapters, which form this book, exhibit experiences, story-lives and reflections resulted from the interview to first hand actors, dancers and choreographers, which may be read separately, the main argument prevails. At the same time, American government confronts externally against a hypothesized foe, dancers and visual arts engage “these dangerous others” into the American Style. This suggests eloquently that American Empire orchestrates a disciplinary mechanism to indoctrinate “rogue states” by the use and abuse of force (legalized by international laws and its implacable warmachinery) but reminding ideologically the importance their cultural values as trade and democracy to be accepted. TERRORISM AND THE SPECTACLE OF DISASTER French Philosopher, Jean Baudrillard, claimed that “the war on Gulf” never took places. The same was repeated when 9/11 and of course waking up a great controversy in philosophical circles. The hightechnology played a vital role in configuring “the end of history” as we know. Basically, in consonant with other French philosophers as Paul Virilio or Marc Augé, Baudrillard acknowledges that news is transmitted by the media which serves as a mediator between reality and Spector-ship. As a result of this, the concept of reality sets the 57 Tourism and Terrorism pace to “pseudo reality”, where events pass to be pseudo-events. One of the metaphors used by Baudrillard to explain further his development goes to Steven Spielberg´s movie, Minority Report. A fictional plot where precogs, who are “clairvoyant” of the future helps the police anticipating crimes before they were committed. Following the plot, Baudrillard exerts a radical criticism to postmodernity to produce “pseudo-events” which means events enrooted in a so-notdistant future. In view of that, we live in a state of Paranoia resulted not only from the hegemony of media, but also the velocity information is reproduced (Baudrillard, 2006). Cultural Analyst, Douglas Kellner adds, Baudrillard is wholly concerned on the negative effects of globalization because of two main reasons. History witnesses how wars were fought against a palpable enemy to defeat. However, the war on terror declared by Bush´s administration turns out in a “fractal complexity”, diluted in the future; this means in the precautory principle of defense. “In Baudrillard’s view, the 9/11 attacks represented the clash of triumphant globalization at war with itself and unfolded a fourth world war: the first put and end to European Supremacy and to the era of colonialism; the second put an end to Nazism; and the third to Communism. Each one brought us progressively closer to the single world order of today, which is now nearing its end, everywhere opposed, everywhere grappling with hostile forces. This is a war of fractal complexity, waged worldwide against rebellious singularities that, in the manner of antibodies, mount a resistance in every cell”. (Kellner, 2005: 3) Similarly-minded reflections are done by Paul Virilio, who alerted in the possibility virtuality monopolizes the meaning of present and social life, introducing allegories which are fabricated by external interests. The dictatorship of technology produces “a virtual reality” imposing stereotypes over citizenry, to the extent to public opinion is controlled by those corporations which invest in the media. While events are portrayed without any connection with causality, what 58 Discussing Terrorism remains important are not the reasons or cultural background that facilitated events, but their effects only. He starts from the premise that the human existence has been emptied by the acceleration of mobilities, which yielded an excess of time. The gap is not fulfilled by social relations, or interaction, but with the subordination of men respecting to Machines (Virilio, 1995, 2005, 2010). John Armitage, one of the most prominent readers of Virilio says, “Perhaps the key to understanding the importance of Virilio’s work on architecture, art and technology lies in the connection he makes between architecture, the organization of territory, and an idiosyncratic archeology of military fortifications, such as military bunkers, and the structure he creates for building these connections with art and technology. Virilio explain this structure as an archeology of military configurations, and it works less as chronology of western military fortifications and more as an aesthetic foundation for interdisciplinary cultural research” (Armitage, 2011; 7) After all, 9/11 represented an apocalyptic war, a conflict which should be fought internally, not between fortifications or bands. Undoubtedly, French legacy has developed a radical pejorative connotation on the ways media covers terrorism. The influence of these circles not only was limited to France or Europe, even were adopted in some English speaking countries. Luke Howie is one of those scholars who take his cue from Baudrillard and Virilio, focusing on the hegemony of screens in order for work-force to accept policies otherwise would be rejected. THE TERROR AT SCREEN In this section, we will describe the argument of Luke Howie, a wellfamous Australian researcher specialized in terrorism and its impacts on daily life. Although the event has gone, its effects continue in social imaginary, moulding the narratives, stories, cultural entertainment industries as well as many other institutions of 59 Tourism and Terrorism Western civilization. This begs a pungent question, why terrorism? Why the term witnessing? Methodologically speaking, Howie understands how witnessing is vital to expand the understanding how terrorism is interpreted and lived. Western societies are based on a type of new Terror voyeurism which not only communicates further of the society consumes these types of spectacles, but alludes to a problematic obsession very hard to break. Howie sets forward an innovative thesis in his investigation, Terror on the Screen published in 2010 in post 9/11 contexts, where he sees 9/11 was something more than a founding events, it transformed culture of consumption in a way that contradicted one of the bulwark of Occident, gazing. If terrorism is success in their goals, it depends on our obsession for visual cultures or what specialists dubbed as “ocularcentrism”. “The witness is the central figure of this book, I base my arguments in this book on the assumption that to witness terrorism is to be a victim of terrorism since as Jenkins has argued, terrorism wants a lot of people watching, not just a lot of people dead” (Howie, 2010: 7). In the global cultures, events not only are covered and disseminated through media, they can be repeated or replayed according to the times audience requests. It is tempting to say that through CNN one shocked by the two planes crushing against the most important towers of the world, as well as felt an ecstasy between reality and fantasy. In the “theatre of terrorism”, Howie adheres, the boundaries between reality and fictions blur. What is most interesting, Howie sets forward a model which takes terrorism from an all-encompassing viewpoint where the spectacle is administered to instil fear within society. Undoubtedly, “It is designed to lay the foundations for understanding how terrorism is witnessed, spectacularized, interpreted and remembered and how this is the beginning of a journey that ends with terror on the screen” (p. 27). 60 Discussing Terrorism Terrorism is more than the illegal use of violence as specialized literature precludes, Howie adheres. Any attack no matter than its destructive capacity is considered an act of terrorism if it cannot be publicised. Besides, although part of the stories and warfare happen in Middle east, urban cities situated as necessary centres where panic surfaces. This happens because of two main reasons. At a closer look, “the theatre of terrorism” needs from an industry oriented to the other to survive while, secondly, 9/11 formed a culture of consumption around terrorism which is daily exploited by the media. His main thesis is that as witnesses of terrorism our understanding of the issue is obscured to the extent we do not understand the reasons behind Al-Qaida or ISIS. This represents one of the limitations of experts to bring efficient plans or solutions to the foreground (Howie, 2010). It is important not to lose the sight that we validate torture, or sexual denigration against terrorists in view of they are marked “as dangerous them”, demons, maniacs, or filled-hatred persons who hate Occident without any real motive. Not only this discourse is far from a clear diagnosis of the problem, but it reinforces long-simmering discourses aimed at fostering nationalism and ethnic-segregation. Unless regulated, the “culture of terrorism on screen” may very well lead towards a hunting of witches or expressions of hostility against Muslisms. As discussed in earlier parts, September 11 still is a date reminded as the epicentre of tragedy for West civilization. Its effects, far from being passed in the time, resonate in the life of peoples up to date. In his book Witnesses to Terror, Howie criticizes the role of “pseudo-experts” who feed up “a spectacle of terror” which is more prone to Cultural Entertainment than scientific explanation of reality. The psychological consequences of 9/11 accelerated a state of emergency where freedom sets the pace to security. In retrospect, 9/11 changed the geography of the World, attempting to forecast what at the bottom turns unpredictable. The production of knowledge, which is esteemed as a valid way to make society a safer place, can 61 Tourism and Terrorism be a “double-edged sword”. Taking his cue from other authors as Zizek, Baudrillard, and Laqueur, Howie defines terrorism as a technique, which is enrooted in politics to impose states proper goals, beyond any consensus. Terrorism needs from witnesses in the same way, journalism did. Howie overtly writes, “Terrorism works this way for witness. If there was one way to describe the outcomes of the research that I have conducted for this book, I would say that terrorism causes people to feel terror. Terror is the name we give to the uncertainty we feel in the feel of global violence in some of the world´s most populous cities. If Terrorism does not cause terror, then it is not terrorism (p. 12). As the previous argument given, Howie adds, targets are selected to create panic within society, not real destruction. For this reason, the worst is coming into a hypothetical future, which is moulded by political power. If knowledge on terrorism is conducted by studies outside the hotspots, this makes difficult a clear understanding of the phenomenon. This happens because panic mediates between citizens and their understanding of reality. It is often assumed what we know on terrorism comes from the literature which comes from media as a valid source of information, not from real experienced revealed by fieldworkers. By “being witnessed”, terrorism terrifies to those who are captivated by news. In parallel with this, there is a clear false multiculturalism which opposes to the rise of other ethnicities, reinforcing not only the Anglo-centrism but the so-called supremacy of English speaking countries over other cultures. Howie`s books remind two important assumptions for this research. At a first glimpse, the distance of audience respecting to what is happening is the key factor that explain terror. Secondly, though terrorism does not look “the destruction of western civilization”, it encourages a racist message that “Muslims kills others for their faith”. In earlier stages, Korstanje and Tarlow (2012) or Korstanje and Olsen (2011) examined carefully the consequences of 9/11 in horror 62 Discussing Terrorism movies, for example in plots as Hostel, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, or the Hills have Eyes. These specialists agree with the thesis that the roots of evilness stem from those villains who are unable to bring the sacred law of hospitality to strangers. Even, evildoers are those who give “a perverse hospitality” seducing their potential hosts in order to kill them while sleeping or launching. Before 9/11, horror movies cantered on the fact that visitors or tourists would be attacked by animals as in Jaws (1975), or The Naked Jungle (1954). In both movies, nature is portrayed as the main threat to be disciplined by human technology. But in modern horror genre things have changed a bit. The role of villains is played by humans, psychotics or maniacs, who in spite looking like us, never reveal their real interests. As terrorists who very well may be one of our neighbours, abusing from “hospitality”, these new evildoers are camouflaged within society. THE GLOBALIZATION OF TERROR In post 9/11 contexts, the attacks to US was esteemed as the start of a new era, even former president George W Bush referred to the needs of Americans not to cede to terror. Although US-led invasions to Iraq and Afghanistan were boasted by some voices and applauded by others, 9/11 situated as an event that emptied the contact of Americans with reality. As Professor Ray Griffin observed, there serious doubts casted on the fact that government were unfamiliar with the possibilities of attacks in American soil, however, little attention was paid to top ranked officials who ignored the alarms of CIA and FBI in this case. If not the President, other officials were familiar US will be targeted by international terrorism, but it fits as a ring to the finger to expand a bloody campaign of conquest and economic submission to some autonomous nations (Ray-Griffin, 2004). As the previous argument given, the book authored by Emeritus professor at SUNY (Buffalo) Geoffrey Skoll sheds light on the reasons 63 Tourism and Terrorism why terror is politically manipulated for government to create a functional “culture of fear” that prevents the cooperation among workers against capital owners. We must confess that the political understanding of fear not only affect the conceptual tenets of democracy but may lead society to legalize torture as a valid mechanism to seek potential threats. The political manipulation of fear not only would wreak havoc in democratic institutions, but also destroy the tenets of republic. The passage from a democracy to a dictatorship, was indeed analysed by philosophy by more than 1.000 years, but is today when we experience with accuracy detail how this works. An exhaustive examination of specialized literature comes with the Geoffrey Skoll´s book, entitled Social Theory of Fear: terror, torture and death in a post capitalist World. Based on the legacy of Wallerstein, Skoll presents a more than interesting hypothesis. We have to pay heed to ancient history to see the background where Roman Empire collapsed. If we do so, we will realize that like US, Romans opted to stand in the wrong building whenever they launched to conquest the World. It caused serious economic asymmetries and imbalances by the greed of indexing new lands for Senate. Sooner or later, the end of Rome reminded us that “Catastrophes occur when systemic regulators no longer contain the conflict through various institutional responses. Such a crisis always holds the potential for bifurcation of the system. Bifurcation occurs at a tipping point where the system stops organizing itself and enter in a chaotic state (p. 28). The elite’s reaction in times of crisis seems not to be persistent with their own interests. Aristocrats do not try to save the system and it’s well-functioning, which paradoxically facilitated the collapse. Egocentrism coupled with individual interests and a wider sentiment of fear, are at a first stage, a big problem for the involving societies and a sentence of death. Comparable with Roman Empire’s and Feudal disintegration, late-capitalism crisis seems to recur to 64 Discussing Terrorism military-machine expansion to keep the control and trade but unlike these past-empires, in our modern times nation-state is inextricably interconnected. As a result of this, the collapse may be very well further apocalyptic than other times. The reliance on fear works as a conduit for status-quo and elites to maintain their privileges. In consonant with this reasoning, military action calls to adaptive measures to dominate strategic zones, legitimating this action with internal support. The extraction of local surplus not only provides to urban dwellers a better reason to belong to the Empire, but also paves the ways towards resentment in the periphery. If the policies associated to fear, conducted by US government are programs orchestrated by financial elite to reduce “uncertainness no less true is that when a real threat emerges, the barriers of society cede. While nation-state is configured to nuance the conflict or controversy among classes to minimum expression, in times of peace, this role is played by market. Rather, when the winds of war are coming, Skoll adds, violence is exerted to refashion the political order in jeopardy. Skoll goes on to acknowledge that “fascism exercises social control through deprivation, identification with a powerful leader, and aggression against internal and external enemies. Liberal capitalism replaces denial with indulgent consumerism and lifestyles replace status identifies such a race” (p. 45). To what extent, globalization is conducive to the liberalization of terror is unclear in this book, but it continued in a recent complementary work, Globalization of American Fear. The idea that capitalist system reproduces by the growth of inequality and poverty is not new since it has been discussed widely by Marxism and post-Marxism in the four corners of the world. However, the intersection of terrorism and capitalism seems be a heated discussion which today retains considerable concern from scholarship. We are told that working is the best project in what we can spend our time whereas terrorism is an act of hatred-filled hearts or maniacs. But to what extent it is true? 65 Tourism and Terrorism Skolls continues a much deeper discussion instilled by former work, Social theory of Fear. At a closer look, the act of governing through fear is used by US to create a culture of mistrust. From the onset, US was based on the belief that the world as a dangerous place to live. Over recent decades in XXth century, fear was used to enhance the legitimacy of elite, sometimes oriented for the workforce to accept policies otherwise would be rejected. At the time, capital and American Empire expanded to colonize new worlds, a much deeper sentiment of fear accompanied the politics. Therefore, it is safe to say we live in a world characterized by a “global fear” which is functional to a particular way of making politics. One of the aspects facilitated the expansion of capitalism was the idea that citizens live in the best of the possible worlds. Beyond the boundaries of consuming society, of course, any change represents a threat for popular parlance, a barrier to overcome. In the first chapter, Skoll traces the historical roots of the culture of fear in America. In retrospect, the capitalist system and theories of economy showed widely that accumulation only is feasible if we introduce exploitation as a key factor to produce and distribute wealth in few hands. The monopolization of surplus value, as Marx puts it, resulted not only from human creativity but by the means of elite to commoditize labour into exchangeable goods. The number of rank-and-file workers involved in a process of production affects directly the profits of capital owners. From that moment on, the capital reproduction seems to be always in detriment of workforce. In this mayhem, whenever the conflict rises, fear undermines the possibilities of claimers and protesters to impose their views. Two major instruments were used by privileged classes to keep the control, ideology and repression. While the latter appealed to surveillance to exert violence against the pathological agents, the latter one was enrooted in a process of fear-mongering that limited the negotiation of worker unions. After 9/11, total forms of control were established in private life subordinating individual rights to the collective well-being, which means a more secure society. Leisure industries were witness of 66 Discussing Terrorism obstructive methods of surveillance over lay citizens. It was unfortunate that this trend makes from US a fascist state. This is a very interesting introductory section where author combines his erudition pitting historical cases where governments used fear in their favour against US and its Anglo-allies in the war on terror.In the second chapter, Skoll discusses to what extent elite in America devoted its resources to forge a culture of fear which passed from communism towards terrorism. The organization of labour conjoined to profit maximization is two key factors behind the manipulation of fear. Though actors changed, the dynamic are the same. Doubtless, this is one of the merits place Geoffrey Skoll now as a must-read author in terrorism issues. He explores the model of four wars as it was formulated by Skoll where he confirms a polemic thesis. From its inception, US was always an imperialist power which struggled in four major events, Philippine War, Korean War, Cold War and Vietnam War. Though the two total world wars involved US as well, no less true is that in these events US played the role of an empire inspiring a model that situates United States as the “administrator” of capitalism. The management of exploitation centers in a genocidal campaign by disciplining communists. In retrospect, the problem of identity and liberal consumerism are placed under the lens of critical scrutiny. The period 1968-1973 not only encouraged a liberalization of human relationship, it induced substantial changes in economies worldwide. During this age the spin doctors of capitalism precaritized the power of workers paving the pathways for the rise of neoliberalism during 90s decade. As this backdrop, the expansion of US as the unique imperial power was possible after the collapse of Soviet Union, but without the legacy of UK in financial leadership, it would have never taken place. One mantle passed from one power to other as US enthralled as the centre of manufacture and trade. The direct intervention or full-scare led wars are ideologically legitimized by the needs of bringing the ideals of American democracy, liberty, freedom and mobility. However, at the bottom, this globalized culture of fear hidden dark interests associated to exploitation. Paradoxically, 67 Tourism and Terrorism these types of interventions suggest that terrorism needs the use of force, but in so doing, impotence and deprivation surface. To set an example, Skoll adds, whilst US supported by financial investors, IMF or ONG arrives to Middle East to take the local politics on its hands, a state of chaos and political instability dominates the environment. The allegory of war on terror leads governments not to tackle off real dangers produced by capitalism as pollution or global warming. Last but not least, eight and nine chapters formulate ground-breaking suggestions to stop with the discourse of fear. Unless otherwise resolved, the question whether US and its domains pays attention to terrorism as the main threat of West covering other most terrible risks, one dangles that the probabilities our civilization collapses are higher than thought. Anyway, citizens are prone to develop sustainable practices of consumption that encourages a real democracy from the bottom to the top. After further review, I feel professor Skoll presents a wellargumented book which is a result of years of academic maturation and research. Starting from the premise post-Marxian studies have a lot to say in terrorism issues, most of them discriminated by academy, Skoll exerts a radical and illustrative criticism on the “culture of Fear” in US. It gives us an impressive snapshot of America so that readers may expand their understanding of what capitalism is. To my end, this is one of those books which are a must-read reference … In future approaches, Skoll should resolve what Korstanje dubbed as “Hobbesian dilemma of politics”, which means that Marxism was wrong respecting to the role of power in societal fabric (reproaching the argument more to Max Weber). To put this in bluntly, with Thomas Hobbes we learned that fear underlies in the worlds of politics even during democracy. Although economic production plays a vital role in the formation of society, it is not determined. There is nothing like a progress towards an end of class struggle, which advances through history. This suggests that society is not affected 68 Discussing Terrorism by fear but it results from the imposition of mechanisms oriented to discipline fear. In other terms, society is created by the fear. The problem with wayward Puritans lies in the fact they have developed a cosmology of conflict where sublimation is only affordable by the imposition of sacrifice. The sense of predestination closed their future in order for Anglo-worker to demonstrate he deserves salvation. In this stage, social Darwinism did the rest. Capitalism worked not only by the culture of fear or consumption imposed to citizens, but by the fact that they enter in competence with others with an exaggerated idea about their real probabilities of success. Because of Americans feel special, superior or even supermen, narcissism undergirds the social trust. The survival of the strongest is the final goal, but behind this, only one is the winner. We can see scenes of this nature in main reality shows as Big brother or even in films as Hunger Games, where the glory of few entails the ruin of the rest. This is a normal ideological resource to normalize the precaritization of workforce. Inevitably, the war of all against all emulated by Darwinism allows the reproduction of material asymmetries by means capitalist-system(s) expansion (Korstanje, 2015). 69 Tourism and Terrorism 2 THE DARK NIGHT OF PARIS 2015 Terrorism sadly plunged Europe and the World into mourning. A couple of jihadists perpetrated simultaneous attacks in different points of Paris by Friday 13 of 2015. These coordinated attacks resulted in 137 fatalities and more than 400 wounded. Similar to 9/ 11, this event not only shocked the Western social imaginary, but also called into question the internal security methods to prevent such attacks. Despite widely deployed technology for surveillance, terrorism remains a scourge for the West. In this context, some questions have surfaced. What is terrorism? What are the steps to follow to prevent terrorist attacks? How can nation-states make this world a safer place? The recent proliferation of newspapers, magazines, and TV programs covering the problem of terrorism seems to be far from reaching coherent answers to the above questions. Although many policy makers, officials, and international experts devote considerable efforts to describe the situation, the socio-cultural factors that determine terrorism are often left out. A good start maya necessary beginning, is to ask what terrorismis? The pervasive roles played by globalization and the war on terror have revealed a cynical dynamic. Liberal markets facilitate the circulations of goods and trade but constraining the mobilities of Workforce, which travel to centre in quest of better opportunities. Capital replicates worldwide producing serious asymmetries which 70 The Dark Night of Paris 2015 pave the ways for the rise of resentment (Powell, 2010). The state of conflicts produced by capitalism represents a fertile ground for terrorism to recruit new comrades. However, a linear correlation between poverty and terrorism has recently come under scrutiny (Enders and Hoover, 2012). Though interesting studies have been advanced on the economic nature of terrorism (Enders and Sandler 2011), they fail to explain the way economic theories conceive of pleasure and wealth maximization. In The Economics of Justice, Richard Posner acknowledges that utilitarianism as it was formulated by Jeremy Bentham engenders two types of monstrousness. If society is based on the maximization of pleasure for all their members, we must assume that torture is a good option to enhance security. One type of monstrosity arises whenever we valorise peoples by the degree of pleasure they develop instead by effects of their decisions. Suppose that A is very fond of killing animals, and B is prone to feed them. Following utilitarianism, A is a better person than B irrespective of ethical conduct. A second type of monstrousness is these types of societies where the solidarity leads to the sacrifice of innocent persons on the altar of social need (Posner, 1983). In a seminal work, David Altheide offers a radical critique on the criteria used by journalism to select what news is published. American and British newspapers are prone to cover news related to crime and terrorism as if both were determined by the same factors. Terrorists are portrayed as the main Threat for West, while local crime is disciplined by the cultural values of society. Local offenders, after all, are framed as individuals who have adapted to society whereas terrorists had no such luck. Terrorists are treated as psychopaths whose behaviour still remains irreversible (Altheide, 2009). This explain not only their degree of “dangerousness”, but also how the law is orchestrated as an apparatus of repression. The liberal scholar, Michael Ignatieff (2013), declared that terrorism is the lesser evil in view of the dangers democratic societies face. One of the troublesome aspects of democracy in its struggle against terrorism, is how can we ethically see torture. Ignatieff argues that 71 Tourism and Terrorism “the war on terror” is the lesser evil. The West should devote all its resources to eradicate terrorism, and of course, in this process torture should be limited to legal controls (Skoll, 2008). This suggests that the current meaning of terrorism should be at least revisited. People feel extreme fright whenever events are going beyond their control. This is exactly what happens with terrorism. No matter that states enhance their security homeland, nobody knows when and how the next attack will take form (Altheide, 2009; Sunstein, 2002a,b; Skoll 2007). It is unfortunate that ethnographers who are interested in getting a hold of terrorists face serious legal problems not only because terrorism is an illegal activity, but is globally repudiated. This seems the reason why today the research, as M. Sageman (2014) anticipated, reached a stage of stagnation. In recently published paper, he argues that mass media concentrates the opinions of many “pseudo-analysts” who create a barrage of speculation, biased ideas, or commentaries that feed-back the policies of governments. Instead of expanding the current understanding of this issue, it increases the ethnocentrism of the West. The lack of valuable investigation relates to the impossibilities of making contact with terrorists, since they are considered maniacs, demons, or psychopaths almost impossible to re-educate. As Richard Bernstein (2013) puts it, if terrorists are stereotyped as evildoers or demons, why question them. As formulated this question has no response. However, psychology teaches that terrorism is a human activity, performed by people who embrace radical tactics at a specific time of their lives. Since all we are all potential terrorists, research should explore the factors that determine how the terrorist mind is formed. Demonization is contrary to understanding. Neither the monopoly of the state nor the attempts of insurgents to pose their message by means of violence, terrorism should be defined as a dialectics of hate in which case both parties are involved in an atmosphere of conflict and violence. Nation-states exert considerable power over populations (sometimes violating essential human rights), but the problem lies in the fact that terrorists are indeed hidden within the population. Beyond their 72 The Dark Night of Paris 2015 technologies, nation-states are unable to forecast when and where the next attack will be. Under some conditions, torture plays a crucial role by interrogating some suspects. However, terror cells work disconnected from other cells, which means that tortured persons have no idea or key information that can be used by state to protect society. The concept of normalcy of terror is one of the troubling aspects that should be discussed by specialists and pundits (Howie, 2011). Beyond the responsibilities of religion, terrorism justifies violent actions against vulnerable persons using discourses that lead toward self-victimization. In so doing, religion serves as an excuse but never as the real reason behind it. James Piazza commented that it is common terrorists once participated in democratic processes to some extent but were forced to go underground for many reasons. Political atomization conjoined to weaker partidocracy is one of the key factors that pave the way for the rise of terrorism. The focus placed by some scholars on poverty or psychological frustration does not explain at a macro-sociological level the influence of politics in the configuration of the necessary instability that sooner or later leads to terrorism. Whenever groups are pressed to clandestine action because of a lack of democratic channels, terrorism rises as an option (Piazza, 2007, 2008). Over recent decades, some voices emerged to find commonalities or shared lines of actions in different terror organizations which range from the IRA to AlQaeda. At first blush, no matter than their religion, culture, or class, a psychological profile may be addressed. We may use psychology to delineate two contrasting profiles: Offenders and terrorists. While the former signal a disordered, deviant behaviour to social rules, the later one emulates a law-abiding attitude to the extent of sacrifice of their lives. Let´s clarify first that criminals deny their crimes, but this happens because they belong or want to belong to society. The same does not apply to terrorists, who are rewarded by captivating the attention of society. Terrorists often adopt their reactions in view of a mythical struggle against injustice or some other broader targets such as “Westernization,” Rationality,” or Mass Consumption. Re-channelling 73 Tourism and Terrorism their hatred towards a much deeper process of victimization, the discourse of terrorism lacks from any rational basis. Nonetheless, once questioned, they vindicate their crimes by alluding to higher positive ideals such as freedom, the struggle against injustice, or the restoration of a lost moral order. Far from being considered as evil-doers, they perceive themselves as “disinterested” freedom fighters. In inculcating terrorists, terror groups employ a sentiment of radicalization, which was widely studied by McCauley and Moskalenko (2008, 2011) and Moskalenko and McCauley (2009). For these psychologists, radicalization corresponds with a system of beliefs which are products of history or certain bad personal experiences. However, terrorists are fewer than those who can share the same sentiment of disappointment, experts add. What is important is that this process of radicalization only prospers in small groups, where interactions with others seem to be reduced to the leaders` viewpoints. The smaller the group, the more there are possibilities to be efficiently indoctrinated. Any individual act of dissidence is rapidly suffocated by leaders and other comrades-inarms. In parallel, candidates are recruited following personal contacts or by taking advantage of some connections between relatives. These like-minded cells have successfully enhanced an internal cohesion which is forged by the creation of an external moral hazard. Since a process like this is not built overnight, no less true is that the absence of law in some peripheral zones represents a fertile ground to the formation of terrorists. That candidates are recruited following peer self-esteem criteria, or social status has been validated by some social scientists such as Wood and Gannon (2013) which recently drew attention to the influence of peers to perform deviant behaviours or become offenders. Criminology has left behind the role played by social interaction in the formation of criminal minds, as well as the limitations environment present for some profiles. Those people who aim at pleasing others are more sensible to acceptance by their peers than others. Behaviour follows the collective values of group. Depending on what these values are, individuals can help or harm 74 The Dark Night of Paris 2015 others (Zimbardo, 2007). In his updated version of the book, The Lucifer Effects, Phillip Zimbardo shows how good people can torture or do appalling things to others. We are prone to imagine we are special to balance our day to day frustrations and psychological deprivations. This not only enhances our ego, but develops an attachment to rules. Although we live as though respecting the law, behaviour changes according to new leaderships. The moral limitations of what we can or not do, depends on the rules of ingroups, not our decisions. Good peoples inserted in the incorrect groups can act the same as their peers. To understand evil-doers we have to distance ourselves from the classic definitions where they are defined as agents who rationally opt to behave bad, harming others without any type of remorse. Our human nature is changed by the social rules and contexts in which we move. From the Stanford prison experiments to Abu Ghraib, Zimbardo adds, it is confirmed empirically that people (far from being good or bad) are influenced by powerful situational forces. Once the other is demonized, actions are ethically justified no matter how terrible they are (Zimbardo, 2007). Although some crimes are demonized in view of their impact on victims, less attention is given to the role played by self-esteem and status in the formation of gangs. This raises a more than interesting question: Is love the emotion liable for hurting others? With this in mind, Wilson, Bradford, and Lemanski (2013) observed that social interactions are of paramount importance to expand the current understanding of terrorism. Some groups develop a bad image of society, which can be crystallized into deviant behaviour. At time of recruiting new candidates, people become engaged by emotional factors, such as friendship, the need to be accepted by peers, and even by recommendations of relatives or a girlfriend. Not only are many terrorists educated in Western societies, but also they are citizens of those societies they eventually attack. Anyone, given certain conditions, might adopt radical goals. As Korstanje (2015) noted, terrorism and democracy seem to be inextricably intertwined. One of the pillars of terrorism is based not only on how much fear 75 Tourism and Terrorism they can instil in populations, but also in the hope of extortion directed towards nation-state. During 19th century Europe faced one of the most serious crises in its history. It triggered forced migration of the impoverished workforce towards peripheral countries such as United States, Australia, Brazil, and Argentina where those economies experienced a sudden growth. However, the conditions of work in these hosting nations were far from optimal. European migrants were subject to long hours of work and otherwise exploited by the owners of capital. Some of these newcomers adopted ideologies coming from socialism and anarchism. In their struggles to gain better working conditions some planned bombings against government officials and notorious industrialists and their property. These anarchists were labelled as terrorists, and were promptly jailed and deported. However, the core of their ideological discourse remained in the organization of anarcho-syndicalists, a more moderate group that adopted the ideals of anarchism to be materialized in improvements for workforce. A few of their claims were finally accepted by the elite, and unions gained the right to strike in furtherance of improved wages and working conditions. Thus disciplined into forms of leisure consumption, terrorism became settled into the core of Westernization. Not only the fear, which is a touchstone, lingers in the heart of our civilization but also interesting commonalities between the strike, unionization, and terrorism converge. From that moment on, cultural industries such as tourism, museums, or various cultural entertainments, as the case of Paris evinced, become targets for international terrorism. As Korstanje argues, we have to consider the thesis that tourism is terrorism by other means. These intersections are based on three common factors: surprise, the instrumentalization of the other, and extortion. At a first glance, the latter two are appeals to sudden blows against State where citizens are unethically hosted. The surprise factor supports state in accepting claims that otherwise would be neglected. In so doing, the other is not only instrumentalised as a means to achieve goals, but disseminates a message of terror to society. The point of entry in 76 The Dark Night of Paris 2015 this discussion seems to be that mass media plays a vital role by amplifying the effects of terrorism in post-industrial societies (Howie, 2012; Eid, 2014). In Witnesses to Terror Luke Howie (2012) noted, terrorists do not seek to destroy entire civilizations, but by the introduction of fear they seek to dismantle the interests of state. Despite its complex algorithms and mathematical models, one of the frightful dilemmas of the West consists of the incapacities to forecast the next attack. Starting from the belief that the innocent is harmed to show the impossibility of the state to protect ordinary people, the credibility and legitimacy of officialdom plummets. It seems worth discussing whether terrorists channel their hate against particular or broader targets. In fact, victims are aleatory; they are selected to cause a psychological shock to society, and terrorists do not have previous knowledge of their victims they will kill. The targets are things are symbolic and abstract like Capitalism, Democracy or Secularism. Following secular logics more associated to means-ends models than religious pursuits, the discourse of terrorism feeds back from perceived global injustices that have taken place in the past and which nourishes a mythical archetype. Normally, terrorists are co-active and prone to minimize the risks whenever the safety of community is in jeopardy. Terrorists are ordinary people who at some moment of their lives were subject to radicalization that isolated them from society. In this vein, one should not lose sight of the fact that terrorists are indifferent to other´s suffering for two main reasons. First, they consider their goals as superior to personal life or any other individual desires. Second, the other is used as a means to fulfil the own objectives. The question whether others are instrumentalised explain why terrorists are insensible to their pain. Whenever, they (terrorists) feel that states are not handling their claims, extortion surfaces as the necessary instrument to impose their agenda. On this point, terrorists, union leaders and businessmen are not so different. Beyond the fear, a more than interesting approach is to discuss is to how much the pillars of terrorism are rationality and extortion. Throughout his 77 Tourism and Terrorism vast bibliography, Zygmunt Bauman has analysed to what extent the logic of instrumentality remains rooted in the ideology of capitalism. The West valorises security over other cultural values, and that means that people (consumers) debate between the fear of abandonment and the need to belong. Those persons who harmonize a comfortable life-style paradoxically need the technological backgrounds to protect their home. At the same time, it serves as a sign of distinction with respect to others who are unable to consume, and the derived sentiment of fear is re-channelled towards mass consumption. Unlike animals, humans develop “a type of derivate fear” which is socially constructed. Because this sentiment has the possibility to transcend the boundaries of time and space, it makes more terrible and diffuse than a real threat. Our imagination is our staunch enemy. Doubtless, the Titanic symbolizes what would happen with Western civilization if the radicalized other is not accepted. This luxurious cruise that embodied the pride of civilized nations met a simple iceberg. The inflation of risk that leads to paranoia facilitates a much deeper process of securitization which permeates the social environment. The vulnerability of humankind is neglected in view of an allegory of consumption, where the maximization of happiness persists. Our terror of death is rooted in the logic of market (Bauman, 2001, 2006, 2013). Therefore, the West is trapped between the wall and the deep blue sea. How can it prevent what is in its essential core? One of the quandaries of policy makers is to anticipate when the next attack will take place. The sentiment of panic is based on the randomness of terrorist targets, which suggests anyone anywhere can be harmed by them. Last but not least, this fear leads to the abolition of personal and individual rights, which prompts an emergency state of surveillance where government imposes on citizens, policies which they otherwise would never accept. After 9/11, the interpretation of courts on the existent labour laws weakened the power of trade unions in favour of Capital. Wole Soyinka leapfrogged to the economic effects of terrorism in domestic politics of developed nations. Soyinka believes the world has faced 78 The Dark Night of Paris 2015 extreme situations of panic before 9/11 ranging from Nazism and the Second World War to nuclear weapon testing. One of the aspects of global power that facilitates this feeling of uncertainties seems to be the lack of a visible rivalry once the USSR collapsed. The political terror promulgated by states diminishes the dignity of enemies. These practices are rooted inside a territory but paved the way for a new form of terrorism which ended in the World Trade Center attacks. It is incorrect to see 9/11 as the beginning of a new fear but as the latest demonstration of the power of an empire over the rest of the world. Mass communications mould our ways of perceiving terrorism even facilitating the conditions towards a new state of war (Soyinka, 2005). This happens simply because terrorism wakes up a hermeneutic dialectics of hate that enable some xenophobic reactions, or even Islamophobia well documented as scholars as Sayyid (2014). Recent humanitarian crisis in Syriah showed not only how European hospitality can be activated to help others, but also showed the limits of this restricted hospitality whenever ISIS fighters are infiltrated. The sad events of Paris in this dark Friday reveal “the end of hospitality” is an inescapable reality. This is the reason why ISIS and Al-Baghdadi declared the “jihad” to modern leisure spaces as tourist destinations, museums or spaces of recreation at modern capitals. The question whether terrorist cells targeted for important persons over more than 40 years has set the pace to a new way of making terrorism where attacks are perpetrated on ordinary citizens, mobile travellers such as tourists, journalists or businessmen. This represents a much more interesting issue which merits investigation. To some extent, New York, Atocha in Spain, London Bombing, and now Paris appeals to our current Eurocentric discourse around security. If states still delineate the world into safe and unsafe boundaries, the probabilities of ISIS expanding are higher. Paradoxically, because we over-valorise security as the privileged place to be, terrorists can more easily plan their attacks. However, here some clarification is needed. Whereas fear is the means to create instability in the system, the touchstone of terrorism is associated with “the instrumentalization of the Other´s suffering”. 79 Tourism and Terrorism 3 HOW DOES TERRORISM AFFECT MODERN HOSPITALITY INTRODUCTION Doubtless, hospitality has been widely studied over the last decades from diverse perspectives. As Lynch et al. (2011) put it, the specialized literature has developed two clear waves of investigation. While some scholars see in hospitality a type of mechanism of control, others focus on its gift-exchange basis. Far for being resolved, this discussion leads to question the roots of hospitality in our contemporary society. Although, Jacques Derrida played a crucial role expanding the philosophical understanding of the issue, even in the Anglo-World, he paid little attention to politics in the configuration of “Otherness”. This essay review focuses on the strengths and weaknesses of Derrida from the lens of a promising Latin American philosopher, Ana Paula Penchaszadeh. The success of nation-state was historically confined to its ability to monopolize the violence (Guidotti-Hernandez, 2011). Modern philosophy attempted to decipher the code of “nation-hood” as inherently intertwined with a much elaborated ethnicity, homogenized and controlled according to the interests of elite (Skoll and Korstanje, 2013; Korstanje, 2013e,f,g). In this context, there is no much difference between Derrida and Nietzsche (in the reception 80 How Does Terrorism Affect Modern Hospitality of Latin Americans). 2 As the previous argument given, the legacy of Derrida as well as his critique to Western thought may be summarized in the three following relevant points • Any process of ethno-genesis which is aimed to the sentiment of “us”, needs a counter-process of differentiation, an “outside” where the border determines who are in and out. • Democracies, whatever the case may be, have their own limits and closures to “Others”. • By means of “strangers”, nation-states develop the in-group rules. One of the contributions of Derrida to this theme reminds us that at the time, we are in presence of others, we are constituted as us. The “Other” not only is disciplined, marked or regulated by host’s rules it reminds that tolerance is given by the law of masters. In this respect, Penchaszadeh distinguishes the guest from alien (stranger). Whereas the former signals to the gaze of state, the latter one defies the status-quo. As a result of this, the societal order demonizes aliens whenever they cannot be disciplined. Aliens represent a serious threat for politics, simply because they are beyond the hegemony of language. This begs a more than interesting question, is hospitality a subtle form of ethnocentrism or racial discrimination?, why hospitality and why now?. The Urgency of Aliens 20 July of 2008 in Rome Italy, as picture on the introductory section showed, two corpses likely from two drowned Roma children lie down at the beach jointly a couple of tourists who were indifferently about what happened. What does this picture suggest?, are first-class citizens insensible to the Other`s suffering?. Well, in the hyper mobile world of communication, instant experiences, hedonism and consuming life, two types of mobilities coexist. The global financial elite encourage travels to take distance from reality, embracing the belief that good citizens are legally allowed to be mobile. While thousands of vagabonds, immigrants, refugees are condemned to starvation and an imminent death. As a project, capitalism has consolidated 81 Tourism and Terrorism generating serious asymmetries in the means of production, where few monopolizes the slavery of the whole (Virilio, 2012; Bauman, 2000; Tzanelli and Yar, 2009; Eagleton, 2011; Bianchi and Stephenson, 2014; Maccannell, 2011; Urry, 2007; Korstanje and Clayton, 2012). Paradoxically, though TV news are fraught of events characterized by “humanitarian disasters” of new-comers who do not find suitable welcome in the centre, nothing is done to change this radical situation. Undoubtedly, the problem of violence and hospitality seems to be inextricably intertwined. This is the main reason why Ana Paula Penchaszadeh presents her book: Politics and Hospitality. In this project, she discusses not only the distance between guest and stranger but also the conceptual limitations of Derrida respecting to the influence of politics in the way the “Other” is imagined and subordinated to main Western matrix. Written in a polished way, this philosophical research is formed in six chapters, which range from the Maussian theory of gifts towards the meaning of democracy. Since the act of giving hospitality is based on tolerance of the “Other”, which is marked as an alien, we must accept that there is something ethnocentric in the way the identity is forged. The first chapter (Hospitality and gift) explores the legacy of Mauss and his theory of gift to place hospitality into the fields of social bondage. She takes a public debate in the Argentinean Senate from 1894-1896, to show her thesis. In view of this document, it is clear how the same “Constitution”, which was originally issued to invite migrants to dwell the argentine soil, is gradually changed to a more restrictive forms of discipline. The needs of creation a nation-hood is associated to the governmental attempts to homogenize diverse ethnicities, groups, and new-comers arriving to Americas from 80s on. In this context, government appealed to language to accept (disciplining) aliens into the same nation. Those who resisted in speaking “our language” should be treated as “anarchists”, as “undesired guests”. The project of Enlightenment adopted by founding parents (in Argentina and other Latin American state as well) envisaged the aborigine as a threat which may place the civilized 82 How Does Terrorism Affect Modern Hospitality country in jeopardy. Rather, the second section discusses the limits imposed by sovereignty to understand the “otherness”. Within a certain territory, the legal jurisprudence issued by state establishes a guiding-rule for classifying selfhood from otherness. For that reason, it is almost impossible to discuss modern hospitality ignoring the principle of sovereignty. Tracing the cue of Schmitt, Hobbes and Rousseau, the sacrificial meaning is sublimated to construct a much broader negotiated sense of security. From education (Rousseau), to fear (Hobbes), the radical other is established to forge the own identity. The third chapter, to our end the best developed, refers to the deepness of death. Alluding to the metaphor of pregnancy, where the young mother who brings life, is uncertain respecting to the evolution of her embryo, hospitality regulates the tension between what is controllable and incontrollable. The current conditions of democracy that today traces and jails thousands of migrants, simply because they are demonized as a threat for social order, is one of the topics widely developed in fourth and fifth chapters. Last but not least, the efficacy of international right to protect “refugees” or the role of international institutions to protect the future victims of genocides represents the epilogue of this trailblazing philosophical project. In sharp contrast to current literature, Penchaszadeh argues convincingly that hospitality is determined by the combination of five items: Language, gift-exchange, sovereignty, representation of death and democracy. Whether Derrida over-emphasized on the tolerance as the borderlands of hospitality, she understands that hospitality goes in the opposite direction than tolerance. Starting from the premise that the self is enrooted into a certain territory, citizens are constituted according to the figure of “Others”, who are not citizens but are tolerated. By exercising their power, nation-states allude to tolerance to encourage the gift-exchange system. In fact, Derrida made a radical critique to post-modern society and its principle of property, which undermines the possibilities for peoples to embrace the “unconditional hospitality”. This leads us to a second question, may hospitality be conceived beyond the politics?. Likely, 83 Tourism and Terrorism as Derrida, Penchaszadeh had an idealized image of democracy, and of course they will respond, yes. However, this seems to be a deepseated issue which may be continued in next approaches. Discussing the limits of democracy, the limitations of Derrida come from his idealized view of “the Republic”. Since its grounds are inclusion and acceptance, Derrida adds, democracy (at some extent) may be equalled to hospitality. However, its effects on politics are paradoxical. On one hand, the nation-hood confers the belief of an exemplary centre to be naturalized in the course of time. This space of exception not only gives “identity” but introduces “uncertainness” to close the unconditional hospitality. The late-capitalism is tended to “create an oligarchy” within democracy, to monopolize the disciplinary mechanism of control over workforce. Although Derrida`s concern on capitalism are correct, why we say adamantly he developed a Romanized view of democracy? As C. Castoriadis noted, democracy has not been a Greek legacy, but from Athens. Over centuries democracy was practiced by Athenians in a way the rest of Greece resisted. After the Peloponnesus war, the real nature of democracy has gone for-ever. Unlike modern democracy (or as we have dubbed in earlier works), ancient Greeks understood if everyone has right to all, anyone has nothing. Although the authority of the King was never questioned, Ancient Greece developed a political resort (demos) for lay-citizens to convoke an assembly if a law was unjust. With the advent of modern industrial revolution not only the social ties are undermined, but a new way of interpreting democracy arises. This is the concept created by British Empire, which has dubbed by Korstanje as “Anglo-democracy”. In perspective, it paves the ways for a new configuration of power, where “selfdetermination” sets the pace to “republicanism”, or “voting”. As a result of this, Anglo-democracy instilled “the concept of freedom” as a platform to stimulate the consumption. The paradox lies in the fact this temporal freedom was not associated to the politic fields, since the lay-citizen is not legally empowered by derogating the law passed by Anglo- 6 democracy. The liberties given to peoples were 84 How Does Terrorism Affect Modern Hospitality inextricably intertwined to “desire” and “consumption”. As the previous argument given, in the Anglo democracy, any subject governs through its representatives and through the constituent assembly. This creates a gap between citizenry and social institutions, which is filled by economic financial corporations. At the time, the global sense of mobility is posed to favour the market citizens are really restricted in the politics. The disciplinary mechanism of surveillance prevents the social change. The ideology of capitalism has successfully expanded and accepted by populations thanks to two major assumptions, which are embraced by Jacques Derrida. First and foremost, many scholars believe that State is a counterforce that balances the interests of Market. Citizens may find a shelter in the policies of nation-state. Historians of capitalism not only have widely criticized this belief, presenting evidence that nation-state surfaced to facilitate the expansion of capitalism, but also focused on social inequality was a constant on human history. Neither hospitality is a reified form of democracy, nor is inequality effaced from earth by democracy. In other times, there were serious political asymmetries enrooted in the authority of King, his territory and the duty of citizens. In order to weaken the social bondage, postmodernity has posed a new axiom, which suggests that “The massive” (this means what comes to all) is based on the spirit of democracy. Far from being real, this belief ignores the doctrine of sum-zero society. Within a frame-time, citizens will choose their governments as consumers get a product. Nonetheless, the workforce and its unions (in the struggle against international capital) lacks “from the demos” as a resource to protect the weaker agents (Korstanje, 2013a,b,c,d; Korstanje, 2014). In this conjuncture, Derrida precludes not only the roots of democracy but hospitality. Ethnology and Anthropology have collected an interesting conceptual framework to understand hospitality as a rite of passage, or a pact, where “strangers” are welltreated to ask for the protection to Gods, once death. The same treatment strangers receive Gods will harm or protect the human beings. Natural disasters, famine, plagues and other calamities were 85 Tourism and Terrorism considered “a just punishment” when the community eroded the right of aliens. For whole part of cultures, the concept of evilness and tragedy stems from the violation of hospitality-guiding rule (Korstanje and Olsen, 2011; Korstanje and Tarlow, 2012; Korstanje, 2010). The conception of Derrida on hospitality not only is far from being historic, but also is imagined according to what his own stereotypes. Anyway, some interesting questions arise. What type of hospitality may secular societies provide?, is hospitality linked to the figuration of death?. To our end, the paradox formulated by Derrida (in view of unconditioned and restricted hospitality) can be resolved as follows. Unconditional hospitality, which is based on religion and the belief in here-after, may be only granted in traditional societies, while its restricted form seems to be proper of modern secular ones. There is a last point in Derridean thesis which merits to be revisited. Hospitality and Religion as it has been earlier noted, hospitality keeps a strong political hallmark. In the age of Bio politics, the exemplary centre exhibits not only the power of master, but also the vulnerability of guest. Any displacement within hospitality is a like a travel to death, towards here-after where Gods or spirits will guide our path (Korstanje and Skoll, 2014a). In this respect, Paloma Balbín Chamorro (2006) has deciphered the complex world of hospitality, using etymology as a valid instrument. The term comes from Latin Hospitium which derived in two legal terms, ius hospitii and ius civitatis. A close reading suggests that Humbert was not correct, when said that strangers received hospitium to be protected during their sojourn, Chamorro adds. In fact, the word hospes was applied to inter-tribal reciprocities that facilitated the economic good exchange. In this vein, Korstanje (2010) highlights that the roots of hospitality should be found in the “indo-Arian” formula, hostis+pet. Although, there was a direct connection between hostis and the figure of enemy, the hospitium was practiced in friendly contexts. The meaning of hostis was applied to connote “equilibrium” and balance among human beings. Furthermore, starting from the premise that pet means “master”, hospes+pet should be understood as “master of 86 How Does Terrorism Affect Modern Hospitality host”. Whatever the case may be, this discussion reveals two relevant things for our review. The first and foremost, hospitality was enrooted in politics. Secondly, there was an asymmetrical relation of reciprocity between hosts and guests, which merits to be investigated. An asymmetry of this nature creates a gap which is filled by religion. Ramos y Loscertales (1948) agrees in the religious aspect of hospitality. Strangers or those who were pilgrims should be protected because they are absolute godsends. They represent an opportunity to be in communion with Gods, and the whole. The ontological security of community is given by its ability to be reconciled with Gods. This was the legal epicentre where any principle jurisprudence is structured. As Korstanje, in earlier works, puts it, hospitality with “strangers” equals the treatment humans received from Gods in the hereafter. The modern ethnology collated evidence enough to demonstrate many ancient tribes thought natural disasters were a product of stranger mistreatments. Here one question surfaces, to what an extent secular societies may offer generalized hospitality?. Korstanje explain that while secular societies, where religion is neglected, embrace “restricted hospitality”, unconditional hospitality only was possible in ancient or traditional communities (Korstanje, 2008; Korstanje and Tarlow, 2012). In regards to imperialism, Jacques Derrida alludes to the figures of “foreigner” to draw the limits between inside and outside. Following Plato’s legacy, he questions to what extent foreigners may be defined as those who asks about others. Guests are often accompanied with their own language, which is derived from their constitutional culture. Hospitality is offered or denied depending on the foreigner’s personal properties. New-comers interpelate the hosting community in the same way, the question may be or not hosted by the speaker. The language of the host interrogates violently and suddenly since it imposes the home owner’s interpretation. Therefore, the foreigner is forced to adopt another tongue which is not the one he usually speaks or writes. The host’s translation is part of his very own abode and it is precisely the point where the possibility of hospitality takes place. 87 Tourism and Terrorism According to Derrida, two types of hospitality emerged in the “absolute” (unconditional) and “restricted” (conditional) forms. In this sense, the absolute hospitality demands the host to open the proper home not only before foreigners but also before anonymous Travellers who are unknown for me. This way, I am obliged to let them to enter but to ask reciprocity. Rather, restricted hospitality signals to those foreigners who meet the criteria of laws, considering that hospitality is applied to a certain person, not an unknown alien. The host’s laws are certainly granted if the newcomers are subject to the right, which is always conditional. Without identity, or property, the guest becomes in “a parasite”. No need to say, Derrida was adamantly criticized because he leaves little evidence how “absolute hospitality” may take room. Kevin O’Gorman explain that deconstructionism was rejected by professional philosophy during long time. The concept of “unconditional hospitality” as an impossibility since always strangers are conceived with a lower degree of violence. In the lack of accuracy to observe the ideal version of hospitality, a more restricted form arises. That way, he involuntarily likes hospitality to ethics or in his own terms, friendship. Whenever the hospitality is lived as an act of generosity, guests and hosts are unified into a friendly meeting. “When a country’s borders, or the domestic domain, are open to guests or immigrants, conditional hospitality places us in relation to impossibility; failure to provide a greater generosity and that impossible greater generosity inhabits our act of conditional hospitality. When, with the best intentions, people nonetheless inevitably fail in their attempt to be open to the difference of the ‘other’ that impossibility resides in their attempt, and places them in a different kind of relationship with the other in question”. (OGorman, 2006: 54) Others voices criticized Derrida´s development as pseudo-philosophy, (see discussion with John Searle). He is accused to misunderstand the real historic hospitality as “an intertribal pact” of non-aggression whose effects are determined by the political act. There is no possibility to offer hospitality beyond the politics. It is important to clarify that this is not an essay review 88 How Does Terrorism Affect Modern Hospitality on Jacques Derrida in the strict sense of the word but on the reception in Latin American philosophy; to be more exact, from the reading of Maria Paula Penchaszadeh. It does represent only the reception Derrida had in the ethos of Latin American philosophers. As postMarxian academicians as Alberto Fillipi observed, Latin America has developed a strange version of Marxism where politics not only were the motor of history, but also state was preferable designed as the protector of citizens before the advance of market. In this region, Marxism has changed to a new form that emphasized the role of politics in the social world. Secondly, there is a strange fascination, likely resulted from French philosophy, for the promises of democracy. Latin American thinks that the restrictions imposed over their economic prosperity not only are given by the continuation of coups de etat that interrupted the democratic life, but also by a dark compliance between armies and neo-liberal forces of the market. In this point, genuine democracy is the best antidote against the asymmetries created by capital-owners. Although it is right on some sense, this romantic gaze ignores “the concept of democracy” cemented the expansion of capitalism worldwide. However, there is a little uncovered point of discussion in this entry that likes Derrida´s work with ethnocentrism. In what way are we authorized to confirm this allegation?, is not Derrida the philosopher of deconstructionism?. Empires consolidate their hegemony in two drastic different directions. On one hand, we have the classic discourse that proclaims the superiority of few over others. In these terms, hospitality is limited not only to the authority of masters but persists in the roots of law. This is exactly what Derrida called “restricted hospitality”. However, there is another type of hospitality that never asks anything in return. Is this a sign of supremacy or a simple attempt to connect with others in egalitarian conditions?. Marshall Sahlins was one of the pioneers in continuing with Marcel Mauss´ concerns. Cantered on other factors as kinship, power, rank and geographical distance, Sahlins elaborated a new typology of reciprocities that may be explained as follows, As a dyadic swamp, reciprocity (like solidarity) 89 Tourism and Terrorism is subject to a rite of redistribution of goods that marks the roots of social bondage. While produced objects are necessary for economic subsistence, the monopoly of surplus (wealth) confers status to holders. Following Sahlins´ model three types of reciprocity should be noted, • Generalized reciprocity is marked by no needs of return for one or both parties. These transactions not only are cantered on vagueness in the obligation to reciprocate, but in a clear asymmetry of rank between sides. • Balanced Reciprocity signals to an equivalent exchange of goods or values among parties. An example of this sub-type whenever a tourists pay for a room at the hotel. • Negative reciprocity is characterized by the interest of parties to maximize their profits no matter than the other. Clear examples of this are theft, or barter. The self receives or takes a good which never is returned with impunity. Not surprisingly, Sahlins did the correct thing to announce the status and rank plays crucial role to create a “generalized reciprocity”. Only the lords of city are allowed to offer an “unconditional hospitality” without reciprocity (Sahlins, 1963, 1965, 1972). Since the “Other” is a little thing, nothing is asked to be returned to the master. This generalized way of reciprocity covers not only an act of paternalism but of imperialism. A subtler discourse that characterizes the upsurge and zenith of empires relates to the fact, that Otherness is under-valorised to be assisted without exception and at any situation. The expansion for trade needs to use the allegory of human rights to connect emotionally with other territories. History witnessed how empires literally appealed to humanitarian reasons to save the “condemned”, the savage souls from their hell. Beyond the attempts to help others, lays the logic of exploitation and domination. This begs a more than interesting question, why we should help Others who have nothing to do with us?. 90 How Does Terrorism Affect Modern Hospitality While Durkheim sought an innovative explanation to precise how society is possible in collective ways, the liberal alternative stays close to “individualism”. One of the exponents of this tradition John Rawls sets forward a theory of reasonable law to explain why some nations fail other are prosperous. Liberalism had serious problems to digest charity when it is framed beyond the individual right to property. The theory of reasonable law rests on the belief that people sacrifice their appetite for war and ambitions to achieve wider forms of political, economics, and social cooperation. Therefore, trade and negotiations are of paramount importance to balance the international relationships. Of course, Rawls is criticized simply because after Auschwitz this idea would seem a simplistic utopia, an allegory. His response to these allegations is not convincing. Rawls echoes Kant’s doctrine of international law that only a liberal society may lead human beings to a sustainable state of well-being. Any person may be pressed to help others without violating its autonomy. Therefore, peoples must assist others people living under unfavourable conditions that prevent their having a just descent political regime. What happens when assistance should be done over dictatorship regimes?. Korstanje and Skoll (2014b) have explained that the theory of peoples, like Derrida, should be revisited but not the reason Rawls notes. He is divining the world in democracies and dictatorship enlarging the gap that facilitates the surface of an “empire of charity”, or “the empire of human rights”. “The neoliberal development in 1990s not only issued a lot of uncontrolled loans that indebted many poor countries, but also generated an iron chain of dependency between first and third world. Shown to be a resounding failure, the first social scientists who encouraged the theory of development—Milton Friedman possibly the most wellknown, especially in his design of the Pinochet-led Chilean economy— replied that cultural asymmetries were the reason for the third world not to gain the benefits of financial assistance. That is, it was not the economy; it was the value system of Third World peoples that kept them in poverty” (Korstanje and Skoll, 2014b: 13). At least, 91 Tourism and Terrorism this reminds Truman’s doctrine of development which not only indebted the world but also created a strong dependency from periphery to its centre. Whenever the suffering in the world becomes in the platform for submission, it exhibits the lack of ethic of imperial ethos. Conclusion (rethinking the imperial code) Even if the tension between hospitality and ethics was formulated by a whole number of philosophers in ethic fields (From Kant to Rawls), much deeper insight is needed respecting how “ethnocentrism” evolved. The ebbs and flows of Derrida´s insight on hospitality stems from this above discussed imperial logic, where the “Other” (incapable to make another thing than knocking the doors of our paradise) is portrayed in vulnerable conditions to reinforce our “absolute supremacy” over them. By offering an absolute hospitality to the peripheral others do not enhance their lives. Rather, it aggravates the conditions of exploitation. Ideologically, the success of empires to keep the control over periphery consists in expanding the good-person exchange into a finely-ingrained system. In so doing, it engenders some big economic imbalances given by the asymmetry of forces. The absolute or unconditional hospitality not only reinforce the sentiment of supremacy of “selected race” over the colonized one, but also elite claimed its right to be like-gods. In every newspaper, in every TV program or talk-show there is a concern for poverty and the vulnerabilities of pours, simply because it enthrals Occident as an exemplary civilization. As Clifford Geertz puts it, sometimes, pacts are celebrated to be violated (justifying a preventive attack), while others are done to show the inferiority of others. This is the weaker blind-point not only in Derrida, but in Penchaszadeh which merits to be discussed. This is the reason why, absolute or restricted hospitalities are subject to politics. Anthony Pagden describes how the concept of hospitality was politically manipulated by Scholastic philosophers to legitimate the conquest of Americas. Although the discovery and colonization was achieved in a shorter period of time, no less true is that other incipient imperial powers as England and France questioned seriously the role of Spaniards in 14 Americas. 92 How Does Terrorism Affect Modern Hospitality What type of law allows Catholic Church in giving rights to Spain in groups that do not accept Christendom?. Starting from the premise aborigines does not accept Catholic religion, why we think the treaty of Tordesillas (1494) was legal? May a person expropriate the land without working in it?. Over years, there was a hot debate among philosophical schools of Spain and Portugal. However, case reports from this new world suggested some conflicts with aboriginal tribes, which rejected the “European principle of hospitality” as it has been formulated by “natural right”. Although, the European natural right demanded that Hommo viatores (traveling humans) should receive protection, food and assistance while traveling, some aborigines was not cognizant of this customs and repelled the presence of strangers. This act of hostility not only reminded that aboriginals (for philosophers) were not familiar with the “natural right” (hospitality) but paved the ways in order for them to be seen as sub-humans. That way, there were not ethical problems in expropriating their lands or even enslaving them for hard work. Pagden´s research discusses to what an extent the conquest of Americas, which as remembered as one of the bloodiest event of history, was legitimized by the European principle of hospitality (Pagden, 1995). To cut the long story short, “absolute hospitality” beyond its impossibility is conducive to the subtle discourse of Empires which expand their hegemonies by means of “generalized reciprocity”. Whatever the case may be, we do thank Ana Paula Penchaszadeh who has a great sensibility and intellect in dealing with these slippery matters. The problem of hospitality is not news, and still persists in the matrix of Western civilization. To what extent, the other is an invention of selfhood to legitimate the established order, or whether this other is used to expand my own hegemony are two major concerns on the puzzle the philosophy should unravel in a near future. 93 Tourism and Terrorism 4 ETHNOCENTRISM AND RISK PERCEPTION INTRODUCTION Every culture has developed ways to adapt to its environment. One method is the construction of feared object which serves as a mechanism to adjust social perceptions of danger. Elements which instil fear vary from one society to another (Korstanje, 2011a). Under some background, the perceived vulnerability of a nation may very well lead towards “chauvinist manifestations” or even a dictatorship. In recent years’ policy makers in the tourism and hospitality industry have acknowledged problems with mass media in maintaining images of tourist destinations. Through an ever changing world, where humankind seems to be subject to a state of instability, the tourism industry is affected by a kind of risk inflation. Though many sociologists have observed that risks are inextricably intertwined with postmodernism (Giddens, 1991; Beck, 2006; Luhmann, 2006; Castel, 1997, 2006; Becker, 2011), the fact is that the term was widely adopted by tourism fields after the September 11, 2001 (9/11) attacks to World Trade Center and Pentagon (Floyd and Pennington Gray, 2004; Dolnicar, 2005; Mansfeld and Pizam, 2006; Boniface and Cooper, 2009; Ertuna and Ertuna, 2009). The attacks caused serious 94 Ethnocentrism and Risk Perception financial losses to tourism even years after the event. In part, this has been because terrorists employed mobile technologies, which are the pride of West, against the symbolic epicentre of world. At bottom, the message was that nobody will feel safe anywhere anymore (Zizek, 2009; Howie, 2012; Korstanje, 2013). Although the concept of risk has served scholarship on the safety of tourist destinations, there remains much to say about the conceptual problems of risk. The present essay aims to explore not only the roots of risk in capitalist societies and attendant methodological limitations, but also to differentiate among fear, risk, and safety. We argue that an allencompassing model is needed to understand tourism risks and needs for protection required by the industry. It is unfortunate that the current specialized literature on risk perception theory (in tourism fields) is far from reaching an understanding of the problem, but by the demonization of non-western cultures. To put this in bluntly, risk perception leads to the configuration of an “ethnocentric” discourse that makes from “security” the touchstone to mark the difference between civilized and uncivilized world. THE MEANING OF RISK Sometimes, we hear concepts as risk, fear and angst in the academic discourse. However, less attention is given to their meanings. The lack of clear definition in the concepts scholars use in their respective researches, not only obscures the derived findings, but leads to wrong results. The specialized literature suggests that fear can be defined as a basic emotion, which protects the survival of an organism. Not just human beings, but all animals experience fear of external threatening stimuli. Alerted by fear, the organism has three possible reactions: Paralysis, attack, or withdrawal (Fraisse, 1973; Panksepp, 1982; Levenson, Ekman and Friesen, 1990; Strongman, 1996). Nonetheless, the concepts of behavioural psychology have not embraced by other social sciences. Anthropology has developed its own sense of what fear means. Although, recognizing a strong 95 Tourism and Terrorism neurobiological basis that reduces or enhances the fear, ethnologists evaluate the social factors by which some fears are exacerbated while other rejected (Malinowski, 1967). Therefore, culture plays a vital role not only conferring a specific meaning to objects, but also to fears. Mary Douglas, a pioneer scholar interested in exploring the connection of fear, evil, and risk, argued that psychological fear represents an attempt to react when faced with a hostile situation. To some extent, the preservation of culture is at stake in contexts of uncertainty or instability. When socialized, fear unites a society (Douglas, 1992). In subsequent studies, Douglas developed a new thesis arguing that risk, danger, and sin are intertwined social constructs. Sin and risk give further legitimacy to the status quo, which would otherwise discredit privileged groups if they did not give solutions to lay people. Risk and sin both provide rationalizations for how the world works. The potentiality of threat provides legitimation for social solidarity and status hierarchies (Douglas, 2007). Philosophically, the self experiences anxiety-angst when faced with a decision. Existentialism defined anxiety as a result of freedom or uncertainty. The self opts for a way out of choosing. While fear corresponds with a specific object or stimulus, anxiety has an abstract nature produced by the presence of nothingness (Heidegger, 1997, Kierkegaard, 2003). This begs a more than interesting question, what is risk?. Following the observations of K. Tierney, risks should be defined as any probability of damage resulting from an event where the integrities of victims are at stake. In recent decades, sociologists have treated risk as a social construction. Within sociology, two contrasting waves have historically discussed the nature of risk (Tierney, 1994). One group explored the probability of harm, focusing on the effects of unseen risk for social systems. Another paid attention to the perception of citizens and the paradoxes this generates (Duclos, 1987). The specialized literature in risk management took the pragmatic perspective that bad evaluations of risk may lead to bad 96 Ethnocentrism and Risk Perception decisions. In this sense, efforts to mitigate risks open new ones (Oliver-Smith, 2002). Zygmunt Bauman (2011) explained that risks are social constructions to try to control the future. In the middle ages, happiness was thought to be restricted to few people, who can attain it only through suffering and expiation. The American Revolution introduced a radical change in the way that happiness was conceived, as suggested by Thomas Jefferson’s claim in the Declaration of Independence (1776) that the pursuit of happiness is a self-evident truth of the human condition. This assertion of a global right to happiness broadened its possibilities, but linked the possibility of happiness to freedom and choices. Risk, then, came to regulate the uncertainty of the future, but also conferred on the subject the liability for failure to be happy. Ulrich Beck has argued that modernity opened new global risks, which were alien to the medieval world view. Chernobyl in the Ukraine was the symbolic of the role played by technology in fabricating new risks. In Beck’s view, technology had helped enhance security, but today it generates new and dire risks that threaten human existence. In Beck’s “risk society” the old modes of production, which fabricated commodities, have turned into methods that produce risks (Beck, 2006, 2011). Parallel to Beck, Anthony Giddens acknowledged globalization as a project based on two key factors. The first is that money has come to serve as a mechanism of connecting presence with absences, or needs with their satisfaction throughout the world. The second element is a network of experts, who not only evaluate potential risks 5 but also devise ways for mitigating risks. Starting from the premise that experts monopolize the trust of lay people, for Giddens, risk is what society creates to sustain its efficient functioning (Giddens, 1991, 1999). In opposition to Giddens´s argument, Niklas Luhmann has criticized the thesis of risk society because of the increasing alarmism it spreads in public consciousness. Certainly, Luhmann adds, risks always are rooted into a previous profits or benefit, whereby the subject should decide. It corresponds with the principle of contingency. Unfortunately, Beck did not contemplate the distinction 97 Tourism and Terrorism between risk and threat. While risk signifies a previous decision by the self, threat refers to something external to the self. A terrorist attack, an airplane accident, or natural disasters are threats, since the victims have no way to reverse the situation. The passengers in an airplane crash have no way of avoiding the harm. In contrast, for the air travel company owner, who opted to reduce costs, the accidents are a risk. Generally, those who make the decision are generators of risks. They are not the same as those who face the risks (Luhmann, 2006). J. Richardson (2010) says that threats which jeopardize society are introduced in the social system by means of knowledge. Risk, in these terms, would be the efforts to intellectualize the future by offsetting costs and benefits. The final decision made on the possibility to face or avoid the damage is given by the degree of contingency, with respect to the problem to be solved (Richardson, 2010). This seems to be the reason why technology designed to mitigate risks under some conditions of uncertainty, generates new risks. A discussion of this nature, coined in the core of social sciences, has not been duly evaluated in tourism fields. In the next section, some of the more relevant studies in tourism risk are scrutinized. Tourist Risk The theory of risk perception has more than forty years of empirical research behind it. Nonetheless, it has been adopted by tourism industry only after the attacks of 9/11 (Dolnicar, 2005a,b; Kuto and Groves, 2004; Paraskevas and 6 Arendell, 2007; Bhattarai, Conway and Shrestha, 2005; Boniface and Cooper, 2009; Yuan, 2005; Floyd, Gibson, Pennington-Gray and Thapa, 2003; Goldblatt and Hu, 2005). Why is risk important for tourism industry? S. Dolnicar (2005a) argued that the intangibility of tourist products generates a high degree of uncertainty in consumers. He said that the tourist industry needs a model that helps policy makers to delineate and define types of risks so that mitigations can be deployed. Following this argument, A. Fuchs and G. Reichel (2010) classify risks depending on the human intervention: There are risks which are fabricated by human beings, while others like disasters followed natural reasons. In recent decades, the world has witnessed disasters 98 Ethnocentrism and Risk Perception and crises which have affected tourism. J.C. Henderson (2008) evaluated the importance of risk management plans to mitigate potential risk for the industry. If risks are controlled, the disaster can be prevented. The perception of risk, far from being pathological, is conducive to recreate a precautionary principle so that the society can avoid the catastrophe. The theory of risk applied in the context of leisure and tourism can be classified in four main categories: a) social bonds, b) nationality and cultural differences, c) residency, d) personality. Scholars who assert that risk perception is limited or enhanced by the trust travellers have were very popular in the first decade of the twenty-first century. They proposed that those travellers who were accompanied by relatives or friends perceive less risk than other groups. The sentiments of vulnerability are awakened when the travellers go beyond the security of home would be controlled by the social trust associated with accompanying companions (Roehl and Fesenmaier, 1992; Yuan, 2005; Castaño, 2006; Park and Reisinger, 2010). A. Reichel, G. Fuchs, and N. Uriely (2007) found that those who prioritized the political instability as the main threat at time of vacationing, travellers in company of others are more likely to suffer physical wounds than single travellers. 7 For other scholars, nationality was the significant variable that explain the variation of risk perception. H. Sackett and D. Botterill (2006) collected evidence that British and Americans perceive more risk than other nationalities. This happens because of the AngloAmerican alliance in the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions. These findings were previously inferred by P. Dominguez, E. Burgette and A. Bernard (2003). To these researchers, nationality plays a vital role in risk perception depending on the geopolitical policies of their respective countries. C. Ertuna and Z.I. Ertuna (2009) validate the idea that there is a connection between risk perception and national or religious affiliation. The mass media disseminate news about terrorism and political instability worldwide. Those nationalities directly involved in international disputes would develop more sensibility to risk than others. For example, while British holiday99 Tourism and Terrorism makers perceived less risk from natural disasters after the tsunami in Sri Lanka, other nationals, such as Germans and Italians, confessed to experience more concerns. The psychological impacts deepened on the number of victims portrayed by the media. The place of residency seems to be another variable that explain why risk evolves over time. M. Floyd, et al. explain that inhabitants of New York City showed higher anxieties after 9/11. This trauma persisted for approximately one year, and was more persistent in those nearer to ground zero. After the attacks, Americans closed their collective perception, and tended to think that going beyond the country was a dangerous and risky venture. J.Y. Wong and C. Yeh (2009) focused on the decision at time of selecting the holiday destination. The level of reliable knowledge and not residency would be the variable that determines whether a destination is avoided. Though risk tends to be rooted in a territory, the sense of danger is broadly associated with more complex trends. The 9/11 attacks represented the onset of a new way of imagining urban life in great cities. What scares people is not proximity to ground zero, but living in urban spaces. Terrorism is presented by establishment media as not occurring in rural areas (Woods et al., 2005; Yuan, 2005). Psychologically, we tend to compare the context of risk to be replicated in related environments. A final viewpoint considered here, emphasizes psychological character or personality as the main factor for analysis. Originally, the pioneer in these types of investigation was Stanley Plog who argued that there is a relation between personality and perception of the environment. Though he was strongly criticized in how he formed the model, it paved the ways for the upsurge of much applied investigation. A. Lepp and H. Gibson (2008) wrote that tourist travel is subject to two contrasting sentiments: The quest for novelty and the need for safety. To some extent, the cultural incompatibility between tourist originating and receiving countries may reduce the travellers’ feelings of safety. Their degree of adaptation to new landscapes is partially determined by their personalities. While some tourists are sensation seekers, others are risk aversive. M. Kozak, 100 Ethnocentrism and Risk Perception J. Crotts and R. Law found the following: a) Risk attracts some travellers who change their original destination to seek it. b) Those personalities based on higher degree of tolerance to change do not need to alter their plans in context of adversity. c) News of disasters or catastrophe not only affects the place of occurrence, but also neighbours countries. d) Risks are not restricted to specific locales, but extend too much wider regions. e) While travellers coming from industrial societies are concerned about terrorism, travellers form underdeveloped nations fear virus outbreaks. f) Personality variations explain why some travellers perceive more risk than others. Y. Reisinger and F. Mavondo (2005) and Yun and Mclaurin (2006) present a scale based on 22 categories to measure the safety of tourist destinations. The specialized literature fails to explain the correlation of personality and risk perception, because the evidence is not conclusive. A remaining question concerns the role of culture as a template for determining which aspects of life are salient in terms of travel safety. Although research in tourism and risk has advanced in recent years, many of the stereotypes and limitations among tourism scholars were first laid down by the pioneer research conducted by W. Roehl and D. Fesenmeier (1992). Drawing a sample of 258 participants, they found that perception of risk varied with the purpose for travel. Based on an answer-rate of 64 percent, this study concluded that demographic variables of travellers such as age, gender, and family structure correlated directly with risk perception. Social bonds played an important role in explaining why some travellers opt for some destinations while they exclude others. Although Fesenmaier and Roehl’s work illuminated whole of the subsequent research in risk fields, their focus was based on a business plan to protect tourist destinations, instead of expanding the current understanding of the issue. The first problem lies in the way they defined risk. Mathematicians evaluate the evolution of risks using complex software which studies the decision making process of participants. However, risk-related research in tourism is based on open or closed-ended questionnaires written to refute or validate 101 Tourism and Terrorism hypotheses. Later, these questions are correlated by following complex algorithms to make stable queues or segments, which can be examined to discover tourist perceptions. The goal of these researchers is to give some preview on the tendencies of the tourism market and its segments. The participants’ views and attitudes are subject to substantial reductions. Quantitative research emphasizes data from standardized questionnaires and closed-ended questions. This means that what Roehl and Fesenmaier obtain is the declaration of participants, who sometimes are not familiar with the reasons for their own behaviour. Participants may simply lie to impress the researcher. W. Roehl and D. Fesenmaier initiated a new way of investigation, but also introduced techniques of engineering in the production of knowledge. Their assumptions, models, and methods were replicated by followers who, eager for legitimacy and greater status, appeared to make “science.” In so doing, they used the experimental model, but fundamentally, their goals were not scientific. Risk studies wanted to promote sales, delving into the psychology of those who have capital to spend—the tourists. Besides, it is contradictory to apply probabilistic models to analyse nonprobabilistic methods, such as open-ended questionnaires. Tourism researchers interested in risk tried to draw larger samples of tourists while excluding other agents who participate actively in the tourist system such as professionals or staff. The researchers concentrated on understanding economic demand by travellers and visitors. Questionnaires were oriented to the consumer. Some other researchers targeted hotel operators using the Delphi or focus group methods. The over valorisation of tourists as the axis of industry not only was replicated in risk related issues, but also paved the way to an ethnocentric discourse. CONCEPTUAL PROBLEMS OF RISK STUDIES There are no scientific reasons for arguing that risk is strictly linked to probability, nor for seeing risk with a strictly quantitative 102 Ethnocentrism and Risk Perception paradigm. Tourism risk studies mainly have aimed at exploring the connection between risk perception and tourism consumption. Their goals are given by the needs of identifying, controlling, and mitigating some dysfunctional or inefficient factors which jeopardize the tourist industry. A wide range of potential threats ranges from natural disasters to terrorism (Yuan, 2005; Park and Reisinger, 2010; Niyaz, 2010). What is noteworthy is that travels and tourist destinations are not the same. Sometimes, risk investigation treats tourist destinations as the all-encompassing unit of analysis. These views lead us to trivialize travel as a psychological process which begins and ends irrespective of the date we purchase the ticket. For example, researchers following terrorism issues do not focus on the biographies of terrorists, but on the perceptions of travellers. The demand, not the offering, is important for these scholars. Their formulated goals lead to basic contradictions. First and foremost, they fail to recognize that perception is the result of social context. We cannot obtain answers to questions without connecting what people say and do. Some misunderstanding is based on the discrepancy by statements and psychological arousal. We may accept some risks without being concerned about them. For example, most people do not hesitate to leave their homes for fear of being struck by lightning, although that risk is far greater than the risk from terrorist attacks. Secondly, less attention was given to the role played by ideology which confers specific reasons for fear. For example, K. Wolff, S. Larsen and R. Doran (2013) and K. Wolff and S. Larsen (2014) have been documented a contradiction in the way people construct risk. Despite two attacks against civilians in Norway, interviewees feel this country is safer than others. The attraction of New York as a symbolic centre of civilization made other attacks fall into oblivion. Other methodological problems with these empirical studies are related to the criterion of sampling. Some samples are not balanced in proportion to the number of participants (Roehl and Fesenmaier, 1992; Sacket and Botterill, 2006), or the criterion of justification is weak (Plog, 1972, 1991; Dominguez, Burguette and Bernard, 2003; 103 Tourism and Terrorism Wong and Yeh, 2009). In other studies, questionnaires are ethnocentric ignoring a division between industrial and rural minds or world views (Kuto and Groves, 2004) or replicating values associated with nationalism or chauvinism (Yun and Mclaurin, 2006), while other studies are determined by conditioned answers because questionnaires are written in English or conducted in the preembarkation sections of transportation facilities (Wong and Yeh, 2009). If I interview tourists who are about to travel, their sentiments will be different were I do the same at home. Since the context conditions responses, they should be compared in diverse environments. Another clear error in these studies is the way the question is formulated. Sentences such as, “I feel fear to travel abroad,” do not reveal any risk, but reveal the prejudice of researchers who consider the world an unsafe place. On another hand, such studies make no clear distinction between risk seekers and risk avoiders. Many of these studies merely assume risk is dysfunctional for international tourism demand. W. Aschauer (2010) criticized the risk paradigm for being oriented to businesses, marketing, and profits, as they confuse safety with risk. Indeed, some tourists elect extreme sports and seek elevated the risks to gain status and prestige. Their psychological structure gives meaning to the risk while their perception plays a neutral role. Both categories work in diverse spheres of human minds. Negative evaluation of some destinations is not explained by the risk itself, but by how it is communicated (Aschauer, 2010). Safety, and not risk, should be prioritized as a fertile ground of investigation in tourism fields. Methodologically, if we conduct investigation prioritizing quantitative techniques, the outcome will not explain the behaviour. We will see only correlations between two or more variables. To understand what is happening in the field, we need to introduce qualitative methods to complement the quantitative one (Slovic, 1987; Korstanje, 2009; Zinn, 2010). Quite aside from the size of the sample, the correlation of both variables does not entail explanations of why that correlation occurs. That is, there is no causal connection, no accounting for the mechanisms 104 Ethnocentrism and Risk Perception producing the correlations. For example, considerable evidence suggests that women perceive more risk than men. Following a quantitative reading, one might infer the gender is a variable of risk perception but this exhibits an ecological fallacy. Males are socialized and educated to repress their emotions. Though they feel fear, they avoid voicing or otherwise exhibiting fearful emotions. On the contrary, females are socialized to communicate fear and other emotions (Becker, 2011). P. Manning (1989) recognizes the importance of understanding that social practice is embedded in a structure whereby discourse is articulated. Understanding how the narratives of safety are orchestrated, over-valorised or silenced, researchers can get a more profound idea of the object of study. This is the reason why questionnaires and interviews alone are not useful in understanding social issues. C. Waterton and B. Wynne (2001) conducted an investigation in towns such as Sellafield (UK), which are next to nuclear plants. Under some conditions, inhabitants at risk of dangerous exposure intellectualize their situation, repressing their fear and displacing it or negating it with sentiments such as pride and stoicism to rationalize their persistence in a dangerous place. This reveals that risk may confer strong attachments of identity where real dangers become a criterion of status and social distinction. Unless the qualitative view is introduced in risk perception research, biased diagnoses may lead scholars to inaccurate or partial explanations. Last but not least, one of the main problems of this perspective on risk and tourism relates to the ethnocentric discourse it disseminates. Racism expressions activated against Muslims are known by specialists as Islamo-phobia. The problem lies in the produced knowledge about Islam, or the distortions certain object may have. Islamophobia today encompasses a lot of aspects enrooted in the code of West, which ranges from the fear for Otherness, to an exaggerated cultural reaction to 9/11(Sayyid, 2014). In this context, risk perception opens the doors for long-simmering hostilities against Muslim World. At time the other non-white is considered as dangerous, West declares its supremacy over other cultures. As 105 Tourism and Terrorism Graham Fuller puts it, what would happen in Muslim World never existed?. The hostilities between East and West was not activated by 9/11; even as Fuller adds, if Islam never would take room in Middle East, this ancient hatred would have flourished in another civilization, as Byzantines. Islam is not the problem, but by the configuration done by West. The struggle between Rome and Constantinople was given in terms of politics, not religion. In the same way, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have historically coexisted without problems. The Anti-Rome sentiments developed by Eastern Roman Empire were based on the hostilities and the lack of tolerance of any political structure or culture which opposed to the terms of Rome. In this conjuncture, Fuller says, “Islam, as a new geopolitical force, inherited not only much of the anti-Rome views that grew over time within Byzantine Empire itself. While Byzantium drew its deepest identity from the belief that it was perpetuating the true tradition of the Roman Empire, it increasingly came to view the Western Church as a geopolitical rival whose 14 power was ultimately as threatening to Byzantine power and identity as Islam itself” (Fuller, 2012: 68). Fuller´s contribution is useful to remind that one of the main successes ideological discourse against Muslim World consists in stressing “the problem of terrorism” as a cultural pathology enrooted in Middle East. Instead of exploring the real roots of terrorism, as an inherent part of capitalism (Korstanje, Skoll and Timmermann 2014), some scholars present the problem as a “Clash of Civilizations” (Huntington, 1993), or an impossibility of some underdeveloped nations to alleviate poverty and resentment against West, or antinomian religious incompatibles. Of course, because the world is a dangerous place, where antidemocratic movements may cement the upsurge of terrorist cells, we need to monitor, detect and mitigate the risks. This is the context, where unfortunately risk perception theory applied in tourism, appeared and evolved. Nowadays, risk has placed the role played by development theory over last two decades. Policy makers do believe those pour countries where poverty and resentment prevail may cause serious problems 106 Ethnocentrism and Risk Perception to West in a later day because they are a fertile ground to the multiplication of terrorist cells, produced by political instability. In this vein, tourism would be an effective instrument not only to pacify the region but enhancing the beaten economies. Undoubtedly, terrorism may be a big problem for all nations and communities, but worse is the asymmetries (or hierarchies) posed by the risk perception. Raoul Bianchi and Markus Stephenson argue convincingly that the ideological discourse of empires entails making citizens believe not only that tourism gives a world without boundaries, but also a political stability for all nations. At time marketing of tourism focused on the risk perception, (globalized fear), a new type of double-oriented mobility may be imposed. This means that when some global citizens are legally authorized to visit any secure region in the world, the whole are immobilized. How risk and ethnocentrism are inter-linked?. The first point to discuss relates to the theory of Ulrich Beck. Although he is well-esteemed by the developments in the Risk Society, some of the results are not correctly formulated. There is unobserved dialectics between risk perception and the economic system. Not only Beck did not realize the peoples of working age perceive further risks than retirees (which marks a direct correlation between economic factors and risk), but it is very difficult to think the risk undermines the current status and hierarchy of society. Although the concept of “reflexivility” applies on the produced knowledge, there still remains a clear asymmetry between those classes which may buy better insurances respecting to others relegated to suffer the negative effects of risks. This happens simply because postmodern societies are structured according to the capacity to mitigate risks, (instead of capital as modern ones). The current climate of inflation of risk, which is daily covered by journalism and media, has two different purposes. First and foremost, it flaunts the technological supremacy of elite over the whole society. Secondly, as Zygmunt Bauman puts it, it marks the boundaries of privilege and disaster. In fact, thousand years back, walls and cities protected to their citizens from the external threats. The devotion 107 Tourism and Terrorism posed on the walls, entailed the preservation of certain rights. The enemy was always a stranger, regulated by the combination of violence and legality. Nowadays, rather, the liquid modernity has diminished the social trust necessary to cohabit with the other. Today, the enemy not only resides in the city, but also enlarged the psychological distance among citizens. The development of a “liquid surveillance” remains how far the undesired guest should keep away, but what is most important, it presents those who can manipulate these types of technologies as the supreme group (privilege race) of society (Bauman and Lyon, 2013). Conclusion As discussed in the present essay review, whenever risk perception is circumscribed within a specific geographical point, as is the case with many of these studies, outcomes tend to demonize civilians living there. If we consider the Middle East a dangerous place, psychologically we will avoid any direct contact with Muslims. This creates geographies of two types: secure and insecure. At a first glance, the former attract more investment and tourism than the latter. Nonetheless, both are inextricably intertwined. Those destinations previously considered unsafe not only direct tourist flows towards particular points, but highlights the product (Lash and Urry, 1994). From an ideological discourse, the theory of risk perception seems to be associated with geopolitical interests, reinforcing the dependency between centre and periphery. Recently, M. Korstanje and D.H. Olsen (2011) and M. Korstanje and P. Tarlow (2012) explored the qualitative archetype of risk and danger in the American cinema industry. Scholars agreed that not only did 9/11create a new paradigm to understand horror movies, but also supported an ideological discourse where American tourists feel superior to other nationalities. The events of 9/11 created a hierarchy of tourists where their value is determined by their nationalities. Effects of 9/11 blurred the memories of other events. It became a mythical date so that the forces of order—the United States, Britain, and their allies, which not coincidentally were the colonial powers—launched their crusade against evil. Terrorism, in this view, became represented as the main threat for the West in 108 Ethnocentrism and Risk Perception this century. Tourists who are victims of attacks, and terrorists share the same cultural values in many respects. Both trust in physical displacement as an instrument of status. Moving to other spaces to rest or knowing diverse landscapes is a pattern terrorists know well in order to plan their attacks. They have been widely educated in Western universities. Because the World Trade Centre and mobile communication industry is a value for West, they have become targets of international terrorism. If Mohammed Ata, one of the leading perpetrators of 9/11, would not know of the importance of civil aviation for the Western public as a source of pride, he would never have opted to direct an airplane against a commercial tower. 109 Tourism and Terrorism 5 TOURISM IS TERRORISM BY OTHER MEANS: THE GENESIS OF UNIONIZATION INTRODUCTION Over the last decades, the specialized literature focused on the effects of terrorism in cultural industries as tourism, or leisure. Events as 9/11, as many other attacks in Paris even Brussels recently prompted many central nations to adopt measures of securitization, tightening the security at borderlands. While some specialists appeal to see terrorism as a direct consequence of the poverty produced by global trade, (Barro, 1991; Pollins, 1989; Abadie and Gardeazabal, 2003; Phillips, 2008), others see in terrorism the main threat to Western civilization (Kristol and Kagan, 1996; Vargas Llosa, 2002). Undoubtedly the Anglo-alliance ignited support in some countries which had a previous experience with terrorism as Spain, United Kingdom in which case “the war on terror” disguised as “an international platform” to defeat the “evil doers”. At some extent, this axis of evil allowed programs and policies which vulnerated the rights of workers in many of central economies. As a dissuasive mechanism, Fear played a vital role by immobilizing dissidents to express their discontent (Altheide, 2009; Bassi, 2010). 110 Tourism is Terrorism by Other Means: The Genesis of Unionization In developed economies, governments posed terrorism as the great challenge of the next millennium. Terrorism became a buzz word that inspired movie makers, editorials, journalists, and the culture industries. A clear definition of terrorism seems in order, but it turns out not so easy to formulate one. Robertson (2002) defined terrorism as the primary security threat for West in the 21th century. Upon review, Pedahzur (Pedahzur et al., 2003) found 22 different definitions used by the US government alone. Schmid found 109 scholarly definitions in his 1983 study. Certain common aspects among most definitions include violence, force, politics, fear, terror, threat, psychological effects, victims, and extortion. Causes for terrorism are even more diverse. Some neoconservative scholars point to the weak role of the United States as a superpower in the world. For them, a solution would be to conduct top-down preemptive strikes by the United States in other countries. They point to hate against the West encouraged by Muslims. (Fukuyama, 1989; Huntington, 1993, 1997; Kristol and Kagan, 1996; Vargas-Llosa, 2002; Rashid, 2002; Kepel, 2002; Fritting and Kang, 2006; Keohane and Zeckhauser, 2003; Susstein, 2005; Pojman, 2006). Other scholars argue that 9/11 presented the opportunity for some privileged groups to manipulate the citizenry´s fear to create a new kind of internal indoctrination (Altheide, 2006, 2009; Sontag, 2002; Said, 2001; Holloway and Pelaez, 2002; Zizek, 2009; Bernstein, 2006; Baudrillard, 1995a,b,2006; Kellner, 2005; Gray, 2007; Smaw, 2008; Fluri, 2009; Corey, 2009; Wolin, 2010; Skoll and Korstanje, 2013; Korstanje, 2013). Luke Howie (2009) describes how cultural entertainment industries have depicted a pejorative and dangerous image onto Islam that affected thousands of citizens and opened a network of discriminatory practices. At a first glance, Goldblatt and Hu (2005) define terrorism as the illegal use of force or violence against persons or their properties in order to intimidate their government, the citizenship or any other segment of society. However, this modest definition has many 111 Tourism and Terrorism problems. Some privileged groups in democracies exert similar or greater violence against others with downright impunity. Furthermore, R. Bernstein (2006) argues that democracy is more than a ritual accomplished every four years but a style of life. In this vein, Skoll (2007) agrees with Zizek that terrorism works as a virus going from one to other hosts to infect an unprepared victim. Schmid contends that the terrorist victimization is often perceived by the terrorist as a sacrifice. The sacrifice can consist of attaching innocent people from the adversary’s camp or of a terrorist blowing himself or herself up in the midst of a group of guilty enemies. In that case, he sees himself as a martyr. The dimension of martyrdom links it to the activity that some scholars see as the most fundamental form of religiosity: The sacrifice (Schmid, 2004, p. 210). L. Howie (2012) acknowledges that the world and economies have changed forever since 9/11, which makes prediction untenable. Given the obsession for security in United States, Howie´s research shows how time changes the interviewees´ viewpoints. There is complicity between terrorists, politicians, and journalism. Howie (2010) examines the limitations of extant conceptual frameworks, and, parallel with other studies such as the work of Baudrillard and Zizek, connects the theories of terrorism with late modernity. Howie adds that terrorism should be defined as more than a political technique or strategies to dissuade the states of certain claims, terrorism is stronger in the witness‘s terror. Terrorism works this way for witnesses. If there was one way to describe the outcomes of the research that I have conducted for this book, I would say that terrorism causes people to feel terror. Terror is the name we give to the uncertainty we feel in the face of global violence that has appeared not just in war zones but in the heart of civilisation in some of the world´s most populous cities. If terrorism does not cause terror, then it is not terrorism (Howie, 2010: 12). It is useful to distinguish between the object of terrorist acts and their target. The target refers to those whom terrorism is designed to influence, whereas the object is composed of its victims. In the case of asymmetric warfare, the terrorist actors 112 Tourism is Terrorism by Other Means: The Genesis of Unionization usually want to influence organizational actors by victimizing members of the general populace (Skoll, 2008). Beneath this proposition is that terrorism is psychological warfare whose strengths are fear and intimidation. Black (2004) said that terrorism is a highly moralistic act intended to exert social influence. Terrorist attacks express grievances by aggression. D. Handelman supports this view, explaining that terrorists often defend themselves from a much broader violence, rooted in a supra-structure preceding their acts. As Ghandi said, ¯Poverty is the worst kind of violence. The related self-destruction of terrorism is at least an act of sacrifice, self-sacrifice for others. For Handelman (2013), terrorism is a result of late modernity, and consists of civilians killing other civilians beyond state control. In doing so, travellers are vulnerable simply because they are caught unwary when they fly from one point to other. The technology that characterized the West has been directed against it. If earlier forms of mass violence went from a state to another state, terrorism seems to be in the opposite direction - It relates to the fight of civilians, against other civilians. THE INTERSECTION OF TERRORISM AND TOURISM One might speculate that tourists encourage peace, because they only want to know more of other cultures. They are not conquerors. Moved by curiosity, they provide fertile sources for international understanding, whereas terrorism and other forms of violence represent a serious threat to the hospitality and tourism industries. Several studies focus on the relationship of terrorism and tourism as well as the perceived risks of travellers regarding certain foreign destinations (Somnez, 1998; Weber, 1998; Domínguez, Burguette and Bernard, 2003; Aziz, 1995; Floyd and Pennington-Gray, 2004; Gibson, Pennington -Gray and Thapa, 2003; Kuto and Groves, 2004; Essner, 2003; Araña and León, 2008; Bhattarai, Conway and Shrestha, 2005; Goldblatt and Hu, 2005; Tarlow, 2003; Prideaux, 2005; Yuan, 2005). In fact, tourism has been one of the industries most affected by 113 Tourism and Terrorism terrorist acts. Terrorism determines the way travellers garner information and draw images of their destinations (Peattie, Clarke and Peattie, 2005). Because of their unfamiliarity with the visited destination, travellers and tourists are often targets of diverse crimes. Some terror cells attack tourists with a double message. On one hand, they inflict a sentiment of panic in the public opinion of the victim’s countries of origin. On the other, they undermine the citizenrytrust in state. Of course, any destination combines risk aversion with risk attraction factors. As Lepp and Gibson (2008) put it, this industry seems to be circumscribed by two contrasting tendencies, the sensation or novelty seeking risk and risk aversion. A type of psychology of tourists plays a crucial role in determining the perception of risk. In this regard, West (2008) considers the terrorist attacks in 2003 on Western tourists in Bali. They have been memorialized by the Australian Press as the archetype of heroism, comparing this event with 9/ 11. This means that collective memory and crises are inextricably intertwined in the national discourse. Postmodern nationalisms legitimize travel as a universal benefit to human kind which should be defended at any cost. Similarly, the narrative of terrorism emphasizes that enemies of democracy utilize foreign tourists precisely because of their vulnerability, as acts of cowardice. Bianchi (2007) has argued that tourism revolves around risk perception, which acts as conducive to the interests of some industrialized nations and to the detriment of the periphery. The ongoing state of insecurity created by so-called terrorism corresponds with a political logic of exclusion and discrimination against otherness. The bridge between tourists from the centre and migrant travellers from the periphery has been enlarged. Paradoxically, studies in risk perception themselves threaten the goal of the security they encourage. To what extent does terrorism affect the tourism industry? J.M Castaño (2005) presents the arrival statistics from 2000 to 2003 in some cities that had been targets of terrorist attacks. Questioning the hypothesis that terrorism threatens tourism, he points out that the cities of Mombasa, New York, Madrid, London, 114 Tourism is Terrorism by Other Means: The Genesis of Unionization Bali, and Cairo experienced notable declines in tourism post-attack, but they recovered in a few months. Terrorism may in fact benefit tourism by means of dark tourism—i.e., terrorism tourism. Castaño argues that tourism as a process is reversible. No matter the original impact on public opinion, given some unspecified time-frame, what today generates scare, tomorrow will entice thousands of tourists. Hotel chains and tourist attraction staff become targets of attacks because they symbolize the strength of an economic order that causes resentment and exclusion. If the West is named as the cause of all suffering, this diminishes the responsibilities of local Arab elites to give their support to colonial powers. Of course, Aziz is not wrong when says tourism is rooted in the logic of capitalism. These attacks may be labelled as forms of protests, to be re-read with a new and much broader lens. Grosspietsch (2005) says that under some conditions the acceptance of tourism in tourist receiving countries is troublesome. As a global industry, tourism not only creates a serious economic dependency between centre and periphery, but also paves the way for political instability. Terrorism may flourish in these types of landscapes. As in Aziz‘s argument, he says that tourism triggers terrorism, combining a bundle of negative effects on the socioeconomic fabric. Although his discussion draws on observations from previous decades (Britton, 1982), Grosspietsch provides a fresh conceptual framework to understand the issue. Terrorism does not affect tourism, nor is terrorism a result of economic resentment. Tourism is adopted by underdeveloped economies to enhance their production, excluding some ethnicities and producing resentment resulting in collateral damages. Tourism indeed provides further values to the extent that it changes social relationships. Scholars who say that tourism should be protected from terrorism are misdiagnosing the problem. Human Suffering and Dark Tourism What are the similarities between terrorism and tourism? The sacralisation of certain sites after a terrorist attack or certain battles cans their commodification as sacred places. This aspect might be studied under title of dark tourism (Strange and Kempa, 2003; Miles, 115 Tourism and Terrorism 2002; Stone and Sharpley, 2008; Smith, 2010). If, to some degree, tourism tends to mitigate the effects of wars by converting the employed artefacts into sacred objects to be exhibited in a showcase, in recent times sites related to horror, torture, tragedy, battles, and concentration camps have emerged as prime tourist destinations. They have enhanced human morbidity and sadism as primary forms of consumption. Dark tourism results from commoditization of two aspects: Fear of death and the need to intellectualize contingency and uncertainty. While the human inclination to enjoy the spectacle of suffering and death has found expression across history, little is known in specialized literature about this uncanny fascination (Stone, 2005). Reasons why visitors seek dark tourism as a form of entertainment are manifold: a) it can be considered as a reminiscence of the old fear of phantom during childhood (Dann, 1998), b) or as a new way of intellectualizing the logic of death in West (Stone, 2005), c) as a convergence of four basic emotions related to insecurity, superiority, humility and gratitude (Tarlow, 2005), or even because of d) the advent of social fragmentation characteristic of late capitalism (Rojeck, 1997). Nicole Guidotti Hernandez in her 2011 book Unspeakable Violence, signals the role played by selective memory not only by ignoring some historical facts, in contrast to the status quo, but to protect the founding values of nation states. Violence should be defined as a disciplinary effort to control the body. The concept of nation, integral to the political form, nation-state, is based on a biased and engineered history. The resultant places where mass death has taken place are often commoditized to be sold in forms of tales or tour -guided spectacles (Guidotti-Hernandez, 2011). At the same time, some groups are demonized, others are sacralised. Any museum replicates a tale, fabricated and narrated according to the reigning politicaleconomic interests - i.e., the ruling class. Starting from this premise, Korstanje and Clayton (2012) enumerate some commonalities between tourism and terrorism, previously ignored by specialized literature, such as a) the insensibility for the suffering of others, b) the curiosity for places of mass-death, and c) employment 116 Tourism is Terrorism by Other Means: The Genesis of Unionization of mobile technology and tourist means of transport to perpetrate the attacks. Dark tourism has recently become a buzz-word applied in several studies and papers. Although its original meaning is aimed at denoting curiosity for suffering and mass death, a lot of polemic has grown around this concept. For some scholars, dark tourism seems to be considered only as a way of realizing and reminding people death, memento Mori, an important mechanism of social cohesion, now commercialized by means of tourism and hospitality industries. For others, this phenomenon represents a type of repressed sadism, enrooted in the logic of capitalism and gazedconsumption. Why people are captivated by disaster and suffering of others represents one of the most striking aspects of dark tourism. In recent years, valuable studies have focused on mass death as a form of cultural entertainment for the tourism and hospitality industries, but, little research has emphasized the anthropological roots of dark tourism or Thana-Tourism. More interested in analysing the phenomenon from an industrial managerial perspective, that body of knowledge ignores the role played by the sacralisation of death in the process of anthropomorphism that ultimately ends in exhibiting a place of staged authenticity. This raises the question of how to remind people of the suffering of others. There would be many forms of interpreting such suffering. One approach suggests that the degree of perceived suffering depends on the role of visitors. D.S. Miller (2008) herself experienced the pain of Hurricane Katrina in her native New Orleans. Combining interesting questions about the connection between disaster and tourism with self-ethnography, her development illustrates how the impacts of disasters in communities take a pervasive nature. On one hand it entices outsider tourists who only want to see what is happening, while on the other, it calls for the assistance of a second type of tourist who is interested in helping the obliterated community. If tourism does not want to help but merely to gaze, this glimpse into the harsh reality of New Orleans suggests that poverty and a 117 Tourism and Terrorism historically unfair wealth distribution are problems silenced by the authorities, supported by a complicit tourism industry. Paradoxically, Miller acknowledges that tourism revitalised the local economy in the process of recovery. To some extent, culture plays a pivotal role in the process of giving sense to unfavourable events. Landscapes after a disaster should be reconfigured in order for survivors to adapt their expectations. Visiting sites where martyrs have died deserves the attention of those who were not involved. However, tours are often sold beyond the devastated zone by operators and mediators that ignore the reasons behind the event. Miller argues that her personal role as both a tourist and a native is not necessarily associated with the hedonistic gaze of conventional tourism, suggesting that through her, tourism can be useful for New Orleans to recover the former landscape of the city. At the same time however, it hosts thousands of people who take pictures of the suffering of others. This contradiction paves the ways for misunderstanding. Her intriguing thesis is that tourism as such does not contribute to the spectacle of disaster, but the role of tourists does. Ultimately, if the poverty and racial problems which generated the material asymmetries that facilitated the effects of Katrina are not placed under the lens of scrutiny, the disaster being repeated is only a question of time. From this perspective, dark tourism can be a part of resiliency or a simple discourse for replicating the logic of capital, or maybe both. The importance of heritage sites in tourism literature has been overemphasized, or has been circumscribed to questions related to profits, management, and financial success. Dark tourism invites responses to challenging questions. Why this happens? Could we have prevented a situation like this? Who is responsible for this? Following this, P. Stone developed a new concept around darkness that refers to the spectrum of dark tourism. Varying degrees of darkness come from seven types of dark sites ranging from darkest to lightest. One of the most interesting concepts of Stone´s model seems to be associated with the level of attractiveness of certain places. Some sites are fraught with political ideology determined by 118 Tourism is Terrorism by Other Means: The Genesis of Unionization their location and authenticity. Based on death and suffering, these sites are historical, and provide tourists with a coherent framework for educational goals. Otherwise, there would be other types of sites created for remembering a certain event that has not taken place within the site of the memorial. These sorts of spaces are heritagecentric, and have less associated political ideology. In addition, Stone typifies seven diverse products rooted in the curiosity of death which transmit a set of different messages to society: a) dark fun factories (entertainment based on simulated suffering of others), b) dark exhibitions (learning opportunities), c) dark dungeons (penal codes and reinforcement of law), d) dark resting places (romanticised sites of commemoration), e) dark shrines (secondary or peripheral sites of remembrance for victims, f) dark conflict sites (commodification of battles and wars), and g) dark camps of genocide (sites where genocide has been practiced). Every typology of dark sites encompasses a specific discourse transmitted repeatedly to a wider range of tourists who exhibit variety in their expectations (Stone, 2006). Dark tourism can be seen as the legacy of a thanatopic tradition whose roots cannot yet be determined with accuracy. Some scholars say the current fascination with death stems from the Middle Ages and the tradition of visiting graves and cemeteries during the 18th and 19th centuries (Seaton, 1996, 1999). Other analysts have dwelled on the role played by mass media as the prerequisite for creating tourist spots that concentrate on disasters and human catastrophes (Lennon and Foley, 2000). For some scholars, dark tourism shows a strong dependency on identity and ethnic affiliation, as sites confer a group sentiment of belonging and meaningful experience rooted in heritage and lore (Foley and Lennon, 1996; Seaton, 1996, 1999, 2000; Simone-Charteris and Boyd, 2010; Dann and Seaton, 2001; Conran, 2002). Korstanje and Ivanov explain that tourism serves as an instrument of resiliency to digest the effects of tragedy, and to give a lesson to survivors. Often, the message of disaster is not duly interpreted, which leads communities to repeat the event, whereas, authors suggest dark tourism gives a meaning to what in fact is meaningless. The concept 119 Tourism and Terrorism of dark tourism as an expression of human morbidity is illustrative and important, but false in nature. The problem of tourism as presented here depend not only the commoditization of spaces, but also on the organization of work that leads people to work to consume. To the psychological need to understand what is happening, the market offers its version of reality. This seems to be exactly what dark tourism represents: A reification of capitalist logic by means of disasters. Tim Ingold (2000) says that capitalism has successfully changed the paradigms of the Enlightenment. The capitalist eye forged the myth that leisure ostensibly liberates the workforce from its oppression. Ingold explain that the ideological power of capitalism rested on its efficacy to control and mark goods and workers. The former are marked by the price of exchange, fixed at the market. The latter depends on its capacity to consume the fabricated merchandises. Workers move their resources to fabricate precisely the merchandise they will consume in their free time. Last but not least, Klein portrays a connection between consumption and disasters. From her perspective, capitalism survives by the combination of destruction and new construction. Disasters not only move a lot of resources which otherwise would be immobilized, but also introduce economic policies which would be rejected by lay people if the disaster would have never have taken place. The market responds to new climate events such as Katrina with new opportunities to expand businesses and profits (Klein, 2011). The next section examines how the organization of work has solidified the monopoly by the nation-state of the workforce. Beyond its boundaries, any attack on the modes of production or any event that jeopardizes the material logic of production or consumption is called terrorism, while in the homeland, if resistance is legalized, it receives the name of a strike. Terrorists employ, as Howie (2012) puts it, our own forms of movements, transport and touring not only to create fear, but also to impede the modern logic of consumption and production. One of the aspects that terrified Americans in 9/11 was not the attack as such, but that the affordable technological forms of 120 Tourism is Terrorism by Other Means: The Genesis of Unionization transport were employed as weapons. Therefore, we think work should not escape analysis in the terrorist literature. Once again, anyone who has faced the experience of being stranded at an airport because of workers strikes will understand the similarities between terrorism and strikes. This does not mean that workers are terrorists, but on the contrary, capitalist states constructed the labels to discipline their internal economic life. Further, history is witness to how states erected their walls to protect the circulation of merchandise at the first stage. This poses serious problems of exploitation of workers, many of them influenced by anarchist ideologies, coined in Europe. By their actions on bodies, states closed the circle to impose a specific identity on the rebellious groups. From Anarchism to Unions While now these organizations seem to be legally recognized, the history of worker unions is fraught with violence, death, and blood. Most of them were historically aligned to leftist political movements emerging in Europe, Germany, and Italy. The industrial revolution and industrial capitalism were prerequisite for workers to think in terms of collective organizations. The US American Federation of Labour was founded in 1886. One of their main strengths was the power of negotiation with the owners of capital. James Joll explain that at first anarchists were depicted as dangerous by the ruling class press and the politicians who did their bidding in Gilded Age America. The United States government waged chronic war against unions beginning at the end of the Civil War and continuing until the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt in the 1930s. The first syndicalism that defied the state was labelled as terrorists. These workers professed a non-negotiable fight for oppressed classes, they claimed were being relegated by capitalist aristocracies (Joll, 1979). At the end of WWII the American ruling class achieved a double capitulation domestically and abroad. The famous Marshall Plan worked as a catalyst to undermine the ever-growing worker demands in Europe, while the CIA consorted with gangsters and former Nazis and Fascists to subvert and terrorize workers, their unions, and their political parties (Ganser, 2005; Kurkul, 1997). At 121 Tourism and Terrorism the same time, legislation such as the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act restricted the political activities of unions and blunted workers only weapon against exploitation - the strike. The problem of communism seems not to be the anticapitalism values it represents, but its potential effects on workers, a threatening influence that would jeopardize the American economy (Robin, 2009; Skoll and Korstanje, 2013). Skoll argues that the function of state is to maintain the hierarchical status quo by exerting power and violence over populations. In times of low conflict, the legitimacy of the state rests on the market which confers certain stability. In the context of relative chaos and disorder the state resorts to violence to re-establish the threatened order. Similarly, the market mediates among human beings by imposing a state of gratification in lieu of constraints, but the moment the control weakens, fear replaces gratification as motivator to legitimize the ruling order (Skoll, 2007). The United States historically developed a Red Scare not because of the anticapitalist values of communism, but primarily for its effects on workers. Communism was not just a reaction to the accumulation of capital by the bourgeoisie, but it also gave workers a consciousness, a discourse to guide their fight. The first anarchists and communist migrants monitored and jailed by many states contributed to the formation of worker unions. States rejected the aliens but accepted and reorganized their ideas in a manner suitable to the long term interests of capital and the ruling class. Capitalist societies domesticated the dangerous lessons of Marx in two different ways: By creating a wide sentiment of fear of communism and by reorganizing the discipline of workers to the capitalist state (Skoll and Korstanje, 2013). J. Joll (1979) traces the roots of anarchism to the text of Godwin, Blanc, Proudhon and Bakunin. Their criticism against the state and the hegemony of law paved the way for the advent of a new movement, which postulated the egalitarian nature of human beings. One of the most troubling aspects of states is that many groups are subjugated under its unique power - its monopoly of force. By reducing government to only small units, formed by families, the 122 Tourism is Terrorism by Other Means: The Genesis of Unionization anarchists thought the problem of asymmetries would be resolved. Joll adds that anarchism came from the advance of capitalism and industrial organization. Centred on the premise that production should be based on the work, and not loans, countries as Russia, Germany, and Italy witnessed the upsurge of a new movement that takes from worker discontents its own strength. While Marx argued foregalitarianism as a result of the class struggle and mass movements, anarchism envisaged a revolution that should start as soon as possible. Anarchists worked hard for their ideas to be adopted in Europe, Latin America, and the United States to organize the workers. Some of their ideas were of paramount importance in forging a consciousness among worker in capitalist societies, but some of them were used by radical groups to perpetrate violent acts, a few of which led to bystanders deaths and injuries. Others took the form of assassinations of ruling class leaders. These acts, deemed terrorism, served the state by giving a rationale to ban anarchist activity. Although the workers adopted the discourses of anarchists to make sense of their struggles against capital holders, states labelled strikers as anarchists bent on destroying public order. Eventually states recognized unions as legitimate, but in the United States not until the 1935 Wagner Act. In Russia, some anarchists opted to conduct the revolution within trade unions, while others preferred to spend their time in forming the local communes. Joll (1972: 166) goes on to admit that. The anarchists, too, were divided among themselves; some were anarcho-syndicalists and placed their hope of revolution in the action of the worker unions which would take over the factories. Others were communist anarchists and disciples of Kropotkin, who saw social revolution coming about through the formation of local communes which would then join in a federation. While both fought a common enemy, anarchists and communists worked together to defeat the monarchy, but once consolidated in power, the Bolsheviks jailed intellectuals who sympathized with anarchism. In Ukraine, the anarchist guerrilla army was so strong to have existed over two years. Of course, at the time, some 123 Tourism and Terrorism intellectuals accepted communism by directing their efforts to improve the labour condition of workers, others plunged into terrorism. The failure of anarchism in Russia pushed many intellectuals to other countries as United States, Argentina, and Brazil, where they worked hard to organize workers. By about 1920, these countries were facing an industrial stage, accelerated by the mass migrations from Europe initiated in the former century. Anarchism found a new basis for their claims, beyond the acts of terrorism. Even though the first strikes were bloody and violent, with the passing of years anarcho-syndicalists were legally accepted in societies which not only needed the masses to work, but also sublimated their protests into reified forms of negotiation that for better or worse accelerated the reproduction of capital. Their formerly attributed terrorism was commoditized into negotiations and legally circumscribed strikes. The archetype of revolution, the general strike, was occasionally employed in the fight against bosses and capital owners. General strikes held by workers became the epicentre for future benefits to the work force. States exerted their disciplinary force to exterminate terrorist anarchists, who rejected joining the union organized workers. The working class gave their loyalties to nation states no matter the side they took during the war. Two world wars accelerated not only the reproduction of capitalism, but disciplined anarcho-syndicalism almost to its disappearance. Joll (1979) explain that anarchism indeed did not disappear, but changed into new forms. History shows that worker unions and terrorism were inextricably intertwined. If tourism continued the logic of labour by other means - as a form of entertainment, alienation or escape we must accept that the terrorist mind-set has survived in syndicalism. Therefore, we do not hesitate to state that tourism is terrorism by other means. Let us remind readers that modern tourism surfaced by the combination of two contrasting tendencies: The technological advances and invention of new machines that shortened the points of connection, and the wage benefits or working hour reduction, proposed by syndicalist. In this respect, modern tourism 124 Tourism is Terrorism by Other Means: The Genesis of Unionization would not be possible without the direct intervention of the first anarchists, most of them labelled as terrorists. To the extent that a strike is considered a legal mechanism to present certain claims, while terrorist attacks are discouraged, seems to be a matter that specialists do not examine properly. A closer view reveals that there are similar processes in both, a strike and terrorism. As the vaccine is the inoculated virus to strengthen the body immune system, strikes are processes of dissent and discord that mitigate the negative effects of conflict. After all, strikes are merely the collective effects of workers withholding their labour. There is nothing violent or threatening about them, except to those who depend on other people work to sustain themselves—i.e., the owners of capital. In their struggle with workers, the ruling class uses as one if its weapons the construal of strikes as taking consumers as hostages. Whenever passengers are stranded at an airport or train stations because of problems between owners and unions, the sense of urgency facilitates the demands of the stronger ones. Businesses and terrorism organizations are not concerned about the vulnerability or needs of passengers. The latter are manipulated as means for achieving certain goals. In a world designed to create and satisfy psychological desires, consumers as holders of money, are of paramount importance for stability of the system. The threat to consumers and the derived economic loses are enough to dissuade owners from the worker‘s claims. In these types of processes, typified by law, the State not only makes interventions, mediating between both actors but also is often in charge of leading negotiations. If negotiations fail, the state may use its armed might to force workers back to their jobs. An early historical example is the great rail strike of 1877 when federal troops were withdrawn from the occupied former Confederacy to kill strikers who had been terrorizing the mass of rail workers, to end the strike. In doing so, first anarchists opted for terrorist acts, until they were disciplined by states. Once this happened, their forms of violence were mutated to another more symbolic way of protest, the strike. Capitalism owes much to worker unions, more than thought. Whatever the case may 125 Tourism and Terrorism be, the resultant tourism has extended around the globe (Naisbitt, 1995), as the wellbeing of industrial societies has advanced. The evolution of tourism, as a mass industry, came from a combination of economic factors, much encouraged by worker unions, such as working hour reduction and a rise in wages. However, history, and in particular the history of tourism ignores the burden industrialism and technological advances brought for workers. Anarchism not only flourished in industrial contexts, exploiting the worker resentment against owners, but also improved their working conditions. An example of how this is manifest in a positive way is where the Thomas Cook Agency supported travellers who suffered from alcoholism. Pre -paid all-inclusive vouchers were provided for alcoholics who do not handle money (Santos-Filho, 2008; Korstanje, 2011a,b). Industrial societies pave the way for expanding trade in the world, in which tourism plays a crucial role, in addition, domestic workers are subject to conditions of exploitation. If anarchism introduced poverty relief in industrial societies, these virulent ideas were not accepted until they were changed to ways acceptable to the state and ruling class. From the ideals of bloody revolution, European societies moved to develop working class organizations - unions and political parties. This is the reason why we argue that tourism indirectly resulted from terrorism. Violence exerted by the anarchists was not enough to change the society, or at least its ways of productions, but their ideas not only inspired many artists, they also influenced many syndicalist leaders (Joll, 1979). The history of pioneers in anarchism shows us two relevant aspects. First and foremost, states create their boundaries as a barrier to protect their economies. What inside can be called strike, beyond is labelled as terrorist attack. Secondly, terrorists, most of them educated in the best Western universities learned our tactics of negotiations, strategies of exploitation and thus progressed to more violent forms of expression. What happens in strikes at airports when thousands of tourists are stranded? First, they are not stranded. They can leave the airport and reschedule their flights, as they are forced to do regularly due to weather and 126 Tourism is Terrorism by Other Means: The Genesis of Unionization other intervening events about which airlines refuse responsibility toward their customers. The company’s response is simple. They characterize workers as taking hostages, the tourists, because they represent the owners of capital. Although the degree of violence is minimized, sometimes, in these types of circumstances, it is important to discuss that worker unions conduct their claims by the introduction of speculation and actions, affecting not only the touristsystem but the whole economy. Employers, and the ruling class as a whole, blame unions for the predictable consequences of their own exploitation of both workers and consumers - in other words the masses. Conclusions Tourists are intertwined with terrorism because they are part and parcel of world capitalism and Western imperialism (Korstanje, 2011b). Sometimes tourists are attacked by dissident groups as a means to affect national policies. More often, tourists and the tourism industries act as logistical agents in deploying capital exploitation and imperial control. When tourists suffer harm, socalled terrorists (dissidents) get the blame. At first glance, tourists are workers who earned their money enabling a pact with a third person (owner). Their power of consumption situates them as privileged actors of the tourist system. They target not only to strike, in their homeland, but also terrorist attacks abroad. Nonetheless, if tourism has been expanded by the advance of industrialism, changed by the conditions of labour and the related first anarchists, whose acts of violence were not successful, it is relatively easy to envisage the possibility of organizing the masses, to create worker associations. The original violence mutated to a subtler form of struggle based on the similar characteristics, the need for hostages, media support, speculation and the appeal to surprise factor. These forms of negotiation were not only learned by terrorists, but also applied in their respective countries to civilian targets, often international tourists. Therefore, we strongly believe that terrorism as it is portrayed in the media is inextricably intertwined with tourism. Tourism is the disciplined expression of terrorism. 127 Tourism and Terrorism 6 WHY WE ARE OBSESSED BY OTHERS‘ DEATH INTRODUCTION Long time ago, Claude Levi-Strauss (1968) thematised on the epistemology of anthropology and social sciences, which confused the dissociation between observable world and structure. For his view, ethnologists were accustomed to see, hear and write what their senses captivate from visited fieldwork, but this was not enough to configure a scientific spectrum of social issues. Structuralism has taught us to find the function of institutions (beyond the eyes of history). His concerns were aimed at deciphering the inconsistencies of phenomenology and ethno-methodology, which have serious problems to explain the dissociation between what people do and say. We often follow some habit though we are not conscious of why we make the things. In the same dichotomy remains still the investigation in dark tourism to date. Valuable research has advanced over years on the elements that form dark tourism as a social expression as well as the interests of tourists to visit these sites (Foley and Lennon, 1996; Seaton, 1996; Miles, 2002; Strange and Kempa, 2003; Wight, 2006; Jamal and Lelo, 2008; Robb, 2009; Stone and Sharpley, 2008; Sharpley, 2005; Stone, 128 Why We are Obsessed by Others’ Death 2012; Kang et al., 2012), but they put too much attention to the perception of tourists instead of valorizing other methodologies. Similarly to opinion polls which constitute an instrument to know consumer’s assets and preferences, these studies emphasized on the problem of tourist´s cravings as a factor of engagement with the fictionalized sites. In view of that, authenticity plays a crucial to boost attractiveness of destinations. Underpinned in the proposition that tourists are valid sources of empirical information, researchers criticize any attempt to construct conceptual model, as a speculative or philosophical approach (Korstanje, 2011b). As a result, the bibliography which explores dark tourism issues is based on mere descriptions that fail to articulate an all-encompassing theory. What are the limits of perception?. On another hand, the use of ICTs to emulate virtual landscapes have added polemic to the debate to what an extent dark tourism is ethical or not, as well as a clear explanation of our strange fascination for death. This text intends to explore the anthropological roots of dark tourism to find an all-embracing model that improve the current understanding of the issue. Our thesis, rather than current conceptual studies published at the most prestigious tourism-led journals, is that dark tourism represents a postmodern attempt to reverse the social function of death, weakening the social bond by the introduction of a sentiment of superiority. At this stage, technology and virtuality accelerate the dependency of self to other´s suffering creating a vicious circle that empirical research has not revealed. Philosophically speaking, it is safe to say from its birth, the man is dying. This means the man comes to this world from and to death. By reminding this seems to be a tactic to deter the process of corruption. UNDERSTANDING DEATH Thanatology has shed the light on human interpretation and the degree of acceptance to death. Religion and religiosity are 129 Tourism and Terrorism mechanisms that pose human beings before their death. It is hypothesized that secular societies struggle to expand the life by the neglect of afterlife (Bardis, 1981, 1986). Over years, sociologists have showed how pour people, who are subject to more material deprivation than rich ones, experience further hopes in death (Korstanje, 2006). As the previous backdrop, Bardis (1986) collated enough evidence to confirm that blacks developed a further acceptance to death than whites. Besides, residents in mega-cities are less incline to think in their deaths than inhabitants of rural areas. At some extent, religiosity and economy are inextricably intertwined. The German philosopher F. Feuerbach acknowledged not only the reflexibility of religion but also questioned to what an extent human beings project their deprivation towards the archetype of gods. After all, “religion is an act of reflection, a self reflection about the essence of humanity: god is for man the sublimation of their sensations and ideas as the reminder in the lived ones” (Feuerbach, IV). His conclusions are based on the historical anthropomorphizing of death. By counter-balancing their own deprivations, societies construct an archetype of divine world which is at odds of real life. Pour societies are prone to believe in omnipotence Gods, who offer in afterlife a plenty of exquisite delicacies and imaginable comforts. In this vein, Johann Huizinga (1993) reported that middleages laid much stress on the archetype of death. It not only represented the decay of life, but also woke up a primitive fear. If the daily life was determined by cruelty, conspirators and corruptions, the community constructed some ideal types in order for social bondage to be tied. Similarly to a psychological mechanism of defence, chivalry, love and honour served to give hope to peasants who were more oppressed by their lords. In this context, the idea of death alluded to the imaginary of sacredness. The putrefaction of the body was common for lay people but not sacred persons, bishops, or saints. The proximity to these personages was a sign of religious devotion. 130 Why We are Obsessed by Others’ Death Pilgrimages were not a spectacle at these times, but a need to be close to the chosen by God. By the decline of medieval times, as never before, exhibited a strange trend, this means the description and portrait of death. Hans Belting (2007) explain that death and image are historically intertwined. Whenever the king by natural decay or any motive, was unable to make personal appearance, many monarchies symbolized his presence by a mask or a subrogate body. The represented image of the king not only re-constructed the hierarchy of society at risk of disappearance, but also exhibited the nature of politics. Any image is a ways of sublimating death. One of the founding fathers of social anthropology, Bronislaw Malinowski, who explored the performance of rites in Melanesia, acknowledged that death represented an archaic problem for humankind. Survivors that are suddenly surprised by the other’s death, face greater degree of uncertainty because nobody knows who the next one is. To reduce the resulted anxiety, they construct a monument to remind the event. The mourning process is opened when come into being two sentiments, fear and pain, and closed at time these two emotions are balanced (Malinowski, 1948). In respect to this, Phillipe Aries (1975) contended that the secularization has expanded the boundaries of the life expectative but paradoxically uncovered the wilderness of death. In middle times, death was elsewhere and for that people were accustomed to die. Its nature was disciplined by religion, arts, science and many other institutions. Now, the problem lies the mortality rate was diminished but death terrifies the society. As Derek S. Jeffreys put it, this happens because we experience two types of different times. One and the most accepted, is the time of our life. We are often familiar with our condition facing diverse shifts which do not alter our identity. The passing of days expresses a time which is chronologically explainable. But a second typology of time threatens our existence. To explain this better suppose that one’s relative dies, this dramatic 131 Tourism and Terrorism event exhibits the vulnerability of my own existence. We, human beings, make institutions to give a valid response to the problems of life, but the enemy, Jeffreys adds, is our staunch enemy (Jeffreys, 2013). The dismantling of communism has serious effects for local economies so that capitalism has been adopted by the whole countries. Based on a limited control over business by states, investors have selected peripheral countries with lower costs to enhance their profits. Undoubtedly, this resulted in a combination of cost-benefits searches that led workers to limited job security system. The globalization encouraged a climate of extreme competition for workers. Being out of this competition means death (Gottdiener, 1994). In this respect, Richard Hofstadter (1992) acknowledged that one of the primary aspects that determined by competition and the spirit for entrepreneurs in US were the adoption of social Darwinism per the view of authors as Asa Gray, Graham Sumner and Herbert Spencer. This biological theory postulated two significant axioms which reinforced the sentiment of exceptionalism inherited in the founding parents of nation. The first was the “survival of fittest”, the second was the “social determinism”. In a brilliant argument, Hofstadter argues that the legitimacy of law to ensure the equality of all citizens was not sufficient to explain why some actors are success while others falls in ruins. As a supra-organism, the social structure overrides the interpretation of law. To evolve in a better stage, the society should accept the struggle for survival as the primary cultural value. The social advance depends on the wealth heritage one generation can pass to another. In this view, “primitive man, who long ago withdrew from the competitive struggle and ceased to accumulate capital goods, must pay with a backward and unenlightened way of life” (p. 58). Millionaires are not resulted from the greed or avarice, but from the evolution of natural selection. They have been selected by their strengths, tested in their success in business, and abilities to achieve adaptation to environment. 132 Why We are Obsessed by Others’ Death Rather, others have been relegated to occupy pour conditions of existence or to disappear. Because of social Darwinism was a doctrine originally adopted by some religious waves, not only Sumner but Gray alarmed on the negative effects of leaving the pour without assistance. At a closer look, Calvinist and other protestant circle emphasized on the hostility of the environment as a proof of faith. This belief suggests that man evolves in a conflictive and dangerous world. Secondly, the archetype of uphill city which holds the selected people exerted considerable influence to delineate the roots of labour. Being success, for Americans, was more than important to ensure one is part of selected by God. At a surface, this is not pretty different in what social Darwinism claims (Hofstadter, 1992). In light of the discussion, Zygmunt Bauman clarified the problem of death in his books Consuming life and Liquid Fear. The capitalist ethos has changed the mind of citizens, who passed being part of the production machinery. As commodities, workers are exploited to congeal the mass-consumption encouraged by capitalism. The big brother is an example how people enter in competence, as commodities, to be selected and bought by others. Participants in this reality show know that only one will win, and the rest will die. Big Brother, for Bauman, emulates the life in capitalist societies which enhance the style of life of few by producing pauperization for the whole. The modern state set the pace to the advent of liberal market to monopolize the sense of security for people. This does not mean that states are unable to keep the security, but also the market is re-channelling the consumption by the imposition of fear. If human disasters as Katrina show the pervasive nature of capitalism which abandoned thousands of pour citizens to death, no less truth is that the “show of disaster” unbinds of responsibilities for the event. The sense of catastrophe, like death, serves to cover the inhuman nature of capitalism (Bauman, 2007, 2008). This society only has an answer to crisis, when its economic system is at risk. Since the real reason for disaster are ignored by the allegory of death, which persisted in 133 Tourism and Terrorism the media and famous TV series where technicians and forensic experts look to solve the crime, the disaster comes sooner or later (Bauman, 2011). What we really know on the real causes of Auschwitz or 9/11?, may a simple museum explain us the complexity of human nature?. Bauman will say, absolutely not. Any attempt to sacralise the dying as a spectacle, at the bottom, represents the prelude of its neglect. Last but not least, Korstanje (2013a) understands that the “process of museification” has direct connection to war-fare and violence. At a first look, wars not only are important for societies, but also appeal to a vital ethno-genesis as mechanism of social relation. The fictionalization of pain and death, as well as the necessary weapons employed in the battles are part of museums. At these shrines, which today have replaced to old religious temples, the society stores a lot of objects, instruments, even weapons aimed to enhance the national pride. Museums represent a profound signification (emulation) of wars and suffering. Revolts, riots and radical revolutions end at a museum. One of the aspects that have facilitated the expansion of capitalism rested on the efficacy to recycle the human symbols. Not surprisingly, museums are built as a reminder of war, which comes from a fabricated story to be socialized to others. The experiences these spaces generate are politically constructed to deter violence and conflict. Museums allude to the construction of a mythical history to reinforce the founding values of society. Nobody would feel anymore the suffering an inmate of Auschwitz. If genocide museums exist, they are aimed at emplacing the values of democracy and tolerance. Auschwitz did not say much on the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki as well as the violation of human rights perpetrated by American government in its history. As Nicole Guidotti Hernandez (2011) put it, there is not good or bad histories, human beings did the same along with the passing of years. Each civilization reminds the wilderness of others, but do not pay attention to its own forms of extreme violence. To the classical forms 134 Why We are Obsessed by Others’ Death of violence exerted by states, there is another subtle unspeakable one which consists in covering the real statement of fact. In America, the power of states to discipline the bodies of aborigines depended not only on their strength but their capacity to create a story, which politically manipulated, helped to their citizens to embrace the founding values of a silenced genocide. THE EPICENTRE OF DARK TOURISM Dark tourism has woken up a hot debate in recent years. While some experts have focused attention to the phenomenon as a sign of cultural entertainment based on a repressed sadism (Bloom, 2000; Baudrillard, 1996, 2006; Koch, 2005), others emphasized in the mediated nature of tourism so that visitors may understand their own death (Lennon and Folley, 2000; Miles, 2002; Stone and Sharpley, 2008). Dark-tourism sites denote territories where massdeath or suffering have determined the identity of a community but no less true is that under some conditions these sites are commoditized to sell the other´s death as a product (Poria, 2007; Chauhan and Khanna, 2009). In this token, Stone and Sharpley (2008) warn on the needs of defining dark tourism form other similar issues. The curiosity or fascination of death seems to be one of the aspects that define Thana-Tourism, or dark tourism. But it is important not to lose the sight how these experiences are framed under shared values that tightens the social bondage (Stone and Sharpley, 2008). Dark tourism may be defined as a pilgrimage or an experience but what seems to be important to remind is that it can be an attempt to contemplate death of the self, by sightseeing the other dead (Stone, 2012). Applied-research in these types of issues is merely descriptive than explanatory. Biran, Poria and Oren (2011) claimed that the specialized literature has some problems to explain the roots of thanaptosis, simply because these studies are not based in empirical 135 Tourism and Terrorism evidence. Like heritage-seekers, dark-site visitors like to expand their current understanding of history. The epistemological limitations of research are given by the ignorance of site-interpretation experienced by tourists or visitors. To study the motivation of dark-seekers one might ask to reconstruct the subject experience. At a closer look, dark tourism not only entails fascination for death as a primary reason of attraction but a quest for authentic experiences. The experiential approach catches the evolution of experience at diverse stages, as well as the combination with the symbolic resource of subject interpretation. E.H. Cohen (2011) has explained that dark tourism serves as an educational instrument which gives a message to society. The meaning conferred to territory plays a vital role at this stage. Visitors tend to think as authentic those sites where the memorized event took room. Instead, whether museums or shrines are built on allegorical reasons in sites that nothing has to do with the founding trauma, they are pondered as inauthentic. Cohen’s outcomes not only reveal the political root of dark tourism, but also the importance of location whenever the self encounters with tragedy. There is a large spectrum of dark tourism products’ Stone (2006) explain that some sites offer darker products than others depending on the degree of suffering. Each subtype can be framed into a spectrum of dark suppliers. To cut the long story short, this essay review suggest that dark fun factories present a fictionalized death perceived as less authentic than Auschwitz museum. At time tourism is embraced as a main industry, the experiences for visitors become more naïve. In respective to this, Raine devoted considerable time to validate Stone´s hypothesis to empirical fieldwork. She contends that the fascination for death may be operationalized in variables which range from lightest to darkest spectrum. Visitors take diverse attitudes to dark tourism sites (Raine, 2013) It is often assumed that dark tourism sites exhibit spaces of great pain. To what an extent these spaces are conducive to a spectacle of horror, as some sociologists put it, is one of the themes that remain 136 Why We are Obsessed by Others’ Death unresolved. Detractors of dark tourism have criticized the fact that suffering should not be commercialized. Recent investigation has posed the question on the economic nature of dark tourism. At the late modernity, the post-industrial societies, far from correcting the problems that led to disaster, recycle the obliterated space to introduce new business and building infrastructure. Affected families not only are not economically assisted, but also are pressed to live to the peripheries of the city. Death and mass-suffering seem to be employed to reinforce the pillars of capitalism. At this stage, tourism is conducive to logic of exploitation where death is the primary resource of attractiveness. Particularly, this makes tourism a more than resilient industry (Korstanje and Clayton, 2012; Klein, 2007; Korstanje, 2011a; Tarlow and Korstanje, 2013b; Verma and Jain, 2013). In an early study, M. Korstanje and S. Ivanov (2012) delineate a strong connection between dark tourism with psychological resilience developed by a community to overcome adversities. Any disaster or trauma not only gives a lesson to survivors and their community, but also re-structures the politics of community. The function of dark tourism consists in situating death within the human understanding of past, present and future. Death generates substantial changes in the life of survivors. The community, which faced disasters or extreme pain, runs serious risk of disintegration, unless a much profound sentiment of pride is developed. To be united, the society alludes to find reasons that explain the disaster. Dark tourism is conducive to that end. In this token, L. White and E. Frew (2013) compile a book formed by 19 good investigations which are very difficult to discuss in a limited manuscript like this, but all them are aimed at the following axiom. Dark tourism sites are politically designed to express a message to community. Victims and their families not only have diverse ways of negotiating that message but also by appropriating an interpretation of social trauma. Dark tourism alludes to a psychological need of figuring one death by imagining the other´s 137 Tourism and Terrorism death. Nonetheless, the myopia of scholars to understand dark tourism rests on two primary aspects. There are no clear boundaries or indicators to mark a unified site of memory which cannot be subject to political struggle. Secondly, starting from the premise heritage depends on the political interests, sometimes the national discourse around dark sites are not accepted one side of community. In perspective, Sather Wagstaff (2011) presents an original thesis based on her auto-ethnography in the ground-zero of New York. Dark tourism sites wake up sentiment of loss and mourning. The problem rests in the way we define that loss. What is dark tourism? And how it can be defined?. The self mediates between its memory and future by the introduction of reminder. Dark tourism shrine is a form of reminding a paining event. The appearance of death is not only irreversible, but also inevitable. Visitors are needed to feel what other felt, though those emotions are unauthentic. From Hiroshima to World Trade Centre, she acknowledges that disasters should tell a story that helps control the trauma or sense of loss. The solidarity conferred to US by the terrorist attack to New York was a clear example of how people are united in context of uncertainty. Death has the function to strengthen the social bond. Some peripheral nations which are unfamiliar with the American way conferred their trust to U.S because 9/11 fabricated shared experiences to other states which can experience a similar situation in the future. To what an extent, the discourse never reveals the cause of events, nor its social conjuncture. It is not surprisingly that tourists visit sites without knowing the real history; they are in part alienated by the heritage. By introducing the human suffering, dark tourism breaks the influence of ideology. Rather dark tourism, heritage imposes a onesided argument created externally to dissuade consumers to adopt governmental policies otherwise would be rejected. Heritage often follows to politics roots. The pain is the only way of understanding the other. It enables our natural capacity toward empathy. Death wakes up the society from its slumber creating the conditions to adopt 138 Why We are Obsessed by Others’ Death substantial changes. Emotions not only do not accept national boundaries but questions the ethnocentrism given by heritage. As Sather Wagstaff put it, “Sites of historical and cultural importance that represent violent events are particularly prone to a social misunderstanding about their emergence; it is believed that they have come into existence only through the events that take place at particular location: war results in battlefields, genocides produce mass graves, the assassination site of a political leader delineates a national sacred place. However, historical commemorative places are not made as important sites simply because of the events that may physically mark them as distinct places through bloodshed or the destruction of building or landscapes. These places are made through ongoing human practices in time and I argue, across multiple spaces and places” (p. 47). Ground-zero exhibits two important aspects which merit to be discussed. Its symbolic hole is filled by the conflicts of involving actors, which range from politicians, families, neighbours and investors. All them struggle to impose their own discourse about 9/11. Sooner or later, stronger stakeholders will monopolize the interpretation of the event in view of their own interests. In this context, Sather Wagstaff adds, tourists are proactive agents to produce meaning beyond the monopoly of political control. Epistemologically speaking, research in dark tourism has some problems to dissociate interpretation from perception. Besides, studies allude to the voice of tourists as the only agent capable to understand what is happening with the approached issue. Social anthropology has yet acknowledged the problem of positivism to think the truth as an objective reality which can be reached by asking to people alone. If we do not validate our hypotheses with rich information, they run the risk to be false (Korstanje, 2014a,b). The problem lies by paying exaggerated attention to what tourists say, we can be led to wrong conclusions. On one hand, sometimes 139 Tourism and Terrorism consulted persons lie, or other they want to exaggerate their emotions. Furthermore, there is a clear dissociation between what people do and say. It is clear how under some circumstance, interviewees do not know the reasons of their feelings or are unable to explain their own behaviour (Korstanje, 2011b; Korstanje, 2014a,b). We remember in one of my fieldwork in the Cromañón sanctuary, a teenager came to me one day to explain me further on the problem We was investigating. I accepted his invitation assuming he had much to say. The interview lasted roughly 5 hours and was taperecorded. The information we obtained from this young was very important for me at a preliminary stage. Nonetheless, with the passing of months we have advanced my ethnography comparing the collated information by what I can hear and see. Not only we realized that the original interview was completely false, because the involved key-informant wanted to attract attention and exaggerated his stories, but he felt the needs to tell something to me. The importance of this story was not determined by its credibility. He had not lost anyone in the disaster of Cromañon, though developed a strange attachment for the event, for the other´s suffering. This empathy led him to alter his sense of reality. Paradoxically, although this interview was a fake, it underpinned the main hypotheses in my research opening the doors to new cosmologies and opportunities to be empirically validated. This story though false shed light on my investigation. In tourism fields, like many other managerial disciplines as marketing or management, persons are importance sources of information, simply because they are consumers. Nor businessrelated research neither managerial literature is interested in searching the truth, but also to incorporate valid and efficient plans of sales enhancement. It is unfortunate that tourism has a strong legacy of these pseudo-scientific disciplines where the speeches of consulted respondents have vital value for developing plans of commercialization. Further interested in improving the profit and 140 Why We are Obsessed by Others’ Death business of dark sites, instead understanding the roots of death, much research has fallen into overt simplifications of what consumers feel or simply perceive. But things can come worse to worst, in recent decades the cyberspace and technology has emptied out the anthropological spaces of negotiations. Today, the relationships are bolstered through a cyber-reality. Death is being experienced by many ways, which escape from the traditional visit to real spaces. Many cybernauts visit virtual pages specially designed and programmed by families to experience the suffering of others, like a dark-site. By a simple click, persons can access to web-pages related to dark “virtual” spaces. This leads to re-think the problem of dark tourism in view of a new context. VIRTUAL DARK TOURISM It is safe to say that the life in the world of our grand-fathers was pretty different to present times. Travels were planned and made not only involving a real displacement but also in weeks. The highdegree of mobility introduced by the last tech-revolution shortened the distances and times (Urry, 2007; Sheller and Urry, 2004; Korstanje and Tarlow, 2012; Vannini, 2012; Tzanelli, 2014a,b). The same technology paved the ways for the advance of a new virtual world, where even travels are made through cyberspace. Although, few academic studies have focused on this issue, virtual-touring represents a common practice in post-industrial societies. In specific terms, virtual tour seems to be a “simulation” generated by special software, where the user meets with fictitious landscapes or pictures taken by other visitors of real landscapes. The experience of this, though it is manipulated by the multimedia, is authentic by many persons. Is this new phenomenon a sign of our irreversible alienation or a new way of escapement without moving?. As this backdrop, Kaelber contends that trauma-scape if hard to access physically can be encouraged through virtual world. These 141 Tourism and Terrorism forms of access can be of three types, tourism on-line, online-tourism and virtual tourism. Whereas tourism on-line limits to provide complementary information that couples to a real travel such as brochures, online tourism is characterized by the emotions surfaced after a virtualized snapshot which is based on a real site. Galleries often portray a set of pictures enrooted in certain territory. Lastly, virtual tourism is fully constructed and reconstructed in cyberspace. The last one subtype is unique in many forms (Kaelber, 2007). The confusion as to what dark tourism may be or not authentic rests on shaky foundations. Death is symbolically appropriated by the self from different ways. Dark tourism exhibits a pathway to interpreting death among many others else. The fascination of understanding death is enrooted in the core of industrial society. To set an example, TV programs, journalists, and TV series dedicated to cover murders work, like dark tourism, as disciplinary mechanism to control the other death. It is unfortunate that the concept of “thanaptosis” was misunderstood by some tourism scholars as Seaton or Sharpley. As stated on the introductory chapter, the word was originally coined by the American poet William Cullen Bryant (1817) to denote the needs of anticipating the own death through the eyes of others. Those who have read this poem will agree that other deaths make us feel better because we avoided temporarily our end. At time we want to retain life, we are suffering because death is inevitable. To overcome this existential obstacle, we have to listen to “nature”. Our death is a vital process in the transformation of life cycle in the earth. To be more precise, Bryant alludes to “thanaptosis” as the happiness for life, which only is possible at time of accepting owndeath. This does not mean or explain the current fascination for other’s death since “Thanaptosis” represents a pantheist concept of evolution. This is the opposite how Sharpley, Lennon and Seaton and British school understand what thanaptosis is. This poses two questions, how we may explain our current fascination for death?, and to what an extent virtual dark tourism is ethical?. 142 Why We are Obsessed by Others’ Death CAPITALISM AND FASCINATION FOR DEATH George H Mead, one of the fathers of symbolic interactionism, questioned why paradoxically many people are prone to read or listen of bad news presented by journalism, at the time they show preference by these types of news. What is our fascination for other’s suffering?. He assertively concludes that the self is configured by its interaction with others. This social dialectic alludes to anticipation and interpretation as two pillars of communication-process. The self feels happiness by other’s suffering, because it represents a rite necessary to avoid or think in own pain. Starting from the premise the self is morally obliged to assist the other to reinforce its sentiment of superiority, Mead adds, this is the ethical nature of social relationship (Mead, 2009). The same remarks may apply for dark tourism shrines. To understand this, we have to come into the myths of Noah and salvation of the world in Christianity, oddly the exploration of tragedy for our cosmology. This legend tells us that God annoyed by the corruption of human beings, mandated to Noah to construct an ark. His divine mission consisted in gathering a pair by specie to achieve the preservation of natural life. The world was destroyed by a great flood. At a first glance, as the myth was ethically formulated, a formal message is based on the importance of nature and the problem of sin, corruption. But unconsciously, it poses the dilemma of competition. At any tournament or game, there can be only one winner. Not only the creation but also Noah is witness of other’s death, other’s mass-death. The curiosity and fascination for death comes from this founding myth. It can be observed in plays, where only one will be the winner. Even, the big brother who was widely studied by sociologists and detractors of visual technology rests on this principle. Only few are the selected ones to live forever. The doctrine of salvation, which is based Protestantism and Catholicism, claims for (though in diverse ways) understanding death. In dark tourism experience as Stone put it, we find similar condition of 143 Tourism and Terrorism exploitation. The other interpreted death reminds us that we, the survivors, are in the race and the main thing is to finish. ¿what is the difference between a dark tourism site, and the medieval pilgrims to touch Saint’s tombs?. In medieval times, as earlier discussed, death was present in almost all institutions, representation of the daily life but paradoxically, pilgrims may not be equalled to dark tourism sites by many reasons. Unlike modern sight-seers, medieval travellers move to sacred sites looking two important aspects to redeem their sins, forgiveness or the mediation of Saints to negotiate with God, a solution to their pains or big troubles. Although venerated, for medieval traveller’s death was not a problem like modern tourists, but also the beginning for a new better life. In this respect, dark tourism exhibits the opposite dynamic. “Secular tourists” are not interested in the life of others, nor in their heritage, or biography. They want to avoid their own death. The specialized bibliography focuses on those modern tourists understand death through the lens of others. Rather, our thesis goes in opposite direction. Tourists exorcise death ritualizing other’s death to expand their own life expectances. Michel Foucault and Biopolitics have explained brilliantly how this works. Based on the example of Nazism, Foucault said that Biopolitics is derived from the concept of “bio-power”, which plays a pervasive role because on one hand it expands the life but by imposing the mass-death. Nazis improved their technique of biotechnology manipulating the life of others, who were labelled as “unter-mensh”. Disposed of their rights, some ethnicities and minorities were subject to a systematic burocratization of death (Foucault, 1969, 2007; Lemke, 2001). The end of WWII resulted in Nazism collapse but its ideology persisted from many means. The ideals of a “superman” characterized by outstanding powers to deter the corruption and evilness, persisted as well as the fascination for scientists for genes, eugenics, clonation and bio-technology. As Jeremy Rifkin put it, “the coming age of commerce” resulted from 144 Why We are Obsessed by Others’ Death the Nazi’s ideology to a selected race may life forever. This ideology, introduced by British eugenics, has never died in US (Rifkin, 1998). In a world where people are commoditized as bio-resources to laboratories to grant the life of elites at the centre, death is expanded to periphery. Most certainly, as Naomi Klein explained, capitalism has induced to a shock economy where the affected (obliterated) communities, in case of disasters, are recycled in new forms of consumption. The doctrine of shock is used by capitalist government for their citizens to accept policies otherwise would be rejected (Klein, 2007). Of course, this argument is not new, but illustrates the empirical connection discussed by David Harvey (1989) as “creative destruction”. Capitalism persists by destroying the social landscapes and institutions to be reconstructed following other ends. Some philosophical concerns arise in the role played by technology at this stage. Shrines reminding spaces of disasters are symbolic dispositiffs, politically enrooted in the allegory of uncertainness. In view of that dark tourism serves as a mechanism of resilience so that the society understands disasters and social trauma (Korstanje and Ivanov, 2012). As disasters, death comes at any moment of life. This engenders much anxiety in the survivors. It is important to discuss that survivors post disaster context develop a much deeper process of mourning. They elaborate special rites (resiliency) to overcome the traumatic event which inflict pain and suffering. Any victim, before the climate of destruction, realizes that Gods were benevolent after all. Survivors, that way, embrace a climate of superiority by their subsistence was given by outstanding characteristics such as bravery, moral virtue and strength. This type of reaction helps community to recover to adversity but may generate sentiments of nationalism, superiority or ethnocentrism if it is not limited. The superiority of survivors, in this vein, depends on the other’s misfortune. Late capitalism not only exploits these types of climates, but also obscures the causality of events (Korstanje, 2011a,c). French 145 Tourism and Terrorism ethnologist, Marc Augé acknowledged that the mass-media portrays tragic events blurring the connection between causes and consequences. News or stories focus on the effects instead on a clear diagnosis of reasons behind. As a result of this disasters’ are continuously repeated once and once again (Augé, 2002). The allegory of death expressed in dark tourism sites corresponds with a contemporary trend imposed by Biopolitics. This explain the growth of dark tourism which today escapes the classic forms of tourism to launch towards the virtual world. In the late capitalism, dark tourism confers to consumers an aura of superiority, while others who lack of the capital to enter in the formal circuits of sightseeing, are exploited as other-deads. In this token, (Virtual) dark tourism is not ethical by many reasons. The most important is the depersonalization it generates. Whereas, death, observed by ethnologists and anthropologists, was conducive to strength the social bonds, its representation as it is placed by dark tourism sites, goes to situate visitors in their own egocentrism. CONCLUSION The present essay review explored not only the anthropological roots of dark tourism, but also the influence of Biopolitics in confirming the allegory of death. In shark opposition to the medieval traveller, dark tourism consumers seek to reinforce their life as others’ death. In contrast to what the specialized literature suggests, dark tourism reinforces the modern egocentrism to enjoy in brother´s tragedy. Based on the myth of Noah ark, capitalism introduced the needs of eternal competence to be part of selected people. Life is symbolized as a great trace where only one will be the winner. Of course, this means that the rest will lose. If tragedy confers to survivors the aura of exemplary civilization, it runs higher costs. To what an extent the problem of authenticity has been introduced in the discussion remains unresolved. As Tzanelli put it, heritage seems to be one of the pillars of capitalism. Mediated events and games connote to dual structures. 146 Why We are Obsessed by Others’ Death At time local identity is expressed in view of global values, cities are cloned so that consumers have the same experience from Japan to Buenos Aires (Tzanelli, 2013; Korstanje, 2013b). The discussion on staged authenticity not only is troublesome because anyone understands authenticity from diverse perspectives, but also failed to explain why localism has been overridden by globalization. What would more than interest to debate is the prone of modern consumers to enjoy for other’s suffering. It is unfortunate dark tourism is part of this trend. Whether death generates social cohesion among human beings, dark tourism enrooted in the modern logic of exploitation of capitalism creates the opposite. Visitor of dark tourism site are simply happier because they wish to continue in a utopian race to no-where. Nonetheless, this seems to be a much deeper issue which merits to be investigated in future approaches. 147 Tourism and Terrorism 7 EXCEMPTIONALISM, NARCISISM AND TERROR: AMERICANS ABROAD The attacks to Paris occurred in November 13 of 2015 shows sadly two previous assumptions. The impossibility to control leisure industries as cultural entertainment, museums and tourism, conjoined to the fact that terrorists have selected travellers over recent years as their primary targets. Some voices claim that terrorism and colonial order were historically interlinked. Let’s explain that colonization in past centuries was supported by an ideology of the colonized other. Bullets kill people, but words indoctrinate their minds. Edward Said has developed a model for understanding the pervasive nature of European ethnocentrism in novelists such as Joseph Conrad who portrayed the cultural values of the empire (Said, 1993). Empires have expanded their influences in the world by imposing an ecumene of exemplarity in which the periphery accepts European superiority. Beyond this center, the interaction between Europeans and non-Europeans engendered what Turner-Bushnell and Green (2002) call a sphere of influence. These borderlands were flexible, and they were continually negotiated. The connection between imperialism and literature has been widely studied in such seminal texts as Rule of Darkness (Bratlinger, 1990), 148 Excemptionalism, Naricisism and Terror: Americans Abroad The Theory of the Novel (Lukacs, 1971), The British Image of India (Greenberger, 1969), Imperial Eyes (Pratt, 2011), and Culture and Imperialism (Said, 1993). This essay focuses on the role played by American ethnocentrism in the modern travel books such as in Charles Robert Temple’s American Abroad (1961). Temple’s book sets forth the perspective of Americans looking outward. Today, it shows the basis for an American outlook on the post-9/11 world which combines American exceptionalism with a pervasive fear. One of the aspects that differentiate American from British ethnocentrism is the sentiment of exceptionalism with respect to others. In the United States Americanness is lived as a superior allegory to be applied to the world for making it a safer and better home for humankind (Wildman, 1996; Fitzgerald, 1986; Coleman, 2010; Skoll, 2009). Though the lens of this essay review we understand how the other is constructed by privileged American citizens in view of their expectations, hopes, and fears. PRELIMINARY DEBATE The habits of travelling are common sense to all cultures of the globe. Many theories have been developed thanks to the experiences and stories derived from these practices. In his book on America, FrançoisRené de Chateaubriand (1768-1848) says there were two types of travellers: Those who go by land and those who go by sea. Many discoveries that today sheds light on our geographies, derived from travellers’ courage to go beyond the boundaries of their respective civilizations (Chateaubriand, 1944). One of the main problems in understanding the potential power of travel writing depends on the attention this genre receives from generation to generation. Travels activate social imaginaries which follow imperial interests, along with landscapes and cultural encounters. Citing K. Oberg and Rachel Irwin (2007) alludes to the encounter among ethnicities as a culture shock, which ranges from a stage of understanding to a profound crisis –honeymoon, crisis, recovery and adjustment. While tourists 149 Tourism and Terrorism generally are embedded in a honeymoon phase, the native other is imagined as a polite and gorgeous friend. Explorers, anthropologists, and aid-workers face another, more disappointing facet. A radical crisis of identity may take some months. When this arrives, the foreigner has serious problems in coping with natives. Depending on how this is resolved, the visitor will return to home or stay. The process of recovery consists in the assimilation of all information, customs, and practices to survive in this new society. After this stage, the adjustment will take place. Depending on how the guests are negotiating with natives, their knowledge has further value for others. Tourists, for example are subject to peripheral and superficial encounters with natives while anthropologists produce another kind of knowledge. The American economist, Robert L Heilbroner days that imperialism as a project was inextricably intertwined with capitalism. He claims that three key factors were important to consolidate European conquests: The impetus for discovery; second, the decline of religion; and third, rise of science (Heilbroner, 1995). One of the disciplines that encouraged the quests for knowledge about non-Europeans and drawing on the methods of classical positivistic social sciences, anthropology emphasized the importance of direct observation of observed peoples. Two main assumptions inspired these new forms of making science. The first was the belief that people lie or simply sometimes do not recognize their drives and behaviour. Researchers are obliged to be there, contrasting the speech with non-verbal practices. The first anthropologists who launched the study of exotic peoples were involuntarily manipulated by governors or officials who read their ethnologies with the aim of more effective control of native peoples (Busby, Korstanje and Mansfield, 2011; Korstanje, 2006; 2012; Pratt, 2011; Teng, 2004; Palmer, 2004; Bandyopadhyay, and Morais, 2005). The production of knowledge, imperialism, and travels became intertwined. Novels, and guidebooks have been historically employed as ideological instruments of 150 Excemptionalism, Naricisism and Terror: Americans Abroad indoctrination whose efficiency rests on what they cover, not what they overtly describe. Mary L. Pratt (2011) explores the imperialistic discourses to understand how the identities of others are created. The dominated group interprets its inferiority in favour of dominators. The literature of travels as well as travel itself is of paramount importance to create an archetype of Europeanness. The conflicting encounters flourish in zones of contact where a real process of acculturation surfaces. The ideology of dominators, as Adam in the paradise, marks the others, while it keeps it-self unmarked—that is, the standard by which others are judged. The passion for travels and discoveries starts with Carl Linnaeus (1707-1778) who in 1735 published his book Systema Naturae (system of nature). This project encouraged many natural historians, or as they are called today natural scientists to classify biological species in the world to create an all-encompassing system that explain the diversity of plants. Following this classificatory system, the first scientific travels were oriented to describe customs, cultures, and any other aspect of peoples who Europeans thought merited attention. In this way and right from the first, the new disciplines of social science abetted colonialism to expand European control over the globe, and in so doing portrayed the other as non-white and an irrational actor who needed to be civilized. In Western ethnocentric ideology, cultural values not only were both necessary and beneficial for indigenes. Literature and travel writings, Pratt adds, encouraged the imperial values everywhere, paving the way for the advance of an ideological colonization that strengthened the bond between the centre and its periphery. Literature offers visualizations and symbolic landscapes where the colonial order is sustained by a moral supremacy of Western culture. The subordinated role of aboriginal life, compared to that of Europe, was one among many other rhetoric devices to create a sentiment of superiority of white writers throughout the colonial world. 151 Tourism and Terrorism Modern tourism scholars have studied the stereotypes of colonialism (Burns, 2004; Mansfield, 2008; Busby, Korstanje and Mansfield, 2011; Caton and Santos, 2008). In one of the books on this theme, Traversing Paris, Charlie Mansfied (2008) seeks the redefinition travel writing as a genre of literature by means of descriptions of the narratives, projections, expectations, and experiences in travels. This French custom, initiated by the Encyclopédist Denis Diderot (1713-1784), reveals the potentialities of a journey to decode the convergence between the autobiography and social conjuncture. The episteme for travels elevates the agency of travellers who reify the same observed reality. The tension between objectivity and subjectivity certainly opens a complex door in travel writing as a scientific genre. The body of a travel writer is necessarily circumscribed by specific time and place, which blurs the boundaries between the lived time of journey and the text. Concerning the contributions of the reactionary royalist and founder of Romanticism in France, François-René, de Chateaubriand (1768-1848), Mansfield indicates that texts work similarly to a souvenir, because like a souvenir they are strongly associated with the identity of tourists. As a souvenir is linked to a wider sentiment of nostalgia, Mansfield leads readers to an under-explored argument: The souvenir works as a mechanism of return transforming the physical distance into emotional proximity. Travel writing comprises a creative praxis by closing the hermeneutical circle between those events we experience on a daily basis and the individual emotional background, and thereby becomes an episteme in the Foucauldian sense. Mansfield’s argument leads to the three elements of discovery travels which are rooted in the modern science: 1) the need to monitor the world to ensure Western control, 2) intellectual appropriation that interprets events to generate knowledge, and 3) support for the capitalist mode of production. All these elements are replicated and renegotiated in the travels. Laura Rascaroli (2013) has called attention to the tension between pleasure and displeasure in traveling. The latter signals unproductive displacement that destroys the self, and the latter leads 152 Excemptionalism, Naricisism and Terror: Americans Abroad the traveller to the materialization of hedonism. The focus of Rascoli argument is on how identity is constructed. In the past, France originally drew from southern Mediterranean culture, but today this logic has been upended. This explain the bifurcation of symbolic (soft) and legal (hard) borders. Florian Grandena (2013) argues that striated space (i.e., space with legal borders) is determined by states but nomadic spaces exist as a response to the growth of social frustration, or perhaps ennui. Probably the exemplary nomadic book is Jack Kerouac’s On the Road (1957). Based on a romantic gaze, a nomad-tourist not only breaks out of the capitalist network but seeks to negotiate his/her identity strolling throughout the nation, something that recalls Walter Benjamin’s flâneur (Buck-Morss, 1986). Ewa Mazierska (2013) explores the epistemology of past travels to criticize the contemporary social fabric. Mazierska reviews scholarly literature that points to tourism as a hedonistic industry, but she notes, as in cinema or many other products of the culture industry, there are many ways of exploring visited spaces. The role of travellers and their proximity to the other are of utmost importance in judging whether tourism is good or bad for society. What is important is not whether the traveller is a tourist or a migrant, but how that travel initiates the process of discovery. She acknowledges that while some doors are open, like the tourism and leisure travels, others are inevitably closed. The past not only facilitates a break in today’s ideological discourse, but unravels it into the complexity of nationhood (Mazierska, 2013: 123). In recent years the industrial world seems to be more concerned for the securitization of identity and mobility than by other questions. Korstanje and Olsen (2011) have examined the genre of horror movies to consider that 9/11 has not only created a serious shock to American culture, but also changed the ways of making terror in cinema. Based on an examination of movies such as Hills Have Eyes, Hostel, and Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Korstanje and Olsen argue that American movie culture exhibits a combination of pride and fear. While American tourists are viewed as the epitome of good civilization, their own cultural 153 Tourism and Terrorism products are compromised of sadists whose main satisfaction is the torture of innocents. The principle of evil seems to be combined with a lack of hospitality. The world beyond the boundaries of the United States is presented as a dangerous place to visit. This leads to the creation of deep-seated ethnocentrism that audiences cannot see with clarity, but which affects how the other, non-American is reconstructed. The concept of risk and terrorism as it is being exploited by Hollywood may instil serious problems in the collective psyche of United States. THE ROOTS OF EXCEPTIONALISM Originally, Max Weber noted the connection between religion and labour. He acknowledged that certain Protestant and Catholic’s cosmologies constructed different models of the world and labour. While Calvinism was based on predestination—that is, a closed future, Catholicism saw salvation as a prerequisite for the present acts. For Calvinistic temperaments, the salvation of individuals was already determined by a book of life in Heaven. Catholicism, in contrast taught that salvation was a consequence of acts on earth (Weber, 1964, 1995, 1958). Weber made a connection between the concepts of religious salvation and the economy. The organization of labour as well as the process of territorialization follows cultural archetypes which put limits on authority and requires the production of a surplus. Calvinism taught that humans were stewards of the earth who were expected to produce more during their lifetimes than they found at birth. The political structure depending on how this surplus was created. S. Coleman (2013) argues that American fundamentalist religious culture is linked to a much broader association between the religious and political order. Those orders, religious and political, are charged with reforming the world, and since it is a dangerous place, the sins of the world should be expiated by sacrifice, and renovated by means of grace and fear. Americans and other Anglophones, especially those in Britain and the settler 154 Excemptionalism, Naricisism and Terror: Americans Abroad countries, Australia and Canada, have produced a culture of terror. That culture induces a generalized fear among the populations of those countries. With a focus on the United States, the ruling class has constructed a culture of fear that has evolved from the kind of fear associated with the anti-communist hysteria in the years following the Second World War and its predecessor Red scares to its current incarnation of the terrorism obsession (Skoll, 2010, Skoll and Korstanje, 2013). While recognizing popular participation in constructing this culture of fear, the fact is that elites in the centers of world capitalism have fostered its construction with planning and deliberation. The culture of fear is conducive in keeping class conflict in America and the world under control.Unlike Spain that relied more on military conquest to colonize the Americas, English colonization was centred on settlements and trade. The English reserved its right for intervening in the autonomy of indigenous peoples, and recognized a degree of indigenous autonomy. The Spanish approach derived from a different economic strategy—that is, Spain’s colonialism was extractive, whereas England’s was based on agricultural exploitation. The English control over the indigenous peoples was based on discursive abilities to proclaim the racial superiority of Anglo order over other ethnicities (Guidotti-Hernandez, 2011). As Richard Hofstadter put it, this sentiment of exemplarity was reinforced by the adoption of social Darwinism at the same time that the US was becoming a colonial power in its own right in the late nineteenth century. The survival of the fittest associated with the virtue of race reinforced an America-centrism (Hofstadter, 1992). Social Darwinism, unlike Darwin’s own biological theory of natural selection and speciation, postulated two significant axioms which reinforced the sentiment of exceptionalism, which itself came from the Puritan tradition in New England (FitzGerald, 1986). Social Darwinism was based on survival of fittest and social determinism. Hofstadter argues that the legitimacy of law to ensure the equality of all citizens was not sufficient to explain why some actors had 155 Tourism and Terrorism success while others fail. As a supra-organism, the social structure overrides the interpretation of law. To evolve to a higher stage, society should accept the struggle for survival as the primary cultural value. In this view, social advance depends on the wealth one generation can pass to the next. Accordingly, “primitive man, who long ago withdrew from the competitive struggle and ceased to accumulate capital goods, must pay with a backward and unenlightened way of life” (Hofstadter, 1992: 58). Therefore, millionaires are not the result of greed, but natural selection. They have been selected by their strength, tested in their success in business and their abilities to adapt to the competitive environment. Those who are not wealthy are simply less fit. A political consequence of this line of thought is that states should not promote charity as a governmental policy; if this happens it runs the risks of general social decline. The society should be recycled allowing the big fish eats the small fish. At a closer look, Calvinist and other protestant circle emphasized on the hostility of the environment as a proof of faith. The foundation for this amalgam comes from the New England Calvinist ideology, of which Jonathan Edwards 1741 sermon Sinners in the Hand of an Angry God is exemplary (Miller, 1953). There, Edwards, spelled out the Calvinist notion of predestination, which, among other things held that only those that God chose would enter Heaven, and everyone else was doomed to Hell. Those so chosen could be identified by their prosperity. The social Darwinism of the latter nineteenth century was annealed to the underlying Calvinist doctrine of hard of individual salvation, stewardship, and prosperity as a sign of moral superiority. In the early republic, up to the Civil War (1861-65), so-called nativism in the United States showed considerable resistance to new comers, such as the Irish fleeing the famine of the 1840s and somewhat less toward Germans and some other nationalities fleeing the counter revolution and political repressions of the European rebellions of 1848. Nativism often combined with anti-Catholicism, 156 Excemptionalism, Naricisism and Terror: Americans Abroad which in turn combined with the racism of the South and its institutionalized racialization of slavery. The racial discrimination as well as its practices constructed a barrier between the community and this undesired guests (Janiewski, 1991). Underneath it all lay economic exploitation of new European immigrants and African American slaves. At the same time, the US carried out its long term genocide of the North American Indians. Eric Cheyfitz explained that empires construct a subordinated image of other, who can never be equal to the elite. Ranging from ridiculing to demonization, the others are often portrayed as inferior, or uncivilized. Imperial discourse consists in disciplining this other — African American slave and their descendents, recent European immigrants, and native North Americans—to make them decent citizens (Cheyfitz, 1993). In practice that came to mean becoming White (Ignatiev, 1995). Despite the cognitive dissonance in the midst of genocide and racial and ethnic exploitation, the ideological apparatuses of the United States developed its image as an exemplary centre, or city on a hill, as the Puritan settlers saw it. It is this image, rather than the reality of social relations, that leads this country to proclaim itself as unique, an exception, and beyond the restraints of the rest of the world. For a recent example of this exceptionalist discourse, Michael Ignatieff, a Canadian political leader who is currently on the Harvard faculty, maintains that the United States has historically constructed a social bond based on the respect and trust in civic institutions. Americans, according to Ignatieff, valorise the freedom of speech and democracy along with the equality of opportunity in a framework of rights and duties as citizens. The concept of human rights, perhaps most explicitly realized in the universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was promulgated under the leadership of Eleanor Roosevelt after the Second World War, combined with the concept of American exceptionalism to spread American ideals of liberty to the rest of the world. From the American exceptionalist perspective, the United States was the premier, if not the only country, which can for instance, 157 Tourism and Terrorism repeatedly reject resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly, as it has done many times with respect to Palestine and Israel. Many American politicians feel they have been excused from accusations of human right violations (Ignatieff, 2001). Following this argument, M. Korstanje explain that the principle of exception that characterized the early political life in the United States, not only was ingrained with its religious matrix, but also paved the ways for the liberal democracy to betray its own foundations. This kind of exceptionalist ideology has been coupled with a disregard for other nations’ sovereignty as the United States has intervened in countries throughout the world to overthrow their governments. The tactics vary from propaganda, to influxes of money to opposition groups, to covertly organizing coups d’état, and outright invasions. Since the Second World War, the United States has acted more like an empire than an exemplar, despite official and public protestations to the contrary (Korstanje, 2013). Understanding how such disparate conceptions—on the one hand an exemplar of liberty and self-determination and on the other, imperial aggression and domination—presents an intellectual challenge. As a literary form, travel writing offers fertile ground to approach an understanding of how ethnocentrism works to maintain these contradictory images. In literature imagined landscapes of travellers are written from the centre to impose a specific message over the periphery. In next section, we examine the book entitled Americans Abroad by the travel writer Charles Robert Temple. This book represents an effort to advise Americans who travel or work abroad about the dangers of the world. A clear diagnosis of how American imperialism works can be done if you pay attention to this now relatively obscure text. THE FEAR OF TRAVELING ABROAD Charles R. Temple was fluent in six languages. He worked in many 158 Excemptionalism, Naricisism and Terror: Americans Abroad countries since he left Yale University in US, some of them with diverse cultures and customs. Concerned on the psychology of tourists, he published in 1961 the book Americans Abroad to explain the different and radical shifts suffered by Americans when have to travel or work abroad. This book gives practical suggestions on travel, and by doing so presents a clear picture of American ethnocentrism. After the Second World War ended in 1945, the United States stood alone among the former belligerents as unscathed in its own territory. The closest the country came to devastation was the attack on Pearl Harbor, in what was then a mere territory, and far from the mainland of the metropole. Not only was its territory intact, it was the centre of the world’s economy. With the growth of a middle income tier of US society, many Americans started to travel worldwide as tourists, businessmen, diplomats, and so forth. In doing so, these citizens represent America to the world. In Temple’s view, one of the aspects that make Americans exemplary is democracy: “Turning up in every part of the globe, these Americans are our informal representative to the other peoples of the world. What we are and what our democracy means will be judged by their action and reaction long after the formal speeches and actions of politicians have been forgotten. This was not always so, and once John Doe, an American living in a foreign country, might have been looked upon by the people about him as just another foreigner, with little or no reference to his national background” (p. 8). For Temple like many other Americans, democracy is lived as a positive cultural legacy that the United States can leave to the civilized world. But for that, its travellers should demonstrate a special virtue which only is given to select people. The United States, in Temple’s argument, should not be judged by its failure or success in international relations, instead the country should be appraised by its tourists’ behaviour. This means that American tourists serve as symbolic ambassadors of their country. Temple’s book is filled 159 Tourism and Terrorism with examples and situations aimed to show the civil virtue of what being a good American means. One of the first obstacles to overcome abroad is the language. Temple acknowledges that some Americans are reluctant to learn languages other than English. He points out that fluency in another language allows the learning of other customs, and opens the horizon to new opportunities for business. For Temple, the American Way is bound up with the role played by money. The degree of materiality, as Weber put it, depends on the need to demonstrate to be part of the select. Temple is concerned for those compatriots who have not devoted time to have experiences with the other. The quest for novelty seems is linked to overcoming the prejudices of home. In this vein, Temple writes “There are certain fundamental experiences which have to be met by everyone who leaves his own country to live elsewhere. Going abroad means giving up home in spiritual a well as physical sense; it means acquiring a new kind of education; it means adopting new attitudes and points of view about foreigners and their ways; it means assessing one’s own values in light of other’s people’s value and standards” (p. 15). All this advice was given to those Americans who opted to live in other countries for a prolonged stay out of their home. Temple has somewhat different advice for tourists. Typically, moved by curiosity, tourists are fascinated by experiences abroad. They need to see how life is lived in foreign countries. Poor countries, many of them with markedly undemocratic cultures, have developed systems where the majority is excluded from political life. This results in serious asymmetries that lead people to poverty. Being poor is an effect of rejecting democratic politics. Therefore, according to Temple, Americans should feel proud of their economic supremacy. If the civilized citizens reserve their right to travel long distances as a sign of wealth, it is no less true is that this act has a serious risk. In this vein, Temple writes, 160 Excemptionalism, Naricisism and Terror: Americans Abroad “Slumming is neither possible nor intelligent. As Americans, living in a technically advanced, affluent society, we tend to downgrade those peoples of the world who have not participated in the industrial revolution and whose economies are inadequate to their population’s needs” (p. 21). This happens because the United States had vast lands and a rich economy that flourished with an internal, domestic industry that provided a continuous chain of production and consumption, a huge internal market for what was produced in America. The sense of Americanness is exhibited by Temple as an archetype of science, hard work, and recreation; always contrasting the difference between the White Anglo model and aboriginals in other countries. Of course, Temple ignores or tries to ignore the many aboriginal reservoirs that continue to coexist with his model White Anglo American citizen. He ignores the urban ghettos, depressed and marginalized small towns and stretches of rural poverty. Secondly, the book assumes that the United States is the most democratic country on the planet. Temple does not ask if the United States is democratic, but instead asks why it is the most democratic country in the world. In the chapter entitled, “Special Luggage Labelled American,” Temple recognizes that democracy is not a perfect system of government, and notes that foreigners may say that judges can be bribed or the activities of some minorities are restricted, but he replies that in the United States” most judges can´t be bribed, few men sell their votes; the majority of Americans reject attempts to limit minority rights; and while a poor man may rarely lunch with a rich one, both can do pretty much what they like otherwise (p. 30). What this excerpt does not take into consideration is hundreds of years of ethnic discrimination, the repression of the black population and the ghettoization of most cities as well as internal riots between blacks and whites. It is not the goal of this paper to judge if America is good or bad, but only to focus on the cultural elements that form Americanness as an archetype of identity. Today, 161 Tourism and Terrorism few citizens in the United States have read Temple’s book, but even so its value is that it reflects the imaginary of how America sees itself and the others. For that reason, it is like an artifact that reveals in microcosm the American ethos and its connection to feelings about strangers. When traveling as tourists for recreational purposes, Temple adds, Americans should understand that the visited lands are not populated “entirely” by barbarians (p. 115). To know more about exotic countries, they have to read magazines or other publications to learn the experience of other travellers, and to become aware of which place is safer or dangerous as well as the things they can and cannot do. Traveling can be conceptualized as an art, where the subject develops new abilities to deal with transportation, new customs, hostile migration officials, and other problems. Readers should follow Temple´s steps to achieve a successful adaptation in other cultures. On the surface, the primary concern of this book is the implicit view that the world seems to be a hostile place. Thus, knowledge and know how facilitate the symbolic resources to mitigate the lapses of anxieties such as the validation of passport at migration office. Guide books are of paramount importance so as to be familiar with the visited destinations. A coherent interpretation of the tourist originating country should be kept in mind at time of purchasing the ticket. Temple gives the example of a friend who traveled to Beirut buying his ticket in Israel and was rejected upon arrival as he was accused of being Zionist spy. Temple’s use of such terms as “entirely barbarian” appears ethnocentric because it assumes the foreigners live in uncivilized cultures. Also, his perspective is from the nation of travellers like Israel, the United States or Britain as the point of sale of the ticket can and should determine how dangerous the final destination may be. If Americans go to a destination whose government has a 162 Excemptionalism, Naricisism and Terror: Americans Abroad relationship with the United States, the possibility of some kind of adverse treatment might occur to a traveller. This opens the question of the relationship between safety and security. Being American abroad means privilege because Americans carry with them a symbolic reminder of US supremacy over the world. Today, in large part because of the US led global war on terror, it also raises the specter of terrorist attacks arising from resentment on the part of dominating people. These two elements, American privilege and Americans as terrorist targets, are present in the Anglo-American archetype promoted by tourism related industries. Temple’s book contains many examples of people who have travelled to Europe, Latin America, and Asia. Being American means superiority over other ethnicities due high income relative to people in other countries. Of course, this is far less true today than in 1961 when Temple wrote the book. Also, Temple assumes that because Americans are educated in a civilized culture where the respect for the other symbolizes the tenets of democracy, it means that Americans are willing to learn about other cultures. However, this way of constructing the other leads to a bipolar logic where the ‘we’ is superior to the ‘they.’ To be part of elite, selected for salvation, brings serious problems for American tourists as symbolic representatives of the United States. Of course, American tourists are not responsible for the policies followed by US, except when they are so designated such as officials in the US State Department. Nevertheless the Anglo-American ethnocentric discourse upends the connection of cause and consequences, conferring the burden on tourists. This can be seen in current guide books which present the Middle East as a dangerous destination for Americans. Tourists become involuntarily ambassadors of their own state. It is important not to lose sight that this ethnocentric discourse was not created by 9/11, it was present long before this event, but to some extent 9/11 closed the hermeneutic circle between a frightened American citizen and the way to construct Otherness. At the time of 9/11, US President 163 Tourism and Terrorism George W. Bush encouraged Americans to confine their travels to the domestic US and at the same time he militarized US borders and restricted migrants as undesired guests. To understand this pervasive logic, one must understand two relevant aspects of ethnocentrism. On one hand it promotes the exemplary nature of one group or ethnicity over the rest. The limits of uniqueness determine an exclusionary circle of belonging, which is symbolically justified by certain fabricated virtues. Valorising American tourists is a subtle way of accepting the hegemony of the United States and its democracy in the world. However, in the dialectic of ethnocentrism, being part of the elite has its costs. Whenever Americans cross the borders of their country, many risks are posed in their trips, from a terrorist attack to a crime, destinations are classified according to the importance of Americanness and their safety. Moreover, ethnocentric discourse neglects the importance of the other except through the lens of one’s own culture. It poses Americans as the most desirable of tourists. It reminiscent of horror movies like Hostel I and II where American tourists were captured and tortured by a criminal network operating in Eastern Europe. Millionaires paid huge fees to torture a tourist. Hostel’s dialogues not only portrays the world as hostile, but also convinces the audience that victims’ value depended on their nationality. Mass entertainment such as horror movies often depicts Eastern Europe or rural zones as hostile and dangerous destinations for civilized tourists. The same sentiment of exceptionalism that leads Americans to be proud of their civilization instils terror when they have to leave home. Literature has often served as an ideological mechanism of power for the centre to exert hegemony over periphery. Substantial studies have shed their light on this slippery matter. However, the problem of imperialism seems not to be limited to literature alone. Other 164 Excemptionalism, Naricisism and Terror: Americans Abroad texts such as guidebooks or travel writing, construct a biased landscape of the world. This is the case in the example use in this essay, Temple’s Americans Abroad. Though lacking in overtly discriminatory or racial considerations, Temple does his text covers what in our consideration is one of the tenets of Anglo-American ethnocentrism, the sentiment of exception. Temple diagnosis is that the world is stereotyped as a dichotomy between dangerous and safe. It appeals to America as the cradle of democracy, civilization, and legal order. In view of this, Americans never should lose sight that they are ambassadors of their superior culture. Even if the enemies of democracy want to attack Americans wherever they are, this should not stop Americans from showing that they are inhabitants of a city on a hill. This point will be carefully examined in the conclusion, once in repeatedly way, we will review how horror movies in US changed after 9/11. Basically, not only the role of villains, but the possibilities have to see a new element, which was baptized by Kristeva as “perverse hospitality”. One of the effects that persisted in the social imaginary of Westerners seems to be the fact that “being hospitable” with others represents a serious risk for society. 165 Tourism and Terrorism CONCLUSION The argument in this book was oriented to discuss to what extent terrorism may be considered “as external threat” which can be controlled by using the rational logic of West, or seeing terrorism as a result of extortion evolving towards reified forms of exploitation accelerated by the current means of production. While we held the polemic thesis that mobilities emerged as a disciplinary form of terrorism, once worker unions struggled against capital-owners for better conditions of work, no less true is that today terrorism seems to be out of control. One of the most paradoxical situations seems to be the fact that jihadists are not born in Middle East, they are natives of the same society under attack. French, British, Germans and Americans who not only are in discontent with their cultures, but also do not belong symbolically to their communities. As Howie puts it, this is exactly one of the problems that instill an excess of fear in global cities. They, who look like us, they who likely are our neighbours may be “dangerous jihadists” planning an attack at a school, a tourist resort in any-time. In this book we have marginally approached to the role of “thana capitalism, in this manner, Howie called to “traumaescape” as a platform where social ties are undermined. As this argument given, cities hit by disasters and terrorism are recycled to be products ready to be gazed by an international demand of tourists. However, far from understanding the real reasons of the event, a biased message disseminates to audience which represents a serious risk the event repeats in a sonot-distant future. The sociology of terrorism (beyond its interdisciplinary nature) still is far from approaching the roots of 166 Conclusion terror as a result of the rationality of capitalism. In this mayhem, this book intends to be fulfilling the gap and confusion left by the media. Some of these misconceptions relate to the fact terrorism advanced by the lack of coordination, or lack of programs of America to situate as police of the world. Scholars as Mandelbaum or Revel are influenced by this ideological discourse which considers US (for being the most democratic country) should tackle “the scourge of terrorism” intervening if necessary in autonomous nations. Further, Michael Mandelbaum (2010) Director of American Foreign Policy at the John Hopkins University, US claimed that the stock and market financial crisis of 2008 pressed US to cut off some of the expenditures in international affairs. This represented a serious threat for the World since it opens the doors for the rise of terrorism worldwide. Based on an excessive support to American international policy, Mandelbaum emulates the great myth of exceptionalism, which argues that America is a great nation not only for its democratic attachment, but also by the melting pot (which suggests the intersection of many ethnicities altogether). As a success project which reflects the liberty of peoples no matter than ethnical affiliation, US should import democracy to the world. The financial problems faced by government were aggravated by the fact that baby boomer’s generation are now retired, which created a lack of checks and balance between social security programs and international global leadership. “The collapse of 2008, the surge in America indebtness, and the retirement of the baby boomers with the resulting explosion of claims on the federal government will create a different economic imperative: Higher taxes, more saving, and the less consumption. This change will reduce the resources available for all public purposes: There will be less to go around” (Mandelbaum, 2010: 28) As previous backdrop, the United States in twenty-first century faced serious problems to keep the political stability through the globe unless by the fact that it should avoid a direct or indirect 167 Tourism and Terrorism competence with other superpower, as in Cold War. This means what in the bottom was a crisis represented the ways for an excellent opportunity, only if US accepted a leading role in the world. As many extreme puritans, Mandelbaum believes this country is designed by Gods to command the leadership to other underdeveloped economies which resulted from the lack of democracy. In this discussion, the threat of terrorism in Middle East tilts to cooperate with democratic states as Israel to struggle against one of the evils of “civilized world”. “The United States will therefore increasingly cooperate with the only democratic and reliably pro American Country in the Middle East, a country with a legitimate government, a cohesive society and formidable military force, the state of Israel” (p. 190). Although, Iraq-led invasion was a complete failure, which affected the credibility of America before other allies, no less true is that all want to deposit their fears in the hands of a World‘s Government that protect the interests of democracy, this nation is America. This raises some more pungent questions; what role plays the antiAmerican sentiment in the world? If Mandelbaum is right why somemany countries hate Americans? Is this hatred-filled sentiment resulting from imperialist policies or simply an excuse to justify poverty? Mandelbaum said that one of the targets of oppressive dictatorship is the United States which serves as scapegoat to deposit all their frustrations and failed hopes. However, further attention should be paid to the benefits capitalism and American democracy brought to Europe and other nations (Mandelbaum, 2010). This argument fits in what Jean Revel dubbed as “anti-Americanism”, which expressed the needs of criticizing the so called imperial expansion of Americans while their protection is implored as a main power for European nations. Even, Revel understands that his nation France plays an ambiguous role in opposing to the interest of US, since on one hand, Europe did not devote considerable efforts or 168 Conclusion spending money in security-related issues, nor intervene in countries to ensure democracy. In that way, while the criticism is adamantly directed against Bush`s administration, the world is a safer place in view of the intervention of US in international affairs (Revel, 2003). What these ethnocentric arguments leave behind is that terrorism is working for Western Capitalism to implode by the erosion of hospitality, which was considered one of the spirits of Western civilization. To put this in bluntly, in 2005 when the movie Hostel came out, written and directed by Eli Roth, it seemed universal, although set in Slovakia. The first Hostel was followed by two sequels in 2007 and 2011. The sadism depicted in the films represented an inherent, though veiled, aspect of contemporary tourism. Cinematic representation of sadism in tourism reflects a wider turn to sadistic relations in international political affairs, especially the rise of jihadism after the September 11, 2001 (9/11) attacks in New York. The rise of international terror has changed not only the tourist industry but also the film industry. Cultural entertainment both reflects and shapes our fears, hopes and challenges. Because of this dialectical relationship between objective reality and its phenomenological impact, exploring horror movies offers a way to expand our understanding current world affairs. Prior to 9/11 horror movies used nature or unnatural beings as the main threats. Monsters, like vampires or similar imaginary creatures, or wild animals such as ants or sharks provided the fearsome threats. It was the natural world or an unnatural phenomenon that were represented as dangerous, but they were dangers able to be tamed by rationality and instrumentality. After 9/11, however, other people became the sources of horror. Today as never before, man is the wolf of man. Of course, horror movies depict the social fears of particular times and cultures. Their emotional effects use the devices of the macabre or supernatural to connect with culture-bound primal fears. They have an ordinary social setting which gets disrupted by the invasion 169 Tourism and Terrorism of a fearsome agent such as monsters or savage beasts. To some extent, horror movies represented a violation of the sacred law of hospitality. Hospitality is a norm that functions to create and maintain a benign social environment. After 9/11 the nature of the threats in horror movies changed from either non-human nature or the supernatural to the social. After 9/11, villains were no longer animals or monsters, but humans. In this process of transformation humans, ordinary everyday people who look and act like us, became the objects of horror (Korstanje and Olsen, 2011; Korstanje and Tarlow, 2012; Korstanje,2015). As Luke Howie observed, not only was generalized fear one of the main effects of terrorism in modern society, but it also represents radical changes in the way we perceive otherness. In recent years, terrorism has shifted the way we construct monsters, leading cinema to frame sources of fear as ordinary citizens who are capable of the worst anytime (Howie 2011; 2012). Here we explore the hypothesis that horror movies, and closely related popular culture artefacts, have decentralised their objects of fear from the non-human to the human. Today, after 9/11, aliens as noncompatriots have become the model other and the real enemy to defeat. In movies such as Jaws (Spielberg, 1975), The Birds (Hitchcock, 1963) or The Naked Jungle (Haskin, 1954), humans are put in jeopardy by savage animals which can be defeated by the embodiment of human ingenuity—technology. In post 9/11 cinema, not only there are no happy ends, but the main threats are fellow humans who are hard to detect. The enemy is not just there, on the other side of the river or wall, they are among us, live as us, and could be one of our neighbours. This cinematic shift reprises that during the post Second World War Red Scare (Skoll and Korstanje, 2013) when Hollywood movies identified the threat as Communists who blended in with the population of the United States and its allies. This same theme is replicated by current horror movie remakes like The Hills Have Eyes (Aja, 2006), Hostel (2005), Texas Chainsaw Massacre (Hooper, 2003) or The Others (Amenábar, 2001). These movies are all remakes of originals from earlier decades, which add 170 Conclusion torture-terror inspired the war on terror after the World Trade Centre attacks of 9/11. Western and non-Western nations had long been the terrain of terrorist attacks, but it was only after 9/11 that the cultural, economic, and strategic hegemony of the United States created the global archetype of terrorism—the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. So-called Ground-Zero, the site of the former World Trade Centre in lower Manhattan became both symbol and icon for terrorism, as the work of radical Muslims. In contrast, the Madrid train bombing of 11 March 2004 was originally blamed on the Basque separatist group the ETA (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna) to gain political advantaged in the upcoming national elections scheduled three days hence (Sabada, 2008). Spanish authorities eventually fell in line under the US terror mythology, and identified Al Qaeda inspired Muslim fanatics. A few sceptics questioned the official story about 9/ 11 (Keohane and Zackhauser, 2003; Griffin, 2004; Friedman 2011), and some commenters saw 9/11 and the war on terror as a pretext for governments to restrict individual rights (Vargas Llosa 2002; Ignatieff, 2013). Nevertheless, the post 9/11 culture of fear was conducive to neo-liberal policies that enhanced the profits of elite and expansion of the US led global empire rationalized by neoconservatives (Skoll, 2007, 2010; Skoll and Korstanje 2013; Altheide 2002, 2006). The climate of polarization, far from being diluted after US-led invasion to Middle East, multiplied in various spheres of society. Mahmoud Eid pointed to the mass media, arguing that the question whether 9/11 ignited the custom of consuming terror as a rentable commodity, cannot be answered without addressing the responsibility of journalism and mass media in covering attacks 24 hours per day. This event opened the doors for a new epoch where terror and profits in television converged (Eid, 2014). The United States used its position as global hegemon to engender a culture of fear. In the counties at the centre of the world capitalist system fear served to protect the status quo social order. After 9/11 171 Tourism and Terrorism this culture of fear became globalized in conjunction with the USled Empire. The US dominated culture industries, in cinema especially, shaped public consciousness in support of the empire. Culture construction aided and abetted securitization, which promised a safer world, and governments relied on both to protect against domestic terrorism internally. In fact, the securitization of global imperialism has really been pacification of segments of populations who posed a threat to the interests of capital owners (Skoll, 2016). Among its other effects 9/11 caused a trauma in the means of transport that largely served the West and centre of capital. Never in history had civilian airplanes been used as weapons against the centre of world capitalism, the World Trade Center, and simultaneously against the centre of world militarism, the Pentagon. The attacks of 9/11 could have undermined the credibility of the George Bush administration in Washington DC by showing how vulnerable the United States was. To counter this threat t its legitimacy, US President George W Bush declared a global war on terror, prosecuted mainly by US military and intelligence apparatuses like the CIA, NSA, and NRO. What Bush failed to declare was the war on terror carried out by the culture industries. Those few, mainly marginal, figures who claimed that 9/11 served as a sort of Reichstag Fire to extend US world control were dismissed as conspiracy theorists. Throwing around accusations of conspiracy theory buttresses the power of the ruling class by affirming the managed messages from the media they own. Establishment social theorists and scholars have deemed conspiracy theorypathology (Lipset and Raab, 1978; Hofman, 1993; Catron and Harmon, 1981), because according to them, it leads to what Hannah Arendt (2013) called a totalitarian mind. More recently, some scholars present conspiracy as a key factor of politics. David Kelman (2012) argues that conspiracy beliefs are part of 172 Conclusion populism. Especially in Latin America and the United States the efficacy of the ruling class depends on consolidating their hegemony by cutting reality in two. Secrecy in government rests on the legitimacy of silence which creates two alternative circuits, official and unofficial. The credibility of one story is linked to the secret that allows the discovering of the other. Conspiracy theories reveal plots for elites to keep the control of society. Any attempt to decipher the plot, validates the secrecy of politics. “Politics is not based on an ideology decided in advance, but it is rather constituted through a specific type of narrative that is often called conspiracy theory. This type of theory is always a machination, that is, a narrative mechanism that secretes, as it were, ideological labels such as the right or the left” (Kelman, 2012: 8). According to Kelman, opposing the secret with the public and the official with the unofficial creates a dialectic in which every conspiracy narrative connotes a double structure: The visible story is continuously eroded by a secret one, like an infinite palimpsest. Kelman, a literary theorist who theorizes politics not through social and political analysis but through works of fiction, explain the political struggle as an unlimited game, rather than battle lines of power. Kelman says that conspiracy is a necessary condition for one discourse to dominate all others. Politics, in his terms, can be defined as an illusory state of emergency where the sense of community (we) is opposed to others who are the enemies (they). Conspiracy narratives are always rooted in a near future, which never materializes in reality. In this type of simulacra conspiracy produces a paradoxical situation. Of course, Kelman’s approach to politics through fiction just adds another layer of obfuscation. For example, the US government blamed Osama bin Laden for 9/11. They never offered any proof for the assertion, but did launch an attack on Afghanistan, presumably to capture him. Although he either died of pneumonia in December 173 Tourism and Terrorism 2001 as reported by Pakistani news media (CLG 2011), or maybe kidney failure in 2003, US forces ravaged the country, and in fact continue to do so, before they claimed to have killed him 2 May 2011, close to 10 years after 9/11. By the way, his ill health virtually precludes him as the so-called mastermind behind 9/11. The bin Laden saga should raise several questions. Why did the US government refuse to provide proof to the Taliban, which the United States recognized as the legitimate government of Afghanistan? Why did the United States attack and invade Afghanistan instead of using policing to apprehend him? Why did it take almost ten years to find bin Laden in an area (Afghanistan-Pakistan border region) where US forces and intelligence apparatuses along with those of its ally Pakistan control information? Why was the actual killing of bin Laden not recorded, although events immediately leading up to it were recorded? Why did US forces not return his body for forensic examination? Why did they secretly dump the body at sea? There are other questions, but the foregoing gives a good start. The fact that they remain unanswered, at least to any satisfactory degree, strongly suggests a US conspiracy and cover-up. The alleged excuse for invading Afghanistan, to get bin Laden, pales in comparison with another: The US government as the main executive branch of the global ruling class wanted to secure transport lines to the Caspian Sea area oil and gas deposits, and to occupy a geostrategic location with respect to China and Russia (Brisard and Daquié, 2002). Kelman´s explanation of conspiracy theory­­ is typical of the more academic, and especially post-modernist, part of ideological justifications for the status quo. A sign of ideological manipulation is the immensely popular support for the US government after the attacks of 9/11. One can only be reminded of the fervor shown by Germans for the Nazis after the Reichstag Fire. Pace Kelman, conspiracy is not politics but anti-politics. Conspiracy is the state at its ideological most effective. A clue to Kelman’s political cluelessness is his dismissal of ideology. He simplifies it to a left-right divide 174 Conclusion without mentioning the ruling class hegemony over political discourse which allows only a very limited range of approved politics, like the Democrats versus Republicans in the United States. Maintaining the status quo depends on constructing discourses that treat present social relations as if they were unchanged from time immemorial. Unchanging social relations naturalizes them. In effect, status quo discourses present the present in such a way that change is unimaginable. Theories attributing conspiracy imply that the social structure is not natural; they imply that things are the way they are because somebody has contrived them. A conspiracy points to the possibility that events do not occur because of nature or chance, but that there is a designed purpose. Once bringing forth the possibility of purpose, the next implication is that some particular persons designed them and did so because they benefit from those social arrangements. In effect, conspiracy theories say that there might be a wizard behind the curtain, and maybe that wizard is not so all powerful as surface appearances might suggest. For example, a conspiracy theory suggests that 9/11 was not the result of many bad decisions, or acts of negligence, but decisions of some secret actors. Conspiracy theories raise questions of causality, and causality implies questions of who caused things. Similarly the emotional effect of horror stories relies on implying evils and threats that are at first only suggested, but as the horror story unfolds, are gradually revealed. Corey Robin (2004) said that fear in politics produces a paralysis in society which inevitably endorses the legitimacy of the existing order. The invention of external enemies enhances the declining social cohesion, while at the same time it quells internal dissident voices. Threat ideology frames events so that they fall within an ethos that endorses the current social structure by setting truth conditions. The ideology ensures changelessness, not by overt propaganda or censorship, but by setting how statements can be judged as either true or false (Burnett, 1995; Buchmann, 2010). That is why pejorative 175 Tourism and Terrorism accusations against dissidents as conspiracy theorists rules out whatever they might say; it is illegitimate, and false by definition. Movies and similar cultural artefacts create momentary miniworlds that invite audiences to participate in their stories. They invite a willing suspension of disbelief, and thereby create a strong pull of audience complicity in the imaginings they present. This is where their effectiveness lies. They round out the worlds that hegemonic discourses describe and explain. In that vein, the construction of horror plays a crucial role in ideological constructs that endorse authority. In his book, The Philosophy of Horror, Richard Fahyargues that one of the fascinations for horror movies rests on the fact danger is controlled by the audience. As a cultural entertainment it offers “The anticipation of terror, the mixture of fear and exhilaration as events unfold, the opportunity to confront the unpredictable and dangerous, the promise of relative safety… and the feeling of relief and regained control when it is over. As Stephen King (1983), we realize that the worst has been faced and it was not so bad after all. King calls this moment reintegration which he compares to the end of a roller coaster ride when one gets off unhurt”(Fahy, 2010: 1-2). Fahy adds, horror not only calls to our attention suffering and death, but does it in a safe context. If the versatility of horror is given by the possibilities to repeat each story in different environment, this constant reproduction alludes to an allegory which merits being deciphered. Eli Roth, a director strongly influenced by 9/11 seems to be replicate the problem of torture and biological terrorism in works as Cabin Fever, 2002 (Fahy, 2010) or Hostel, 2005 (Korstanje and Tarlow, 2012; Korstanje and Olsen, 2011). From its inception, human beings have questioned not only their nature, where or to where they go, but their adaptive skills respecting to other species. Horror movies depict the conjuncture of nature violence (Fahy, 2010). Despite the human creation of culture serves as a protective cocoon, human evil cannot be abolished, and good people can fall victim to it (Korstanje, 2015). 176 Conclusion Phillip Nickel (2010) offers a different aspect of horror. He examines the origin of horror as a particular condition of human experience. According to Nickel, all horror stories are based on two significant tenets: the presence of a super natural evil, and the intention to create fear in their audience. Nickel also addresses the attraction of horror: “I will try to put the philosophical discussion of horror back on track. I will argue that there is something good about horror- I mean, aesthetically interesting and epistemologically good. I shall argue that by the threats it presents to the everyday life of the viewer, horror gives us a perspective on so-called common sense. It helps us to see that the notion of everyday life completely secure against threats cannot be possible, and that security of common-sense is a persistent illusion” (Nikel, 2010: 17). Terrorism operates in a like manner to horror stories in that terrorism threatens a population by victimizing a few. States claim to offer security from terror; just as the fictional quality of horror stories reassure audiences. States, therefore, point to “the unknown other” as that which disrupts security and they demonize the threatening other as the reason of all our evils (Korstanje, 2015b) Lorena Russell (2010) interprets The Hills Have Eyes as a critique of conservatism in American families, where the dangerous others are hippies, vagabonds, and the homeless. Russell discusses the power of films as imbricated materials that represent specific behaviours and practices using an ideologically tinted lens. Films not only reflect the relations of power, but the “anxieties of the times” (p. 104). From her viewpoint, the manipulation of horror by cinema works as ideological apparatus that controls the working class. Following this, Jeremy Morris (2010) contends that current horror movies express a higher degree of sadism as never before. In works as Hostel, Saw and The Devil´s Reject, there is a reverse role between torturer and the victim where converges sadism, punishment and 177 Tourism and Terrorism retributivism. Torture-related in horror films rests on the obsession for modern citizens to feel happiness by acts which escapes from morality, even torture. His main thesis is that the “distant other” who scares us is reduced to a controlled-prey which upends the roots of fear. The sentiment of vulnerability sets the pace to the desire for torture. Enrooted in the heart of civil life, torture has impacted in American Social imaginary. To what extent torture can be morally permitted, is one of the questions Morris attempts to respond. Is the enjoyment of torture ever morally justifiable? (Morris, 2010: 43). The issue seems not to be new. Originally the act of torture is associated to instrumentality, which oscillates from gleaning information to “disciplinary acts of punishments”, but enjoyment entails some underlying elements of sadism. Given this argument, Morris notes, sadist torture is oriented to the transformation of victims in torturers and torturers in victims. Those who have experienced the trauma of being tortured, become in a potential torturer while the original monster who inflicted a greater pain in their preys (as in Hostel) become victims. Additionally, there is a supernatural element in these types of movies (as in House of 1000 Corpses) which excites audience to the extent to construct a collective imaginary narrative that exerts influence in daily life. This is exactly, Morris adheres, and the doctrine of redistribution as it was formulated by liberals. The lesson is what you are doing to others you are doing to yourself. In disciplining this remote unknown others, we accept torture as a form of entertainment (Morris, 2010). “Here is the genius of sadist tortureterror: It transforms the source of fear from a distant other to something familiar in ourselves. The terror of the victim is supplanted by the delight of the torturer, which is being consciously shared by audience: that is the source of terror” (Morris, 2010: 51). What have in common all demons and monster in the whole portion of horror movies?. There are two elements not addressed by the foregoing critiques. The first is the fact that almost all villains and monsters kill and 178 Conclusion torture strangers who have been made vulnerable by seduction. The negative hospitality is inextricably intertwined with a kind of irreconcilable evil. Secondly, terrorism and 9/11 changed the ways these monsters have been constructed. These two aspects form the point of departure for the following discussion. Horror movies draw on folk tales. Sometimes they do it directly, but more often it is indirect. Monsters of various sorts populate folktales—trolls, goblins, werewolves, witches, vampires and other kinds of undead the latter of which would include the modern Frankenstein monster. Folktales in the present usage refers to stories that have no particular authors but have circulated in various forms among populations define by semi-permeable cultural boundaries. This is most noticeable in geographically bounded areas like the Middle East, Scandinavia, sub-Saharan Africa, and North America where various mythical figures appear in slightly different versions among culture-defining narratives. Occasionally a set of folk tales takes on foundational significance for a much broader cultural tradition. Such is the case for Greek myths that serve as a foundation stone for Western culture. What are the commonalities of Greek ancient tragedy and horror movies? For example, what has Helen of Troy’s abduction by Paris in common with the movie Hostel? In the Homeric version of the story, Helen is kidnapped by Paris while he and his brother, Hector, enjoyed the hospitality of Menelaus, Helen’s husband and brother of Agamemnon, who then led the invasion of Troy to re-capture Helen. In the Illiad’s account, the question of hospitality arises at least twice: With Paris’ violation of stealing his host’s wife and the introduction of the Trojan horse into the walled city. A perverse side of hospitality, as noted by Julia Kristeva (1991), occurs when guests are welcomed only to be enslaved or killed, which illustrates the mechanism of reversal prevalent in folktales, and it is an example of negative reciprocity (Sahlins, 1972). 179 Tourism and Terrorism Hospitality is a norm that emerges coincident with the establishment of settled communities, as it sets and reinforces borders. Hospitality maintains peace, facilitates trade, and is crucial for exogamy and enforcement of incest rules. Hospitality ensures that an encounter between hosts and guests is a pretext for celebrating with a banquet gift-exchange hat can include marriage. An example of reverse or negative hospitality is Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1897) which draws on the mythological figure of vampires as monsters who suck the blood of their victims. In Stoker’s novel the vampire is an aristocrat who has been preying on surrounding peasants; a fairly obvious bit of political symbolism. In the novel Dracula, a young lawyer, Jonathan Harker, leaves his English home Transylvania where Count Dracula has his castle. Although Dracula at first appears to be a generous host, eventually Dracula imprisons Harker and sucks his blood. As in the Iliad, initial hospitality eventually leads to torture and death. The movie Hostel has a similar theme. Young backpackers are enticed to a youth hostel in Slovakia where they are imprisoned, and the hostel owners are paid handsomely by sadistic millionaires to torture and kill the hostel’s guests. The fees charged for torturing and killing vary with the nationalities of the guests with Americans at the top. An embedded message of the movie is that being American in Slovakia represents a great risk for travellers risk exposure to an orgy of sadism and cruelty. Hostel is a low-budget popular culture allegory of classical folktale themes and cultural functions. Still, Hostel and contemporary horror movies are meant as entertainment—just fiction which requires a willing suspension of disbelief. This is not the case with contemporary stories of terrorism. They are definitively not presented as fiction, but as fact. Terror fairy tales in the post-9/11 era claim to present the truth, albeit one that should strain the mind of a seven-year-old. 180 Conclusion Terrorism as a hypostasized phenomenon was invented by Ronald Reagan’s presidential campaign functionaries in 1980. They accused the sitting US president, Jimmy Carter, of giving in or being weak against terrorism. The accusation arguably won the presidency for Ronald Reagan in November. The terrorism industry came into its own during the US presidential election of 1980. It was then that it assisted Ronald Reagan to gain the presidency over the incumbent Jimmy Carter (Wills, 2003). The terrorism industry manufactures, refines, and packages for distribution information, analysis, and opinion on a topic called ‘terrorism.’ The industry-created terrorism qualifies as a commodity. The industry continually manufactures it with adjustments and occasional model changes as dictated by the exigencies of the state and the ruling class. Terrorism in the twenty-first century is an ideological vehicle for the production of fear as a commodity. The ideological apparatuses of the empire manufacture the terrorism mythology by creating terror events. The terrorism industry uses reversal and decontextualization to make its product. It employs techniques of repetition, imagery, and condensation. (Skoll, 2016: 135). Just as the terrorism industry has created the mythology of terrorism so the film industry creates movies. Of course the film industry’s goal is profit whereas that of the terrorism industry is to further the interests of the state. Nonetheless, there is more overlap than it might first appear. The terrorism industry is part of the overarching ideological state apparatus (Althusser, 1971). Movies are products of the culture industry (Horkheimer and Adorno, 2002). The overlap is greater and more obvious in the propaganda movies like Zero Dark Thirty (Bigelow, 2012), American Sniper (Eastwood, 2015), and Eye in the Sky (Hood, 2016). Increasingly since the Second World War, movies as commodities have sold state ideology with entertainment along a continuum of subtlety—some movies are more 181 Tourism and Terrorism ideologically obvious than others. Horror movies seem remote, but partly because ours is an age of fear promoted by the mythology of terrorism, horror and terror mythology begin to converge. Greek myths follow into the more general category of folktales. Folktales originate as part of oral tradition, and therefore are hard to date. It is only when they are transcribed that they enter a place in history. In the case of the Greek myths, tradition names Homer as the first to record them in writing. But homer’s time, the eighth century BCE, was several hundred years removed from the Trojan wars which probably occurred in the eleventh century BCE. Homer’s world saw the transition from tribal societies, the home of the heroes of the myths to the emergence of states controlling urban settlements—the city-states of classical Greece. His time also expressed the transition from a culture rooted in Mythos, performance-based transmission of myths, to Logos (Havelock, 1983), written myths, which also corresponded to the emergence of the state as the main political mechanism (Gouldner, 1965). Moreover, the versions of the Greek myths we moderns rely on are derived from an even later period, the classical Greek age in the fourth century BCE, with poets such as Aeschylus, Euripides, and Sophocles. Modern versions of myths and folktales go through several transformations before they reach us. The original, oral versions function within premodern societies, sometimes tribal and sometimes feudal, but always pre-industrial. They reflect the functional requirements of their times. Once recorded, however, another dimension of meaning is added, as their transcribers record them according to the social needs of their times. For example, the Grimm bothers recorded northern European folktales in the first part of the nineteenth century at the time of the rise of the bourgeoisie and industrial capitalism. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein comes from the same era, but Bram Stoker’s Dracula is from the age of monopoly capitalism and neo-colonialism. Although the movies considered here are from the twenty-first century, their roots go back to pre-modern times. The movies are an 182 Conclusion amalgam of cultures, and their most recent accretion comes from the ideological needs of the terror states, especially the United States and its closest Anglophone allies. Myths, fairy tales, and horror stories call for a willing suspension of disbelief in order to work their cultural magic, which relies on entertainment in the furtherance of enculturation and norm enforcement. Their didacticism is sugar coated. Imbricated social commentary is woven into the story and images, but in ways that are decontextualized as if to avoid censorship. The earlier commentary about blood sucking aristocrats illustrates the point, and so do some distinctions between vampires and werewolves. Vampires can only be killed by a wooden stake, a peasant’s tool, but silver bullets kill werewolves. Werewolves are at the opposite end of the social scale; they are homeless rabble. Such criticisms of the social order are probably part of the original oral tradition, but the most recent elements appear in the recorded versions. Frankenstein’s monster alludes to the dramatic and potentially uncontrollable forces unleashed by the early industrial revolution in the 1810s, and the aristocrat Dracula must contend with the triumphant bourgeoisie of the 1890s. When folktales become recorded stories, they are commodified in novels and movies among other forms. Like any commodity, social labor produces them, and a vehicle for the market is the terrorism mythology. Terrorism is the marketing of the fear commodity. Just like steel, cotton cloth, or electronically produced images are created by certain mechanisms of human work so is terrorism. The first, fundamental mechanism is reversal. At this crucial stage of the production process victims are converted to villains. Those who resist the coercive violence of the empire meted out through state apparatuses are recreated as terrorists. Any organized resistance is made into terrorism. Moreover, this production process is progressive. The more certain people are victimized, the more they are depicted as terror threats. Possibly the model in this regard was the Nazi 183 Tourism and Terrorism production of communists and Jews as terrorist threats to Germans. The more the communists and Jews were victimized—killed, torture, detained, and so on—the more they were advertised as dangerous. For an earlier example, the more the United States carried out its genocide of American Indians, the more fearsome became representations of them. The more the US military, CIA, and other purveyors of violence and terror bomb, assassinate, and isolate Muslims and others in the Middle East and Central Asia, the more they become terrorist threats. An important part of the production of the terrorism mythology and each tale of terror is decontextualization. Representations serve to disconnect events from history and contemporary social phenomena. Repetition is one of the techniques employed in this mechanism as illustrated by the aforementioned repetition of a plane striking the World Trade Center on 9/11. The image becomes the event and explain it. Imagery is of course another technique in the repetition mechanism. Focusing attention on the World Trade Center towers helped sever the event from the hidden connection to the Saudis and that the CIA had created al Qaeda, including its name. Not everyone was mesmerized by the magic. Some saw through the misdirection, but it is not necessary to fool all the people all the time. The minority can always be dismissed as cranks and so-called conspiracy theorists. A third technique in the process of decontextualization is condensation. Condensation narrows consciousness to the event or episode. Only the violent incident, the search for perpetrators, the identification of terrorist organization are depicted and repeated. The war on terror, that global extension of imperial control, is condensed to incidents which are strung together only to present a myth of designated terrorists, which since 9/11 are mainly jihadists. The mythology of terrorism creates social divisiveness. People learn to fear neither nature nor the supernatural, but each other. Typical of the movies mentioned above, the same theme permeates 184 Conclusion two of the most popular cable television series: The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones. The first comes from a series of comic books. Robert Kirkman is the principal writer for the novels and comics. The second, The Game of Thrones, based on a novel of the same title and a series of novels, titled A Song of Ice and Fire by George R.R. Martin, Both fall into the general category of science fiction fantasy. In The Walking Dead zombies are the central setting and plot device. It is set in the near future after a virus has turned much of humanity into zombies. The leading characters are those not afflicted, and who try to survive. The setting for The Game of Thrones is another world, but one that resembles earth in general outline with continents, separated by oceans, and differing climates ranging from sub-arctic to sub-tropical. The distinctive feature of Thrones is that it resembles a medieval society—a swords and sorcery fantasy fictional genre. Both are immensely popular television series. Thrones connects with a well established consuming public going back at least to the nineteenth century’s fascination with fictional medievalism, probably set in motion by Sir Walter Scott’s (1771-1832) novels. The Walking Dead connects more with monster fiction, but also going back to the nineteenth century and another predilection is that for the undead, such as Bram Stoker’s (1847-1912) Dracula. Other famous fiction in a similar vein is Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, published 1818. One story, The Walking Dead, projects forward in time, and the other, Thrones, backward, but they have a similar political unconscious. Another obvious similarity is that neither has heroes or heroines. Unlike fiction rooted in the nineteenth century and largely through the twentieth, the characters fail to demonstrate anything like heroic personas, or even those that are especially likeable. They have a definite anti-empathic quality, as if both fictional worlds contained mainly psychopaths. This common characteristic is part of their political unconscious (Skoll, 2010: 174-5). Other undead populate the web and popular culture. The undead in various forms may not inhabit the earth, but they proliferate and 185 Tourism and Terrorism reproduce in electronic form along with print media. This phenomenon, the popularity of undead motifs, does not arise from especially clever marketing strategies, although they play a role, but they would find less success if it did not resonate with a form of public consciousness, or more accurately, unconsciousness (Skoll, 2010: 175). The undead represent a postmodern sensibility. This sensibility reeks of decay. “[It is a] ‘degraded’ landscape of schlock and kitsch, of TV series and Readers’ Digest culture, of advertising and motels, of the late show and the grade-B Hollywood film, of so-called paraliterature with its airport paperback categories of the gothic and the romance, the popular biography, the murder mystery and science fiction or fantasy novel: Materials they no longer simply ‘quote’, as a Joyce or a Mahler might have done, but incorporate into their very substance” (Jameson, 1991:55). Last but not least, the postmodern sensibility arises from material conditions in world capitalism. The creation of terrorism mythology was a piece of political propaganda that has risen to dominate international and domestic public policy throughout the world. The state ideological efforts suffuse popular culture, and the two elements—state ideological propaganda and popular culture—lean on each other for their narratives, images, and meanings. Social divisiveness and chaos suffuse movies, television, and popular literature. In the process, fiction and fact have become merged. The creation of the terrorism mythology arose because of the US support for Israel’s invasion of Lebanon during the Lebanese civil war in the 1980s, where Lebanese forces resisting US forces were deemed terrorists (Fisk, 1990). International terrorism perpetrated by the United States, and other Western powers, is reversed so that its victims and those who resist it are constructed in propaganda and popular culture as the terrorists. One result has been to curb hospitality among First World 186 Conclusion nations as their civil populations try to cope with refugees their own governments have created by their military aggressions in the Middle East. Horror movies mirror the radical shifts international geopolitics, because such popular culture artefacts partake in the hegemonic ideology. The attacks of 9/11 have been used to justify US imperial aggression and act as the foundation for the fear-filled social imaginary. 187 Tourism and Terrorism REFERENCES Abadie, A. and Gardeazabal, J. (2003). “The economic costs of Conflict: A case study of Basque country”. American Economic Review, 93(1): 113–132. Achcar, G. (2002). Le choc des barbaries: Terrorismes et désordre mondial (Vol. 887). Paris, Editions Complexe. Aja, Alexander, dir. (2006). The Hills Have Eyes. Altheide, D. (2006). Terrorist and the Politics of Fear. Oxford, Altamira Press. Altheide, D. (2009). “Moral Panic: From sociological concept to public discourse”. Crime and Media Culture, 5(1): 79–99. Altheide, D.L. (1987). “Format and symbols in TV coverage of terrorism in the United States and Great Britain”. International Studies Quarterly, pp. 161– 176. Altheide, D.L. (2007). “The mass media and terrorism”. Discourse & Communication, 1(3): 287–308. Althusser, Louis. (1971). Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses. In:Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays, Translated by Ben Brewster. New York, NY: New Left Books and Monthly Review Press.pp. 127–186. Amar, G. (2011).Hommo Mobilies. Buenos Aires, La Crujia Ediciones. Amenábar, A, dir. (2001). The Others. Araña, J. and León, C. (2008). The Impact of terrorism on tourism demmand. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2): 299–315. Arendt, H. (2013). The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Aries, P. (1975). Western attitudes toward death: From the Middle Ages to the present (Vol. 3). Maryland, John Hopkins University Press. Ariès, P. (2013). The hour of our death. New York, Vintage. Armitage, J. (2011). Virilio now. Current Perspectives in Virilio Studies. Cambridge, Polity Press. Asal, V.H., Rethemeyer, R.K., Anderson, I., Stein, A., Rizzo, J. and Rozea, M. (2009). The softest of targets: A study on terrorist target selection. Journal of Applied Security Research, 4(3): 258–278. 188 References Aschauer, W. (2010). “Perception of tourists at risky destinations. A model of psychological influence factors”. Tourism Review, 65(2): 4–20. Augé, M. (1996). Los no lugares: Espacios de anonimato. Barcelona, Editorial Gedisa. Augé, M. (1997). L’impossible voyage: Le tourisme et ses images. Paris, Payot & Rivages. Augé, M. (1998a). Hacia Una Antropología de los Mundos contemporáneos. Barcelona, Editorial Gedisa. Augé, M. (1998b) El viaje imposible: El turismo y sus imágenes. Barcelona, Editorial Gedisa. Augé, M. (2002). Diario de guerra: El mundo después del 11 de septiembre. Barcelona, Gedisa. Aziz, H. (1995) Understanding attacks on tourists in Egypt. Tourist Management, 16: 91–95. Bandyopadhyay, R. and Morais, D. (2005).”Representative Dissonance: India’s Self and Western Image.” Annals of Tourism Research, 32(4): 1006–1021, Bardis, P.D. (1981). History of Thanatology: Philosophical, Religious, Psychological, and Sociological Ideas Concerning Death, from Primitive Times to the Present. Washington DC, University Press of America. Bardis, P.D. (1986). “Thanatometer. A scale for the measurement of awareness and acceptance of death”. South African Journal of Sociology, 17(3): 71– 74. Barro, R. (1991). Economic Growth in a cross section countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics,106(2): 407–443. Bassi, C. (2010). The Anti-Imperialism of Fools: A cautionary story on the revolutionary Socialist Vanguard of England post-9/11 Anti War Movement. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 9(2): 113– 137. Baudrillard, J. (1995a). The systems of the objects. (2cd Ed) Mexico, Siglo XXI. Baudrillard, J. (1995b). The Gulf War Did Not Take Place. (1stEd) Sydney, Power Publications. Baudrillard, J. (1996). The perfect crime. London, Verso. Baudrillard, J. (2003). The Spirit of Terrorism. London, Verso. Baudrillard, J. (2006). “Virtuality and Events: The hell of power”. Baudrillard Studies, 3(2): 1–18. Bauman, Z. (2000). Globalization: The human consequences. New York, Columbia University Press. Bauman, Z. (2001). “Consuming life”. Journal of Consumer Culture, 1(1): 9– 29. 189 Tourism and Terrorism Bauman, Z. (2006). Liquid Fear, Cambridge, Polity Press. Bauman, Z. (2007). Consuming Life. Cambridge, Polity Press. Bauman, Z. (2011a). La Sociedad Sitiada. (The society under siege). Buenos Aires, Fondo de Cultura Económica. Bauman, Z. (2011b). Collateral damage: Social inequalities in a global age. Cambridge, Polity Press. Bauman, Z. (2013). Consuming life. New York, John Wiley & Sons. Bauman, Z. and Lyon, D. (2013). Liquid Surveillance, a conversation. New York, Willey & Son. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity (Vol. 17). London, Sage. Beck, U. (2006). La Sociedad del Riesgo: Hacia una nueva modernidad. Buenos Aires, Paidos. Beck, U. (2011). “Convivir con el Riesgo Global”. En La Humanidad Amenazada: gobernar los riesgos globales. Innerarity, D. and Solana, J. (eds.), Madrid, Paidos, pp. 21–32. Becker, P. (2011). “Whose Risks? Gender and the Ranking of Hazards”. Disaster Prevention and Management,20(4): 423–433. Belting, H. (2007). Antropología de la imagen. Madrid, Editorial Katz. Bernstein, R. (2006). The Abuse of Evil. The corruption of politics and religion since 9/11. (1st Ed) Buenos Aires, Katz. Bernstein, R.J. (2013). The abuse of evil: The corruption of politics and religion since 9/11. New York, John Wiley & Sons. Bhattarai, K., Conway, D.and Shrestha,N. (2005). “Tourism, terrorism and turmoil in Nepal”. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(3): 669–688. Bianchi, R. (2007). Tourism and The Globalization of Fear: Analyzing the politics of risk and (in)security in global travel. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7(1): 64–74. Bianchi, R. and Stephenson, M. (2014). Tourism and Citizenship: Rights, freedoms and responsibilities in the global Order. Abingdon, Routledge Biddle, S.D. (2005). American grand strategy after 9/11: An assessment. Carlisle, DIANE Publishing. Bigelow, Katherine, dir. (2012). Zero Dark Thirty. Biran, A., Poria, Y. and Oren, G. (2011). “Sought Experience at Dark Heritage sites”. Annals of Tourism Research,38(3): 820–841. Blom, T. (2000). “Morbid-Tourism – a postmodern market niche with an example from Althrop”. Norwegian Journal of Geography,54(1): 29–36. Boniface, B. and Cooper, C. (2009). World-wide destinations: The geography of travel and tourism. New York, Elsevier. 190 References Brantlinger, P. (1990). Rule of Darkness: British Literature and Imperialism.Ithaca, Cornell University Press. pp. 1830–1914. Brisard, Jean-Charles and Guillaume Dasqui­­é. (2002). Translated by Lucy Rounds. New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press/Nation Books. Britton, D. (2014). Picturing Dark Tourism: Mostar. In: XVIII ISA World Congress of Sociology. Isaconf.pp. 13–19. Britton, S. (1982). The Political Economy of Tourism in the Third World . Annals of Tourism Research, 9(3): 331–358. Bryant, W.C. (1817). “Thanatopsis”. North American Review, 5(15): 338–341. Buchmann, A. (2010). “Planning and Development in Film Tourism: Insight into the experience of Lord of The Ring Film Guides”. Tourism and Hospitality Planning & Development,7(1): 77–84. Buck-Morss, S. (1986). “The Flaneur, the Sandwichman and the Whore: The Politics of Loitering.” New German Critique (Autumn).pp. 99–140. Buda, D.M.and McIntosh, A.J. (2013). Dark tourism and voyeurism: Tourist arrested for “spying” in Iran. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research,7(3): 214–226. Burnett, R. (1995). Cultures of vision. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Burns, P.M. (2004). “Six Postcards from Arabia: A Visual Discourse of Colonial Travels in the Orient.” Tourist Studies, 4(3): 255–275. Busby, G., Korstanje, M.E. and Mansfield, C. (2011). “Madrid: Literary Fiction and the Imaginary Urban Destination.” Journal of Tourism Consumption and Practice Volume,3(2). Castaño, J.M. (2005). Psicología Social de los Viajes y el Turismo. Madrid, Thomson Ed. Castoriadis, C. (1996). “La democracia como procedimiento y como régimen”. Jueces Para la Democracia, (26): 50–59. Castoriadis, C. (2006). Lo que hace a Grecia: Seminarios 1982-1983: La creación humana II. De Homero a Heráclito. Escobar, E., Gondicas,M. and Vernay,P. (eds.), Fondo de Cultura Económica. Caton, K. and Santos, C.A. (2008). “Closing the Hermeneutic Circle? Photographic Encounters with the Other”.Annals of Tourism Research, 35(1): 7–26. Catron, B. and Harmon, M. (1981). Action Theory in Practice: Toward Theory without Conspiracy. Public Administration Review, 41(5): 535–541. Chamorro, P.B. (2006). Ius Hospitii y ius civitatis. Gerión. Revista de Historia Antigua, 24(1): 207–235. Chateaubriand, F. (1944). Viaje a América. Buenos Aires: Emecé Editores. 191 Tourism and Terrorism Chauhan, V. and Khanna, S. (2009). “Tourism: A tool for crafting peace process in Kashmir, J&K, India”. Tourismos: An International Multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism. 4(2): 69–89. Cheyfitz, E. (1993). “Savage Law, the plot against American Indians in Johnson & Graham´s Lesee v MÍntosh and the Pioneers”. Kaplan, A. and Pease,D. (eds.),Cultures of United States Imperialism. Durham, Duke University Press, pp. 109–128. CLG. (2011).U.S. Official: Bin Laden ‘already buried at sea’. May 2. http:// www.legitgov.org/US-Official-Bin-Laden-already-buried-sea Cohen, E.H. (2011). “Educational dark tourism at an in populo site: The Holocaust museum in Jerusalem”. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1): 193– 209. Coleman, S. (2001). “Actors of History? Religion, Politics, and Reality within the Protestant Right in America”. Religion, Politics and Globalization: Anthropological Approaches. Lindquist,G. and Handelman, D.(eds.), New York, Berghan Book.pp. 171–188. Cresswell, T. (2010). Towards a politics of mobility. Environment and planning D: society and space, 28(1): 17–31. Croft, C. (2015).Dancers as Diplomats: American Choreography in Cultural Exchange. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Cropf, R.and Bagwell, T. (2016).Ethical Issues and Citizen Rights in the Era of Digital Government Surveillance. Hershey, PE: IGI Global. Cusack, T. (2010).”Enlightened Protestants: The improved shorescape, order and liminiality at early seaside resorts in Victorian Ireland”. Journal of Tourism History, 2(3): 165–185. Dann, G. (1998). The Dark side of Tourism: Etudes et Rapports. L Aix en Provence. Centre International de Reserches et d Etudes Turistiques. Dann, G.and Seaton, A. (2001). Slavery, Contested Heritage and Thanatourism. London, Routledge. Debord, G. (2012). Society of the Spectacle. London, Bread and Circuses Publishing. Derrida, J. (1997). Deconstruction in a nutshell: A conversation with Jacques Derrida (No. 1). New York, Fordham University Press. Derrida, J. (2005). The principle of hospitality. Parallax, 11(1): 6–9. Derrida, J. and Dufourmantelle, A. (2000). Of hospitality. Stanford, Stanford University Press. Diken, B. and Laustsen, C.B. (2002). Zones of indistinction security, terror, and bare life. Space and Culture, 5(3): 290–307. Dolnicar, S. (2005a). “Fear Segment in tourism”. CD Proceedings of the 14 International Research Conference of the Council for Australian University and Hospitality Education. CAUTHE. 1-5 Febrero de 2005, Australia. 18 192 References Dolnicar, S. (2005b). “Understanding barriers to leisure travel, tourists fears as marketing basis”. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 11(3): 197–208. Domínguez, P. Burguette, E. and Bernard, A. (2003). “Efectos del 11 de Septiembre en la hotelería Mexicana: reflexión sobre la mono-dependencia turística”. Estudios y Perspectivas en Turismo, 12(3–4): 335–348. Douglas, M. (1992). Risk and Blame. New York: Routledge Douglas, M. 2007. Pureza y Peligro: Un análisis de los conceptos de contaminación y tabú. Buenos Aires, Nueva Visión. Dowling, R.E. (1986). “Terrorism and the media: A rhetorical genre”. Journal of Communication, 36(1): 12–24. Duclos, D. (1987). “Le Risque: Une construction sociale?”. En J. Fabiani, y J Thyes. La Societeé Vulnerable. Paris, Ecole Normale Superieure, pp. 91– 92. Eagleton, T. (2011). Trouble with strangers: A study of ethics. New York. John Wiley & Sons. Eastwood, Clint, dir. (2015). American Sniper.Florida, R. (2014). The Rise of the Creative Class—Revisited: Revised and Expanded. New York, Basic books. Edwards, J. (1741). Sinners in the Hand of an Angry God. Edited by Reiner Smolinski. Electronic Texts in American Studies Paper 54. Lincoln, NB: University of Nebraska-Lincoln. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/etas/54. Eid, M. (ed.), (2014). Exchanging Terrorism Oxygen for Media Airwaves: The Age of Terroredia: The Age of Terroredia. Hershey, PE: IGI Global. Enders, W. and Hoover, G.A. (2012). “The nonlinear relationship between terrorism and poverty”. The American Economic Review, 102(3): 267–272. Enders, W. and Sandler, T. (2011). The political economy of terrorism. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Epstein, R. (2011). ”Book Review: The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined”.Scientific American. Retrieved March 18, 2015. Ertuna, C. and Ertuna, Z.I. (2009). “The Sensitivity of German and British tourists to new shocks”. Tourism Review, 64(3): 19–27. Essner, J. (2003).Terrorism´s impact on Tourism: What the industry may learn from Egypt´s struggle with al-Gama´a al-Islamiya. Security and Development. IPS 688. Evans, G. (2009). “Creative cities, creative spaces and urban policy”. Urban Studies, 46(5–6): 1003–1040. Fahy, T (2010). “Introduction”. In:The Philosophy of Horror Movies. Fahy, T.(ed.), Lexington, The University Press of Kentucky, pp. 1–13. Feuerbach, L. (2009). The Essence of Christianity. Madrid, Clasicos de la Cultura, Trotta Editorial. 193 Tourism and Terrorism Fillipi, A. (1988). Instituciones e ideologías en la independencia hispanoamericana. Buenos Aires, Alianza. Fisk, Robert. (1990). Pity the nation: The abduction of Lebanon. New York: Atheneum. Fitzgerald, F. (1986). Cities on a Hill. New York, Simon & Schuster. Floyd, M. and Pennington-Gray,L. (2004). “Profiling risk: Perception of tourist”. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(4): 1051–1054. Floyd, M. Gibson, H. Pennington-Gray, L. and Thapa, B. (2003). “The Effects of risk perception on intention to travel in the aftermath of September 11, 2001”. In: Safety and Security in Tourism: Relationships, Management and Marketing. Hall, M. Timothy, D.Y. and Duval, T.(eds.), New York: Haworth Hospitality Press. Fluri, J. (2009). Foreign Passport Only: Geographies of postconflict work in Kabul, Afghanistan. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99(5): 986–994. Foley, M.and Lennon, J.J. (1996). JFK and dark tourism: A fascination with assassination. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 2(4): 198–211. Foucault, M. (1969).L´archéologie du savoir”. Paris, Gallimard. Foucault, M. (2001). The Society must be defended Buenos Aires, Fondo de Cultura Económica. Foucault, M. (2007).Birth of Biopolitics. Buenos Aires, FCE. Fraisse, P. (1973). “Las Emociones”. En Motivación, Emoción y Personalidad. P. Fraisse y J. Piaget (compiladores). Buenos Aires: Editorial Paidos. pp. 106–187. Freud, S. (1920).Beyond the Pleasure Principle, London: International PsychoAnalytical Press. Friedman, G. (2011). The Next Decade. New York, Doubleday. Fritting, M. and Kang, H. (2006). International Terrorism, International Trade and Borders. Research in Global Strategic Management, 12(1): 203–223. Fuchs, G. and Reichel, A. (2010). “Health Tourists Visiting a Highly Volatile Destination”. Anatolia, an international Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 21(2): 205–226. Fukuyama, F. (Summer 1989). The End of History. The National Interest, 16: 4–18. Fuller, G. (2012). A World without Islam, New York, Back Bay Books. Ganser, D. (2005). NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation GLADIO and Terrorism in Western Europe. London: Frank Cass Publishers. Geertz, C. (1980). Negara. New Jersey, Princeton University Press. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 194 References Giddens, A. (1999). Consecuencias de la Modernidad. Madrid: Alianza Editorial. Glassner, B. (1999). The Culture of Fear: Why Americans Are Afraid of the Wrong Things. New York, Basic Books. Goldblatt, J. and Hu, C. (2005). “Tourism, terrorism, and the new world for event leaders”. E-Review of Tourism Research, 3(6): 139–144. Gottdiener, M. (1994).The New Urban Sociology. New York, McGraw-Hill. Gouldner, Alvin. (1965). Enter Plato: Classical Greece and the origins of social theory. New York: Basic Books. Grandena, F. (2013). “The Constant Tourist: Passing incimacy and touristic Nomadism in Drole de Felix”. In: Open Roads, Closed Borders: The temporary French-language Road Movie, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, pp. 19–38 Gray, C.S. (2007). The Implications of Preemptive and Preventive war Doctrines: Reconsideration. Department of the Army, Department of Defense, US Government. Availableathttp: / / www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/Pubs/display.cfm? pubid=789 Greenberger, A.J. (1969). The British image of India: A study in the literature of imperialism, 1880-1960. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Grossman, M. (2014).Artists of the possible, governing through networks and American policy since 1945. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Grosspietsch, M. (2005). Can tourism provoke terrorism? Working Paper Series. Num. 3. Sustainable Development Through Tourism, University of Munster, Germany. Available at www.sd-tourism.org. Guidotti-Hernández, N.M. (2011). Unspeakable violence: Remapping US and Mexican national imaginaries. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. p. 374 Gygax, M. (2007). “El Intercambio de dones en el mundo griego: Reciprocidad, imprecisión, equivalencia y desequilibrio”. Gerión, 25(1): 111–26. Haigh, R. and Amaratunga, D. (2010). “An integrative review of the built environment discipline’s role in the development of society’s resilience to disasters”. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 1(1): 11–24. Handelman, D. (2013). Self-Exploders, Self Sacrifice and the Rizhomic organizations of Terrorism. In Religion, Politics, & Globalization. New York, Berghan. pp. 232–262. Hartnell, A. (2009). “Katrina tourism and a tale of two cities: visualizing race and class in New Orleans”. American Quarterly, 61(3): 723–747. Harvey, D. (1989). The condition of postmodernity (Vol. 14). Oxford, Blackwell. Haskin, Roy, dir. (1954). The Naked Jungle. Havelock, Eic. (1983). “The linguistic task of the pre-Socratics.” In:Language and thought in early Greek society. Kevin, Robb (ed.), La Salle, IL: Hegler Institute.pp. 7–82. 195 Tourism and Terrorism Heidegger, M. (1997). El Ser y el Tiempo. Santiago, Editorial Universitaria. Heilbroner, R.L.(1995). The Worldly Philosophers. The lives, times and ideas of the great economic thinkers. New York, Touchstone. Henderson, J.C. (2008). “Managing crises: UK civil aviation, BAA airpots and the August 2006 terrorist threat”. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 8(2): 125–136. Hofman, A. (1993). Opinion, Illusion, and the Illusion of Opinion: Barruel’s Theory of Conspiracy. Eighteenth-Century Studies, 27(1): 27–60. Hofstadter, R. (1992). Social Darwinism in American Thoughts. Boston, Beacon Press. Holloway, J. and Paláez, E. (2002). La guerra de todos los estados contra toda la gente. En Guerra Infinita: Hegemonía y terror mundial. Ceceña, A. y Sader, E. Buenos Aires: CLACSO. pp. 159–166. Hood, G, dir. (2016). Eye in the Sky. Horkheimer, Max and Theodore, Adorno (2002/1947). Dialec tic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments. Gunzelin, Schmid Noerr(ed.), translated by Edmund Jephcott. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Howie, L. (2009). A Role for Business in the War on Terror. Disaster Prevention and Management, 18(2): 100–107. Howie, L. (2010).Terror on the Screen: Witnesses and the reanimation of 9/11 as Image-event, Popular culture and Pornography. Washington DC, New Academia Publishing. Howie, L. (2011). “They were created by Man… and they have a plan: Subjective and objective violence in Battlestar Gallactica and the War on terror”. International Zizek Studies, 5(2): 1–19. Howie, L. (2012). Witnessing terrorism. In: Witnesses to Terror New Hampshire, Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 155–175. Huizinga, J. (1993).The Waning of Middle Age. Hodder & Stoughton Limited. Huntington, S.P. (1993). The clash of civilizations?. Foreign Affairs, pp. 22– 49. Huntington, S.P.(1993). The Third Wave. Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Oklahoma, Oklahoma University Press. Ignatieff, M. (2001).Human Rights. As Politics and Idolatry. New Jersey, Princeton University Press. pp. 3–53. Ignatieff, M. (2013). The lesser evil: Political ethics in an age of terror. Princeton, Princeton University Press. Ignatiev, N. (1995). How the Irish Became White. New York: Routledge. Ingold, T. (2000). The Perception of Enviroment: Essays on livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. London, Routledge. 196 References Ingold, T. (2011). Being Alive. Essays on movement, knowledge and description. London, Routledge. Irwin, R. (2007). “The Culture Shock, negotiating feeling in the field”. Anthropology Matters,9(1): 1–11. Jamal, T. and Lelo, L. (2011). Exploring the conceptual and analytical framing of dark tourism: From darkness to intentionality. Tourist Experience: Contemporary Perspectives, pp. 29–42. Jameson, Frederic. (1991). Postmodernism, or the cultural logic of late capitalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Janiewski, D. (1991). “Southern honor, Southern deshonor: Managerial ideology and the construction of gender, race and class relations in southern industry”. In: Baron, A. (ed.),Work Engendered. Toward a new history of American Labor.Ithaca, Cornell University Press. pp. 47–69. Jeffreys, D.S. (2013).Spirituality in Dark Places: The ethics of solitary confinement. New York, Palgrave Macmillan. Johnson, C. (2000). Blowback: The costs and consequences of American empire. New York, Macmillan. Joll, J. (1979). The Anarchists. Cambridge, Methuen. Kaelber, L. (2007). “A memorial as virtual traumascape: Darkest tourism in 3D and cyber space to the gas Chambers of Auschwitz”. E-Review of Tourism Research, 5(2): 24–33. Kagan, S. and Hahn, J. (2011). “Creative cities and (un) sustainability: From creative class to sustainable creative cities”. Culture and Local Governance,3(1): 11–27. Kang, E.J.and Lee, T.J. (2011). “The dark tourism experience”. Tourism and Leisure Studies, 23(7): 547–566. Kang, E.J., Scott, N., Lee, T.J.and Ballantyne, R. (2012). “Benefits of visiting a ‘dark tourism’site: The case of the Jeju April 3rd peace park, Korea”. Tourism Management,33(2): 257–265. Kaplan, C. (2006). Mobility and war: The cosmic view of US ‘air power’.Environment and Planning A, 38(2): 395–407. Kellner, D. (2005). “Baudrillard, Globalization and Terrorism: Some comments in recent adventures of the Image and Spectacle on the occasion of Baudrillard´s 75th birthday”. Baudrillard Studies, 2(1): 1–9. Kelman, D. (2012). Counterfeit Politics, Secret Plots and Conspiracy Narratives in the Americas. Lanham MD: Bucknell University Press. Keohane, N.O. and Zeckhauser, R.J. (2003). The ecology of terror defense. In: The Risks of Terrorism. Springer US. pp. 103–131. Kepel, G. (2002). Los Hechos del 11 de Septiembre de 2001. In: El Mundo Después del 11 de Septiembre de 2001. (Compilación). Barcelona: Editorial Península. pp. 25–43. 197 Tourism and Terrorism Kerouac, J. (1957). On the Road. New York, Viking Press. Kierkegaard, S. (2003). Temor y Temblor. Buenos Aires, Losada. King, S. (1983). Stephen King’s Danse Macabre. New York: Berkley Books. Klein, N. (2007). The shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism. New York, Macmillan. Klein, N. (2011). The shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism, Buenos Aires, FCE. Koch, A. (2005). “Cyber citizen or cyborg citizen: Baudrillard, political agency, and the commons in virtual politics”. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 20(2– 3): 159–175. Korstanje, M. (2006). “Lo religioso en el siglo XXI: Transformación de creencias y prácticas”. Ciencias Sociales Online, 3(3): 28–55. Korstanje, M. (2008). “Book Review, Jacques Derrida La Hospitalidad”. Kritike, 2(2): 178–182. Korstanje, M. (2009). “Re-visiting the risk perception theory in the contexts of travels”. ERTR: E-Review of Tourism Research, 7(4): 68–81. Korstanje, M. (2012). Reconsidering cultural tourism: An anthropologist’s perspective. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 7(2): 179–184. Korstanje, M. (2013d). “Preemption and Terrorism, when the future governs”.MotenR. (ed.). Cultura. Special Issue, The Axiology of Islam. 10(1): 167–184. Korstanje, M. (2013e). “Guerra y Museología: Una introducción a la teoría de los museos”. Aposta, Revista de Ciencias Sociales. N 56, pp. 1–30. Korstanje, M. (2013f). “Review of Olympic Ceremonialism and The performance of national character”. Event Management, 17(4): 453–455. Korstanje, M. (2014c). “Review: Dark tourism and place identity”. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change,DOI:10.1080/14766825.2014.892560. Korstanje, M. (2014d). “Review: Heritage that hurts” Journal of Heritage Tourism,DOI: 10.1080/14766825.2014.892560. Korstanje, M.and Busby, G. (2010). Understanding the Bible as the roots of physical displacement: The origin of tourism. E-Review of Tourism Research, 8(3): 95–111. Korstanje, M. and Skoll, G. (2013). “Discussing concepts: Terrorism and tourism in the spotlight”. Turismo y Desarrollo: Revista de Investigación en Turisme y Desarrollo Local, 6(14): 1–7. Korstanje, M. and Skoll, G. (2014). “Biopolitics and Clonation, the roots of paradise”. International Journal of Human Potential Development, 3 (1): 20–33. Korstanje, M.E. (2010). “Formas Elementales de la Hospitalidad”, RBTUR, 4(2): 86–111. 198 References Korstanje, M.E. (2011a). Reconnecting with poverty: New challenges of disaster management. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 2(2): 165–177. Korstanje, M.E. (2011b). “Detaching the elementary forms of dark-tourism”. Anatolia,22(3): 424–427. Korstanje, M.E. (2011c). “Why risk why now? Conceptual problems around the risk perception in tourism industry”. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em turismo, 5(1): 4–22. Korstanje, M.E. (2013a). Ley y democracia en la era del terrorismo. Nómadas. Revista Crítica de Ciencias Sociales y Jurídicas, 35(3): 179–188. Korstanje, M.E. (2013b). El Concepto De Anglo-Democracia Explicado Con Claridad: Estados Unidos Luego Del 11 De Septiembre. Contribuciones a las Ciencias Sociales, (2013-06). Korstanje, M.E. (2013c). “Empire and Democracy. A critical reading of Michael Ignatieff”. Nómadas. Revista Crítica de Ciencias Sociales y Jurídicas, 38: 69–78. Korstanje, M.E. (2014a). Como funciona el riesgo en democracia: política y sistema productivo. Eikasia: Revista de Filosofía, (55): 139–158. Korstanje, M.E. (2014b). Exegesis and myths as methodologies of research in tourism. Anatolia, 25(2): 299–301. Korstanje, M.E. (2015).A Difficult World, examining the roots of Capitalism. New York, Nova Science Publishers. Korstanje, M.E. (2015b). Horror movies post 9/11: Delineating tourism in a context of certainty. Anatolia, 26(1): 96–98. Korstanje, M.E. (2016). “Review: The better of Angels Nature: Why violence has declined”. International Journal of Baudrillard Studies. 13(1): 99–102. Korstanje, M.E.and Clayton, A. (2012). Tourism and terrorism: Conflicts and commonalities. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 4(1): 8–25. Korstanje, M.E.and George, B. (2015). Dark Tourism: Revisiting Some Philosophical Issues. E-Review of Tourism Research, 12(1–2): 127–136. Korstanje, M.E.and Ivanov, S. (2012). “Tourism as a Form of New Psychological Resilience: The Inception of Dark Tourism”. Cultur: Revista de Cultura e Turismo,6(4): 56–71. Korstanje, M.E.and Olsen, D.H. (2011). The discourse of risk in horror movies post 9/11: Hospitality and hostility in perspective. International Journal of Tourism Anthropology, 1(3–4): 304–317. Korstanje, M.E. and Skoll (2015a). “From disaster to religiosity: República de Cromañón, Buenos Aires, Argentina”. Religious tourism and pilgrimage management: an international perspective. Raj, R. and Griffin, K. (eds.), pp. 267–278. 199 Tourism and Terrorism Korstanje, M.E. and Tarlow, P. (2012). “Being lost: tourism, risk and vulnerability in the post-‘9/11’entertainment industry”. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 10(1): 22–33. Korstanje, M.E. Tzanelli, R.and Clayton, A. (2014). Brazilian World cup 2014: Terrorism, tourism, and social conflict. Event Management, 18(4): 487–491. Korstanje, M.E., Skoll, G.and Timmermann, F. (2015). “Terrorism, Tourism and Worker Unions: The disciplinary boundaries of fear”. International Journal of Religious Tourism and Pilgrimage, 2(1): 1–12. Kozak, M, Crotts, J. and Law, R. (2007). “The Impact of the pereption of risk on international Travellers”. International Journal of Tourism Research, 9(4): 233–242. Kristeva, J. (1991).Extranjeros para nosotros mismos. Barcelona, Plaza & Janes. Kristol, W. and Kagan, R. (1996). Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy . Foreign Affairs. July /August issue. Kurku, E. (1997). Trapped in a Web of Covert Killers. Covert Action Quarterly (winter): 6-12. Kuto, B. andGroves, J. (2004). “The Effects of terrorism: Evaluating Kenya´s tourism crisis”. Pero ¿como definir un acto “terrorista?. E-Review of Tourism Research, 2(4): 88–95. Lasch, C. (1991). The culture of narcissism: American life in an age of diminishing expectations. New York, WW Norton & Company. Lash, S. and Urry, J. (1994). Economies of signs and space (Vol. 26). London, Sage. Lemke, T. (2001). “The birth of bio-politics’: Michel Foucault’s lecture at the College de France on neo-liberal governmentality”. Economy and society, 30(2): 190–207. Lennon, J. and Foley, M. (2000). Dark Tourism: The attraction of Death and Disasters. London, Thomson Learning. Lepp, A. and Gibson, H. (2008). “Sensation Seeking and Tourism: Tourist role, perception of risk and Destination Choice”. Tourism Management, 29: 740– 750. Levenson, R.W. Ekman, P. and Friesen, W.W. (1990). “Voluntary facial expression generates emotions-specific nervous system activity”. Psychophysiology, 27: 363–384. Levi-Strauss, C. (1968).Structural Anthropology. Harmondsworth, Penguin Books. Luhmann, N. (2006). Sociología del Riesgo. México City: Universidad Iberoamericana. Lukács, G. (1971). The Theory of the Novel: A historico-philosophical essay on the forms of great epic literature. Massachuseets, MIT press. 200 References Lynch, P., Molz, J.G., Mcintosh, A., Lugosi, P.and Lashley, C. (2011). Theorizing hospitality. Hospitality & Society, 1(1): 3–24. MacCannell, D. (1976). The tourist: A new theory of the leisure class. Berkeley, University of California Press. MacCannell, D. (2011). The ethics of sightseeing. Berkeley, University of California Press. Malinowski, B. (1948). Magic, Science and Religion: And Other Essays, by Bronislaw Malinowski. Selected, and with an Introduction by Robert Redfield. Boston, Beacon Press. Malinowski, B. (1967). Una Teoría de la cultura. Buenos Aires, Editorial Sudamericana. Mandelbaum, M. (2010). The Frugal Power: America´s Global Leadership in a cash-strapped Era. New York, Public Affairs. Manning, P.K. (1989). “Semiotics and Social Theory”. In Action and Structure: Research methods and social theory. London.Sage, pp. 80–98. Mansfeld, Y. (1999). “Cycles of war, terror, and peace: Determinants and management of crisis and recovery of the Israeli tourism industry”. Journal of Travel Research, 38(1): 30–36. Mansfeld, Y. and Pizam, A. (2006). Tourism, Security and Safety: from theory to practice. Oxford, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Mansfield, C. (2008). Traversing Paris: French Travel Writing practices in the Late Twentieth Century. Saarsbruck, VDM Verlag. Mazierska, E. (2013). “Tourism and Travelling in Jean-Luc Godard´s Allemagne 90 neuf zero and Eloge de l´amour”. In:Open Roads, Closed Borders. Michael, Gott and Thibaut, Schilt (eds.), Chicago, University of Chicago Press. pp. 119–136. McCauley, C. and Moskalenko, S. (2008). “Mechanisms of political radicalization: Pathways toward terrorism”. Terrorism and Political Violence, 20(3): 415–433. McCauley, C. and Moskalenko, S. (2011). Friction: How radicalization happens to them and us. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Mead, G.H. (2009). Mind, self, and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviourist (Vol. 1). Chicago, University of Chicago press. Miles, W.F. (2002). “Auschwitz, Museum interpretation and Darker Tourism”. Annals of Tourism Research,29(4): 1175–1178. Miller, D.S. (2008).”Disaster Tourism and Disaster Landscape attraction after Hurricane Katrina: An auto-ethnography journey”. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 2(2): 115–131. Mo, A. (2009). “Creatives, creative production and the creative market”. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 12(2–4): 134–143. 201 Tourism and Terrorism Morris, J. (2010). “The Justification of Torture-Horror: Retribution and Sadism in Saw, Hostel, and the Devil´s Rejects”. “. In:The Philosophy of Horror Movies. Fahy, T.(eds.), Lexington, The University Press of Kentucky, pp. 42–56. Moskalenko, S. and McCauley, C. (2009). Measuring political mobilization: The distinction between activism and radicalism. Terrorism and Political Violence, 21(2): 239–260. Moten, A.R. (2010). “Understanding terrorism: Contested concept, conflicting perspectives and shattering consequences”. Intellectual Discourse, 18(1): 1–17. Mythen, G. and Walklate, S. (2006). Communicating the terrorist risk: Harnessing a culture of fear?. Crime, Media, Culture, 2(2): 123–142. Naisbitt, J. (1995). Global Paradox. London, Nicholas Breadly Publishing. Nikel, P. (2010). “Horror and the Idea of Everyday life: On sceptical threats in Psycho and The Birds”. In:The Philosophy of Horror Movies. Fahy, T.(eds.), Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky,pp. 14–32. Niyaz, A. (2010). “Terrorism and extremism: A threat to Maldives tourism industry”. Unisci. Discussion Papers. No. 24. Octubre. O’ Gorman, K. (2006). “Jacques Derrida´s philosophy of hospitality”. Hospitality Review, 8(4): 50–57. Oberg, K. (2007). “Culture Shock: Adjustment to New Cultural Environments”.Practical Anthropology,7: 177–182. Oliver-Smith, A. (2002). “Theorizing disasters, nature, power and culture?”. In: Hoffman, S. and Oliver-Smith, A. (eds.), Catasthrope and culture: The anthropology of disasters. Oxford: School of American Research James Currey, pp. 23–47. Oswin, N. and Yeoh, B. (2010). “Introduction: Mobile City Singapore”. Mobilities, 5(2): 167–175. Pagden, A. (1995). Lords of all the World: Ideologies of Empire in Spain, Britain and France c. 1500-c. 1800 (p. 126178). New Haven, CT, Yale University Press. Palmer, C.A. (1994). Tourism and colonialism: The experience of the Bahamas. Annals of Tourism Research, 21(4): 792–811. Panksepp, J. (1982). “Toward a General psychobiological theory of Emotions”. The Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 5: 407–467. Park, K. and Reisinger, Y. (2010). “Differences in the perceived influence of natural disasters and travel risk on international travels”. Tourism Geographies, 12(1): 1–24. Peattie, S. Clarke, P. and Peattie, K. (2005). Risk and Responsibility in Tourism: Promoting sun-safety . Tourism Management, 26: 399–408. 202 References Pech, R. and Slade, B. (2006). Religious Fundamentalism and Terrorism: Why do they do it and what do they want?. Foresight, 8(1): 8–20. Pedahzur et al., (2003). Altruism and Fatalism: The Characteristics of Palestinian Suicide Terrorists. Deviant Behavior, 24(4): 405–23. Penchaszadeh, A.P. (2014). Politica y Hospitalidad: Disquisiciones urgentes sobre la figura del extranjero. Buenos Aires, EUDEBA. Phillips, D.E. (2008). Terrorism and Security in the Caribbean before and After 9/11. Conflict Management, Peace Economics and Development, 7: 97–138. Piazza, J.A. (2007). “Draining the swamp: Democracy promotion, state failure, and terrorism in 19 Middle Eastern countries”. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 30(6): 521–539. Piazza, J.A. (2008). “Incubators of terror: Do failed and failing states promote transnational terrorism?”. International Studies Quarterly, 52(3): 469–488. Pinker, S. (2011). The better angels of our nature: The decline of violence in history and its causes. New York, Penguin Books. Plog, S. (1973). “Why destination areas rise and fall in popularity.” The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 13(3): 13–16. Plog, S. (1991). Leisure travel; making it a growth market. Again!. New York: Wiley and Sons. Pojman, L. (2006). Terrorism, Human Rights and the case for World Government. (1st Ed) Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield. Pollins, B.M. (1989). Does trade still follow the flag? . American Political Science Review, 83(2): 465–480. Poria, Y. (2007). Establishing cooperation between Israel and Poland to save Auschwitz Concentration Camp: Globalising the responsibility for the Massacre. International Journal of Tourism Policy, 1(1): 45-57. Possner, R.A. (1983). The Economics of Justice. Cambridge, Harvard University Press. Powell, J. (2010). “Neo-liberalism and Globalization: Repetitious inequalities and the implication for a global social theory”. Sincronia: A journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Spring. University of Guadalajara, Mexico. Prideaux, B. (2005). Factors affecting bilateral tourism Flows . Annals of Tourism Research,32(3): 780–801. Raine, R. (2013). “A Dark Tourism spectrum”. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research,7(3): 242–256. Ramos, Y. and Loscertales, J. (1948). Hospicio y Clientela en España Cética. Revista Emérita, 10(1): 308–337. Rascarolli, L. (2013). “On Eve of the journey, Tangier, Tbillisi, Calais”. In:Open Roads, Closed Borders. Michael,got and thibaut, Schilt (eds.), Chicago, Chicago University Press. pp. 19–38. 203 Tourism and Terrorism Rashid, A. (2002). Los Hechos del 11 de Septiembre de 2001". In: El Mundo Después del 11 de Septiembre de 2001. (Compilación). Barcelona: Editorial Península. pp. 13–23. Rawls, J. (1999). The Law of Peoples Cambridge, Harvard University Press. Ray-Griffin, D. (2004). The New Pearl Harbor. Disturbing questions about Bush administration and 9/11. Massachusetts, Olive Branch Press. Reichel, A., Fuchs, G. andUriely, N. (2007). “Perceived risk and the noninstituonalized tourist role: The case of Israeli student ex backpackers”. Journal of Travel Research,46: 217–226. Reisinger, Y. and Mavondo,F. (2005). “Travel anxiety and intention to travel internationally: Implication of travel risk perception”. Journal of Travel Research, 43(3): 212–245. Revel, J.F. (2003). Anti-Americanism. New York, Encounter Books. Richardson, J. (2010). “The certainty of uncertainty: Risk management revisited”. Foresight, 12(4): 47–64. Riesman, D. (1953). The lonely crowd: A study of the changing American character (Vol. 16). New York, Double. Rifkin, J. (1998).The biotech Century. London, Victor Gollancz. Robb, E.M. (2009). Violence and recreation: Vacationing in the realm of dark tourism. Anthropology and Humanism,34(1): 51–60. Robbie, D. (2008). “Touring katrina: Authentic identities and disaster tourism in New Orleans”. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 3(4), 257-266. Robertson, G. (2002). The Role of military in combating terrorism . Paper presented at second Nato Russiaconference, Moscow, Russia. Robin, C. (2004). Fear: The history of a political idea. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Robin, C. (2009). Fear, the history of political ideas. México, fondo de Cultural Económica. Roehl, W. and Fesenmaier, D. (1992). “Risk perceptions and pleasure travel: An exploratory analysis”. Journal of Travel Research, 30(4): 17–29. Rojeck, C. (1997). Indexing, Dragging and the social construction of tourist sights. In: Rojeck and Urry, J. (eds.), Touring Cultures: Transformations of Travel and Theory. London: Routledge, pp. 52–74. Roth, dirE. (2002). Cabin Fever. Roth, dirE. (2005). Hostel. Russell, L. (2010). “Ideological Formations of the Nuclear Family in the Hills have Eyes”. In:The Philosophy of Horror Movies. Fahy, T.(eds.), Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky, pp. 87–120. 204 References Sackett, H. and Botterill, D. (2006). “Perception of international travel risk: An exploratory study of the influence of proximity to terrorist attack”. EReview of tourism Research, 4(2): 44–49. Sádaba, T. (2008). Framing: El encuadre de las noticias: El binomio terrorismomedios. Buenos Aires, La Crujía Ediciones. Sageman, M. (2014). The Stagnation in Terrorism Research. Terrorism and Political Violence, (ahead-of-print), pp. 1–16. Sahlins, M.D. (1963). Poor man, rich man, big-man, chief: Political types in Melanesia and Polynesia. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 5(3): 285–303. Sahlins, M.D. (1965). Exchange-value and the diplomacy of primitive trade. Essays in Economic Anthropology: Dedicated to the Memory of Karl Polany, University of Washington Press, Seattle, pp. 95–129. Sahlins, M.D. (1972). Stone age economics. New York, Transaction Publishers. Said, E. (2001). The Clash of Ignorance. The Nation. October 4. Available at http://www.thenation.com/article/ clash-ignorance. Said, E.W. (1993). Culture and imperialism. New York: Random House LLC. Santos-Filho, Dos J. (2008). “Thomas Cook: Marco da historiografia dominante do turismo: Ensaio sociologico sobre o concepto ao fenomeno turistico na historia”. Revista de Investigación en Turismo y Desarrollo Local. Vol 1 Disponible en http://www.eumed.net/rev/turydes/ index.htm. Acceso en Aug 10 2010. Sassen, S. (1990). The mobility of labor and capital: A study in international investment and labor flow. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Sather-Wagstaff, J. (2011). Heritage that hurts: Tourists in the memoryscapes of September 11 (Vol. 4). California, Left Coast Press. Sayyid, S. (2014). A measure of Islamophobia. Islamophobia Studies Journal, 2(1): 10–25. Schmid, A. (1983). Political Terrorism: A Research Guide to Concepts, Theories, Datya Bases, and Literature. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Schmid, A. and Jongman, A. (1988). Political Terrorism. New Brunswick: Transaction Books. Searle, J. (1977). “Reiterating the Différences: A Reply to Derrida”, Glyph 2 Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press. Seaton, A.V. (1996). “Guided by the Dark: From Thanatopsis to Thanatourism”. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 2(4): 234–244. Seaton, A.V. (1999). War and Thanatourism: Waterloo 1815–1914. Annals of Tourism Research,26(1): 130–158. Seaton, A.V. (2000). Thanatourism: Entry. In: Jafari,J. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Tourism. London, Routledge. 205 Tourism and Terrorism Sennett, R. (2011). The corrosion of character: The personal consequences of work in the new capitalism. New York, WW Norton & Company. Sharpley, R. (2005). Travels to the edge of darkness: Towards a typology of dark tourism. Taking tourism to the limits: Issues, concepts and managerial perspectives, pp. 217–228. Sheller, M. and Urry, J. (2004). Tourism mobilities: places to play, places in play. London, Routledge. Sheller, M. and Urry, J. (2006). The new mobilities paradigm. Environment and Planning A, 38(2): 207–226. Shelley, M. and Wollenstonecraft (1818). Frankenstein; or, the modern Prometheus. London: Lackington, Hughes, Harding, Mavor & Jones. Simon, J. (2007). Governing through crime: How the war on crime transformed American democracy and created a culture of fear. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Simone-Charteris, M. and Boyd, S.W. (2010). The Development of Religious Heritage Tourism in Northern Ireland: Opportunities, benefits and obstacles. Tourism, 58(3): 229–257. Skoll, G. (2008b). Toward a Theory of Terrorism: A Multidimensional Analysis. In: Global Terrorism Issues and Developments. Rene, Larche (ed.), New York, Nova Science Publishers.pp. 19–60. Skoll, G. (2009). Contemporary Criminology and Criminal Justice Theory. Evaluating Justice Systems in Capitalist Societies. New York, Palgrave Macmillan. Skoll, G. (2010).Social Theory of Fear: Terror, torture and death in a post capitalist World. New York, Palgrave Macmillan. Skoll, G. (2016).Globalization of American Fear Culture: The empire in the Twenty-First Century. New York, Palgrave Macmillan. Skoll, G.R. (2007). Meanings of terrorism. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law-Revue Internationale de Sémiotique juridique, 20(2): 107– 127. Skoll, G.R. (2008a). “Torture and the Fifth Amendment Torture, the Global War on Terror, and Constitutional Values”. Criminal Justice Review, 33(1): 29–47. Skoll, G.R. and Korstanje, M.E. (2013). “Constructing an American fear culture from red scares to terrorism”. International Journal of Human Rights and Constitutional Studies, 1(4): 341–364. Slovic, P. (1987). “Perception of Risks”. New series.Science, 236(4799): 285– 285. Smaw, E. (2008). From Chaos to Contrarianism: Hobbes, Pojman, and the Case of World Government. Essays in Philosophy, 9(2): 4–18. 206 References Smith, W.W. (2010). The Darker side of Travel: The theory and practice of dark tourism.Annals of Tourism Research,37(3): 867–869. Somnez, S. (1998). Tourism, Terrorism, and political inestability. Annals of Tourism Research, 25: 416–456. Sontag, S. (2002). Seamos Realistas. In: El Mundo Después del 11 de Septiembre de 2001. (Compilación). Barcelona: Editorial Península. pp. 59–61. Soyinka, W. (2005). The Climate of Fear: The quest for dignity in a dehumanized World. New York, Random House. Spielberg, Steven dir. (1975). Jaws. Stoker, Bram (1897). Dracula. UK: Archibald Constable & Co. Stone, P. (2005). Dark Tourism Consumption. A call for Research . E-Review of Tourism Research (ERTR), 3(5): 109–116. Stone, P. (2006). “A Dark Tourism Spectrum: Towards a typology of death and macabre related tourist sites, attraction and exhibitions”. Tourism, 54(2): 145–160. Stone, P. (2012b). “Dark tourism as mortality capital”. Annals of Tourism Research,39(3): 1565–1587. Stone, P. and Sharpley, R. (2008). Consuming Dark Tourism, a Thanatological perspective. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2): 574–595. Stone, P.R. (2011). Dark tourism: Towards a new post-disciplinary research agenda. International Journal of Tourism Anthropology,1(3–4), 318–332. Stone, P.R. (2012a). Dark tourism and significant other death: Towards a model of mortality mediation. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(3): 1565–1587. Strang, K.D. (2015). “What and where are the risks of International Terrorist Attacks: A descriptive study of the evidence”. International Journal of the Risk and Contingency Management, 4(1): 1–20. Strange, C. and Kempa, M. (2003). Shades of Dark Tourism: Alcatraz and Robben Island. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(2): 386–405. Strongman, K.T. (1996). The Phsychology of Emotions: Theories of emotions in perspective. Chichester, Willey and Sons. Sunstein, C. (2005). Laws of Fear: Beyond the precautionary Principle. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Sunstein, C.R. (2002a). Risk and reason: Safety, law, and the environment. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Sunstein, C.R. (2002b). “Probability neglect: Emotions, worst cases, and law”. Yale Law Journal, pp. 61–107. Sunstein, C.R. (2003). Terrorism and probability neglect. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 26(2–3): 121–136. Tarlow, P. (2003). Tourism Ethics. E-Review of Tourism Research, 1(3): 39­– 41. 207 Tourism and Terrorism Tarlow, P. (2005). Dark Tourism: The appealing dark side of tourism and more . In: Novelli, N. (ed.), Niche Tourism– contemporary issues, trends and cases. Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 47–58. Tarlow, P. (2014). Tourism security: Strategies for effectively managing travel risk and safety. Oxford, Elsevier. Tarlow, P. and Korstanje, M. (2013).”How do you build the trip product? Tourism as a tool for post disaster recovery Fukuyima, Japan”. Pasos: Revista De Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural, 10(5): 629–369. Temple, C.R. (1961). Americans Abroad. New York, Sterling Publishing. Teng, E. (2004). Taiwan’s imagined geography: Chinese colonial travel writing and pictures, 1683-1895 (Vol. 230). Harvard Univ Asia Center. Tierney, K. (1994). “Sociology´s Unique Contributions to the Study of Risk”. Disaster Research Center, Preliminary Paper, 204. Turner-Bushnell, A.and Greene, J. (2002). “Peripheries, Centres and the construction of early modern American Empires”. In:Negotiated Empires. Daniels, C. and Kennedy, M. (eds.), New York: Routledge, pp. 1–14. Tzanelli, R. (2013).Olympic Ceremonialism and the performance of national character. Hampshire, Palgrave-Macmillan. Tzanelli, R. (2014). “Embodied art and aesthetic performativity in the London 2012 handover to Rio (2016)”. Global Studies Journal,6(2): 13–24. Tzanelli, R. (2014a). “Embodied art and aesthetic performativity in the London 2012 handover to Rio (2016)”. Global Studies Journal, 6(2): 13–24. Tzanelli, R. (2014b). “Business as usual? Transforming Brazilian slumscapes in hyper-neoliberal digital environments”. The Sociological Imagination. Available at R Tzanelli - The Sociological Imagination, 2014 eprints.whiterose.ac.uk Tzanelli, R.and Yar, M. (2009). Paradoxes of Belonging: Migration, exclusion and transnational rights in the Mediterranean. Development, 52(4): 473– 478. Urry, J. (2007a). Mobilities. Cambridge, Polity. Urry, J. (2007b). “Introduction: Mobile cultures”. Viajes y Geografías. Buenos Aires, Prometeo, pp. 17–32. Vannini, P. (2012). Ferry tales: Mobility, place, and time on Canada’s west coast. New York, Routledge. Vargas Llosa, M. (2002). La Lucha Final . En El Mundo Después del 11 de Septiembre de 2001. (1st Ed) Barcelona: Editorial Península. pp. 53–58. Verma, S. and Jain, R. (2013). Exploiting Tragedy for Tourism. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(8): 9–13. Virilio, P. (1989). War and cinema: The logistics of perception. London, Verso. 208 References Virilio, P. (1995). The art of the motor. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press. Virilio, P. (1997). Open sky (Vol. 35). London, Verso. Virilio, P. (2005a). The information bomb (Vol. 10). London, Verso. Virilio, P. (2005b). City of panic. London, Berg Pub Limited. Virilio, P. (2010). The University of Disaster. Oxford, Polity Press. Virilio, P. (2012). The great accelerator. Cambridge, Polity. Weber, M. (1946).Essays in Sociology. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Weber, M. (1958). Essays in Sociology. New York, Oxford University Press. Weber, M. (1964). Economía y sociedad: Esbozo de sociología comprensiva. México, FCE. Weber, M. (1995). La Ética Protestante y el Espíritu del Capitalismo. Barcelona, Península. Weber, S. (1998). War, terrorism and tourism . Annals of Tourism Research,25(3): 760–763. West, B. (2008), “Collective Memory and Crisis: The 2002 Bali Bombing, National Heroic archetypes and the counter-narrative of Cosmopolitan nationalism”. Journal of Sociology, 44(4): 337–353. White, L. and Frew, E. (2013).Dark Tourism: Place and identity: Managing and interpreting dark places. London, Routledge. Wight, A.C. (2006). “Philosophical and methodological praxes in dark tourism: Controversy, contention and the evolving paradigm”. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 12(2): 119–129. Wildman, S.M. (1996). Privilege revealed: How invisible preference undermines America. New York, NYU Press. Wills, D.C. (2003). The First War on Terrorism: Counter-Terrorism Policy During the Reagan Administration. Lanham, Rowman and Littlefield. Wilson, M., Bradford, E.and Lemanski, L. (2013). “The role of Group processes in Terrorism”. In:Crime and Crime Reduction, the importance of group processes. Wood, J. and Gannon, T. (eds.), New York, NE: Routledge, pp. 99–117. Wolff, K.and Larsen, S. (2014). “Can terrorism make us feel safer? Risk perceptions and worries before and after the July 22nd attacks”. Annals of Tourism Research,44: 200–209. Wolff, K., Larsen, S. and Doran, R. (2013). How dangerous is Norway? Risk perceptions before and after Utoya. CAUTHE 2013: Tourism and Global Change: On the Edge of Something Big, 941. Wolin, R. (2010). The idea of cosmopolitanism: From Kant to the Iraq war and beyond. Ethics & Global Politics, 3(2): 143–153. 209 Tourism and Terrorism Wong, J.Y. and Yeh, C. (2009). “Tourist Hesitation in Destination decision making”. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(1): 6–23. Wood, J.L. and Gannon, T.A. (eds.), (2013). Crime and Crime Reduction: The importance of group processes. Abingdon, Routledge. Woods, J. et al., (2008). “Terrorism Risk Perception and Proximity to Primary Terrorist Targets: How close is too close?”.Research in Human Ecology, 15(1): 63–70. Wynne, B. (2001). “Can focus groups assess community views?”. In: Developing Focus Group. Politics theory and practices. Barbour, R. and Kitzinger, J.(eds.), London, Sage, pp. 127–143. Young-Sook, L. (2006). The Korean War and tourism: Legacy of the war on the development of the tourism industry in South Korea . International Journal of Tourism Research,8(3): 157–170. Yuan, M. (2005). “After September 11: Determining its Impacts on Rural Canadians travel to U.S”. E-Review of Tourism Research, 3(5): 103–108. Yun, D. and MacLaurin, T. (2006). Development and validation of an attitudinal travel Safety scale. Canada Chapter TTRA Conference, Montebello, QC. Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer effect: Understanding how good people turn evil. New York, Taylor and Francis. Zinn, J.O. (2010). “Biography, risk and uncertainty – is there common ground for biographical research and risk research”. FQS, Forum, Qualitative Social Research, 11(1): Paper 15. Žižek, S. (1996). Invisible ideology: Political violence between fiction and fantasy. Journal of Political Ideologies, 1(1): 15–32. Žižek, S. (2002). Welcome to the desert of the real: Five essays on September 11 and related dates. London, Verso. Zizek, S. (2008). El Espectro de la Ideología. In: Mapping Ideology. Zizek, S. (ed.), Buenos Aires, Fondo de Cultura Económica, pp. 7–42. Zizek, S. (2009). Violence. Buenos 210