Writing identity
Evil terrorists, good Americans
in Writing the war on terrorism
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

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

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.


If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

This chapter explores the unique and particular ways in which identity has been discursively constructed through the official language of counter-terrorism. It focuses on the strategies used to differentiate, demonise and dehumanise the terrorist 'other'. Establishing the identities of the primary characters, the heroes and villains or the 'good guys' and the 'bad guys', was a key element in constructing the overall narrative of the 'war on terrorism'. In a media-saturated society, establishing the identities of the 'good guys' and the 'bad guys' was essential to making the national story of America's war understandable to the wider public. In direct contrast to the terrorists, Americans are discursively constructed first and foremost as Innocent' victims; even the Pentagon casualties and the soldiers fighting in Afghanistan are remade as 'innocent Americans'. In addition, Americans are discursively reconstructed as 'heroic' and 'united'.

Writing the war on terrorism

Language, politics and counter-terrorism


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 417 89 12
Full Text Views 86 18 0
PDF Downloads 21 15 0