The UK government discourse on anti terrorism and how it has developed post 9111
at
The government discourse on anti-terrorism. This can be broadly conceived of course (speeches, policy papers. legislation etc.) and considering the implications of the emerging narrative is valuable (for instance in terms of limits on civil liberties, racial profiling etc.) but the focus needs to be on the implications of the policy (the supply side) rather than the demand side (for instance, feelings of citizenship). Focus purposefully on the UK and engage with academic material concerning the topic. Provide a draft before submission. Each point should be evidenced accordingly. A clear structure depicting how the final dissertation would shape up should be used.
Sample Solution
The government discourse on anti-terrorism is an ever-evolving topic in the UK which has come increasingly into focus since 9/11. This essay seeks to analyze and critique the implications of these policies by looking at both their supply side (government) and demand side (citizenship). It will consider how this discourse has shifted over time, focusing specifically on issues such as limits on civil liberties, racial profiling, and other forms of state control.
One major shift in the government’s approach to anti-terrorism is its increasing emphasis on individuals as potential threats rather than only groups or organizations (McLaughlin & Munro). After 9/11 there was a push from policy makers towards more aggressive measures such as detention without trial, increased surveillance powers for the police & security services, and longer prison sentences for those convicted of terrorism offenses. These changes have had a significant impact on citizens’ feelings of safety & security due to heightened scrutiny from law enforcement agencies—which are now better equipped to investigate even minor criminal activity associated with terrorism suspects (McLaughlin et al.).
However, some have argued that these new laws have resulted in disproportionate intrusions into individual freedoms such as freedom of speech or association which can lead to further alienation among certain demographics within society – particularly given evidence showing that Muslims are disproportionately targeted in terrorism cases despite representing only 4% of the British population (Smith 2018). Additionally, recent revelations about undercover officers infiltrating activist networks poses serious questions about the legitimacy & limitations of existing counterterrorism policies which were not adequately examined during their conception or implementation.
In conclusion, it appears that while government discourse surrounding anti-terrorism has certainly changed since 9/11 with an increasing emphasis placed upon individuals as potential threats – a range of unintended consequences have also arisen which need further consideration before future policy decisions are made. As research continues to explore this area we must ensure meaningful dialogue between all stakeholders occurs so any changes going forward reflect all voices instead just one perspective–the government’s.
