Hijacking History: American Culture and the War on Terror by Liane Tanguay (review)

Looking to the first seven years following the events of 11 September 2001, Liane Tanguay seeks to understand how “mainstream” Americans were convinced to support the policies of the War on Terror, in particular, questioning why there was such broad support for the administration of George W. Bush. Further, it asks why people were willing to surrender personal freedoms, damage America’s international reputation in pursuit of war, and allow patriotism to be redefined as “hostile, xenophobic nationalism”? All of that was achieved by the “ideological hegemony” of a “unitary executive.” The book makes a thought-provoking argument that links the media, the administration, the military-industrial complex, and Hollywood in promoting what the author refers to as a “structure of feeling.” This structure is rooted in Francis Fukuyama’s end-of-history thesis that conceptualizes the twin pillars of liberal democracy and neo-liberal market capitalism as the pinnacle of human socio-political and economic relations, the crown of human achievement, to which no viable conceivable alternative exists. Accompanying this sense of finality is a feeling among “mainstream Americans” that any sudden or dramatic change to the structure of the system is most likely to result in apocalyptic outcomes. A culture of fear emerges in reaction to the potential clash of civilizations that challenges this order, most ominously an Islamic bloc represented by al Qaeda and like-minded jihadists.

Tanguay convincingly argues that it is this structure of feeling that permitted the War on Terror mandate. The neo-conservatives hawkishly capitalized on this in selling their war message. Employing cultural studies methods, the book draws conclusions based on the box-office sales of particular films and on television ratings, which are used to indicate a correlation between what was happening in terms of the US intervention in Iraq, what the general public perceived to be happening, and how strong popular support for military action was. The book, though making a compelling case, is strongly reliant on a deterministic perspective, which is a subject for debate, and although it does not make conspiratorial claims, it places a great deal of emphasis on co-operative agency. The author acknowledges having little practical association with what is termed the American “mainstream” but nonetheless offers a methodologically sound approach. The book’s contribution to the broader literature on the War on Terror, the Bush administration, neo-imperial ambitions, and democracy is that of emphasizing the role of the contradictions of the capitalist system. The argument is put forward that the War on Terror during the Bush administration did not represent simply a “deviation from an otherwise tolerable norm” but was an inevitable consequence of capitalist globalization. Tanguay’s argument is focused and persuasive and will no doubt serve as a catalyst for debates surrounding not only the War on Terror and US foreign policy but also the nature and influence of public media such as Hollywood and popular news resources. In addition, it is a solid case study for the many debates on the sustainability of the contemporary global order. Tanguay’s interdisciplinary approach that blends cultural studies with international relations will be of interest to a broad audience.