The idea of American Empire has taken on a new resonance and a sense of legitimacy among ordinary people concerned about peace and justice in our world after 9/11. US security was seen to be threatened from outside. Many say resist the Empire and reject its distorted concept of peace and security.
In Empire Hardt and Negri turn to a new section called intervention. They say that the new framework of legitimacy provided by the communications industries includes new forms and new articulations of the exercise of legitimate force. During its formation, the new power must demonstrate the effectiveness of its force at the same time that the bases of its legitimation are being constructed.
Another mouthful that is difficult to digest. I interpret the reference to the communications industries to be CNN and Fox Television. The former made then news when it started its 24 hours news service in the sense that reality became the news as reported on CNN----eg., during the first Gulf War. Fox Television legitimated the second Gulf War with its embedded journalists and US patriotism.
What then is the new framework of legitimacy in formation that is provided by these communications industries? We need to remember that empire in the text by Hardt and Negri does not mean the US as a hegemonic power.
I have no idea. America introducing the beacon of democracy into the US? The old idea of a global village? That we are fighting a global war? The need for a for a strong Empire to police an unruly world?
From the periphery of Empire in Australia what comes across the Washington neo-conservatives rhetoric of legitimation. They use the Empire-word freely and they insist that the United States is the world’s most benevolent nation and that it should, and does, use its imperial power robustly to expand freedom across the globe.
Is the legitimation the worldwide war on terror, involving open and covert military operations, new security legislation and efforts to block the financing of terrorism?
Inside the nation state the media (eg., Murdoch's The Australian) constructs the “war on terrorism” in terms of the creation of an ideology of fear, threat and repression, which constructs enemies (Muslims with links to overseas organizations) and promotes violence against them. Is this the new mode of legitimation?