What do you think?
Rate this book
The Counterrevolution: How Our Government Went to War Against Its Own Citizens
A distinguished political theorist sounds the alarm about the counterinsurgency strategies used to govern Americans Militarized police officers with tanks and drones. Pervasive government surveillance and profiling. Social media that distract and track us. All of these, contends Bernard E. Harcourt, are facets of a new and radical governing paradigm in the United States -- one rooted in the modes of warfare originally developed to suppress anticolonial revolutions and, more recently, to prosecute the war on terror.The Counterrevolution is a penetrating and disturbing account of the rise of counterinsurgency, first as a military strategy but increasingly as a way of ruling ordinary Americans. Harcourt shows how counterinsurgency's principles -- bulk intelligence collection, ruthless targeting of minorities, pacifying propaganda -- have taken hold domestically despite the absence of any radical uprising. This counterrevolution against phantom enemies, he argues, is the tyranny of our age. Seeing it clearly is the first step to resisting it effectively.
336 pages, Kindle Edition
Published February 27, 2018
11 people are currently reading
343 people want to read
About the author
Bernard E. Harcourt
23 books71 followersBernard Harcourt is the Julius Kreeger Professor of Law & Criminology and Chair and Professor of Political Science at The University of Chicago.
Professor Harcourt's scholarship intersects social and political theory, the sociology of punishment, criminal law and procedure, and criminology. He is the author of Against Prediction: Punishing and Policing in an Actuarial Age (University of Chicago Press 2007), Language of the Gun: Youth, Crime, and Public Policy (University of Chicago Press 2005), and Illusion of Order: The False Promise of Broken-Windows Policing (Harvard University Press 2001). Harcourt is also the coauthor of Criminal Law and the Regulation of Vice (Thompson West 2007), the editor of Guns, Crime, and Punishment in America (New York University Press 2003), and the founder and editor of the journal Carceral Notebooks.
Professor Harcourt earned his bachelor's degree in political theory at Princeton University, his law degree at Harvard Law School, and his PhD in political science at Harvard University. After law school, Professor Harcourt clerked for the Hon. Charles S. Haight Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and then worked as an attorney at the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Alabama, representing death row inmates. Professor Harcourt continues to represent death row inmates pro bono, and has also served on human rights missions in South Africa and Guatemala.
Professor Harcourt has been a visiting professor at Harvard University, New York University, the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, Université Paris X–Nanterre, and Université Paul Cézanne Aix-Marseille III, and was previously on the faculty at the University of Arizona.
Education:
AB ,1984, Princeton University; JD, 1989, and PhD, 2000, Harvard University
Professor Harcourt's scholarship intersects social and political theory, the sociology of punishment, criminal law and procedure, and criminology. He is the author of Against Prediction: Punishing and Policing in an Actuarial Age (University of Chicago Press 2007), Language of the Gun: Youth, Crime, and Public Policy (University of Chicago Press 2005), and Illusion of Order: The False Promise of Broken-Windows Policing (Harvard University Press 2001). Harcourt is also the coauthor of Criminal Law and the Regulation of Vice (Thompson West 2007), the editor of Guns, Crime, and Punishment in America (New York University Press 2003), and the founder and editor of the journal Carceral Notebooks.
Professor Harcourt earned his bachelor's degree in political theory at Princeton University, his law degree at Harvard Law School, and his PhD in political science at Harvard University. After law school, Professor Harcourt clerked for the Hon. Charles S. Haight Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and then worked as an attorney at the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Alabama, representing death row inmates. Professor Harcourt continues to represent death row inmates pro bono, and has also served on human rights missions in South Africa and Guatemala.
Professor Harcourt has been a visiting professor at Harvard University, New York University, the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, Université Paris X–Nanterre, and Université Paul Cézanne Aix-Marseille III, and was previously on the faculty at the University of Arizona.
Education:
AB ,1984, Princeton University; JD, 1989, and PhD, 2000, Harvard University
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
December 22, 2019
读这本书的直接原因是今年新闻里泛滥的警察暴力。为什么本应是保护公民生命财产安全的执法机构，会对和平示威的公民大打出手？这本书非常完美地回答了这个问题。
作者是哥伦比亚大学政治科学教授，他提出的观点是一种思维范式（paradigm）转变的分析角度，他认为，传统的英美西欧自由民主政府，在海外战争中面对的游击战冲击，已经改变了对政治的思考方式，逐步用反游击战的思维和手段，来处理国内政治问题。自由民主已经让位于借口“反恐战争”肆意扩大政府权限并逐步把反游击战策略合法化的僭主政治（tyranny）。反游击战策略不仅用于杀害海外“恐怖分子”，也早已用于刑求、囚禁、折磨、杀害本国公民。
这个角度完美地解释了今年新闻里所有血腥的警民冲突图片。
作者是哥伦比亚大学政治科学教授，他提出的观点是一种思维范式（paradigm）转变的分析角度，他认为，传统的英美西欧自由民主政府，在海外战争中面对的游击战冲击，已经改变了对政治的思考方式，逐步用反游击战的思维和手段，来处理国内政治问题。自由民主已经让位于借口“反恐战争”肆意扩大政府权限并逐步把反游击战策略合法化的僭主政治（tyranny）。反游击战策略不仅用于杀害海外“恐怖分子”，也早已用于刑求、囚禁、折磨、杀害本国公民。
这个角度完美地解释了今年新闻里所有血腥的警民冲突图片。
January 20, 2019
Harcourt does an excellent job of tracing the history of counterinsurgency warfare from French tactics in Algeria through Vietnam, and ultimately via the War on Terror into the relationship of the US government to its citizens. He discusses aspects of this new governing tactic which are broad ranging indeed: from police surveillance of mosques after 9/11 to Pokemon Go.
Of particular interest to me was his analysis of the doctrine of "exceptionalism," which posits that the deviations from normal are justified to the public as temporary deviations from the rule of law that will end and we will return to "normal" legalities as soon as the extraordinary "danger" (here, terrorism) has ended. He pushed back against this theory, arguing (convincingly, in my view) that what is actually happening is the legalization of the extraordinary. That is, we are not in a temporary state where the rule of law is suspended, but in a permanent state where what is acceptable under the law has changed. His prime example are the Bush (and later Obama) legal opinions justifying torture, remote drone assassinations of US citizens--but also including the whithering of due process and failure of the courts to grapple with excessive use of force). For example, the court created doctrine of qualified immunity holds that no officer can be held liable for use of force, because no officer had previously been held liable for use of force).
My concern with Harcourt's argument is that his emphasis on counterinsurgency means that he deemphasizes the role of racism in legitimating both the surveillance state and the prison industrial complex. Whether applied in Afghanistan or the West Side of Chicago, it simply isn't true that we are trying to identify a small group of insurgents. Rather, we are simply labelling entire neighborhoods (or countries) as enemy territory, which we need to occupy and neutralize, and where residents are treated as enemy combatants, rather than citizens in need of protection. These neighborhoods and countries are inevitably those occupied by Black and Brown people.
Despite this disagreement with Harcourt's emphasis, this is a very interesting book, advancing a comprehensive viewpoint which neatly explains both US policy abroad and US policy towards its own citizens, all based on counterinsurgency theory.
Of particular interest to me was his analysis of the doctrine of "exceptionalism," which posits that the deviations from normal are justified to the public as temporary deviations from the rule of law that will end and we will return to "normal" legalities as soon as the extraordinary "danger" (here, terrorism) has ended. He pushed back against this theory, arguing (convincingly, in my view) that what is actually happening is the legalization of the extraordinary. That is, we are not in a temporary state where the rule of law is suspended, but in a permanent state where what is acceptable under the law has changed. His prime example are the Bush (and later Obama) legal opinions justifying torture, remote drone assassinations of US citizens--but also including the whithering of due process and failure of the courts to grapple with excessive use of force). For example, the court created doctrine of qualified immunity holds that no officer can be held liable for use of force, because no officer had previously been held liable for use of force).
My concern with Harcourt's argument is that his emphasis on counterinsurgency means that he deemphasizes the role of racism in legitimating both the surveillance state and the prison industrial complex. Whether applied in Afghanistan or the West Side of Chicago, it simply isn't true that we are trying to identify a small group of insurgents. Rather, we are simply labelling entire neighborhoods (or countries) as enemy territory, which we need to occupy and neutralize, and where residents are treated as enemy combatants, rather than citizens in need of protection. These neighborhoods and countries are inevitably those occupied by Black and Brown people.
Despite this disagreement with Harcourt's emphasis, this is a very interesting book, advancing a comprehensive viewpoint which neatly explains both US policy abroad and US policy towards its own citizens, all based on counterinsurgency theory.
May 9, 2018
It is not like this is a bad book. It’s just repetitive. The other problem is the person most likely to pick up this book probably is pretty aware of most of what they are about to read. In some ways, I found the best thing about the analysis was how the author argues that we are not living in a state of exception (and why) but in what he labels counterrevolution (Mot defined in the normal way).
May 5, 2018
Here is a book that is important for everyone to read and understand. It teaches how and why we find ourselves with a government that approaches everything as if its citizens are formenting revolution. The author walks through the history of counterinsurgency and lines it up with what we see today. From Systems Analysis of RAND through to the legalization of horrific acts against suspects, this will open your eyes.
Counterinsurgency has two groups of three in its core. The first group is how it sees the population: Active minority (those against the government), the passive masses and the counterrevolutionary minority (those actively seeking to destroy the active minority). The second group is its strategy: Total awareness, eliminate the active minority, & pacify the masses. All of this can explain what is happening today with the US government.
The beginnings of counterinsurgency thought can be traced back to Mao. The French took a lot from Mao’s success and applied it to their colonies after World War II. A lot of the US counterinsurgency theory comes from the French commanders writing about their experiences in the 1950’s & 60’s. The US military’s approach in Iraq can then be seen as an application of Mao and his success in China.
The doctrine of counterinsurgency is then brought back from the US wars. A lot of police and others in law enforcement went through the military and became steeped in the ways of counterinsurgency. Militarize the police and codify in law the naked use of force, you have the results of the past few years. With this being the only way of looking at problems, the government then wants to create an active minority even if one doesn’t exist. When the government vilifies non-whites, it is seeking a revolutionary group in US society to counter. When the government says it needs access to everyone’s data in the name of freedom, it is this doctrine. All things run through the core of counterinsurgency.
The author, through a lot of research and detail, demonstrates how & why our freedoms have been eroded over the years. Some of the material is dense, but is required to fully understand the systems arrayed against law abiding citizens. The author even shows how the rise of smartphones, with its constant stream of information and shortening of attention spans plays right into counterinsurgency doctrine. Everything here is real. It isn’t imagined or a conspiracy created in the dark corner of some whacko’s mind. The US government is setting up to counter a revolution that doesn’t exist. That means a group needs to be targeted to justify all of the effort. What was an exception is now the rule. Unless we wake up to this truth as a country, we will turn into the very places we disparage.
There is a lot that I didn’t touch on, such as torture, drone assassination, and the legalizing of acts that used to be considered morally wrong. Read the book, it contains the depth required to understand how we came to today.
Counterinsurgency has two groups of three in its core. The first group is how it sees the population: Active minority (those against the government), the passive masses and the counterrevolutionary minority (those actively seeking to destroy the active minority). The second group is its strategy: Total awareness, eliminate the active minority, & pacify the masses. All of this can explain what is happening today with the US government.
The beginnings of counterinsurgency thought can be traced back to Mao. The French took a lot from Mao’s success and applied it to their colonies after World War II. A lot of the US counterinsurgency theory comes from the French commanders writing about their experiences in the 1950’s & 60’s. The US military’s approach in Iraq can then be seen as an application of Mao and his success in China.
The doctrine of counterinsurgency is then brought back from the US wars. A lot of police and others in law enforcement went through the military and became steeped in the ways of counterinsurgency. Militarize the police and codify in law the naked use of force, you have the results of the past few years. With this being the only way of looking at problems, the government then wants to create an active minority even if one doesn’t exist. When the government vilifies non-whites, it is seeking a revolutionary group in US society to counter. When the government says it needs access to everyone’s data in the name of freedom, it is this doctrine. All things run through the core of counterinsurgency.
The author, through a lot of research and detail, demonstrates how & why our freedoms have been eroded over the years. Some of the material is dense, but is required to fully understand the systems arrayed against law abiding citizens. The author even shows how the rise of smartphones, with its constant stream of information and shortening of attention spans plays right into counterinsurgency doctrine. Everything here is real. It isn’t imagined or a conspiracy created in the dark corner of some whacko’s mind. The US government is setting up to counter a revolution that doesn’t exist. That means a group needs to be targeted to justify all of the effort. What was an exception is now the rule. Unless we wake up to this truth as a country, we will turn into the very places we disparage.
There is a lot that I didn’t touch on, such as torture, drone assassination, and the legalizing of acts that used to be considered morally wrong. Read the book, it contains the depth required to understand how we came to today.
June 28, 2020
Harcourt makes some interesting points regarding domestic security, insurgency, and counterinsurgency. The beginning and middle of the book had me intrigued, but by the end, I was almost struggling to finish, especially the chapter on systems. The book is repetitive at times and is pretty self-explanatory at others. There were also a few correlative (but not causative) stretches that Harcourt makes in the book.
July 1, 2020
Thought provoking...are we still a democracy? I get the feeling, after Harcourt’s arguments (and evidence), it is questionable
December 2, 2021
Not bad, about 60 pages too long.
November 4, 2020
Very good book............makes you think about what has happen that you have grown up with since 9/11 and what you are seeing in the street during this election cycle.
Does not matter whether you are a democrat or republican, whether you are black or white, or if you are male or female, this book will make you think about incidents, presidents and the constitution with an added interest in the intents of each.
Once I started reading I could not put it down.
Does not matter whether you are a democrat or republican, whether you are black or white, or if you are male or female, this book will make you think about incidents, presidents and the constitution with an added interest in the intents of each.
Once I started reading I could not put it down.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews