di Enzo Ferrara Each time, after an event of war or terror disseminates all over clusters of death, fear, and frightfulness, it seems urgent to enfork new lenses - maybe new eyes, if possible, after September 11th 2001 - and wider perspectives to observe and analyze the world. Unfortunately, this is not the case for most of the talks heard from politicians, bureaucrats, and commentators that tend to reduce extremely complex problems of international politics to issues of unity, armed security, normality, and retaliation. Everywhere terrorism, homeland security, and patriotism have emerged in the common lexicon, and while rhetoric is proposed to substitute thought, assumptions and attendant emotions are used to inspire and buttress a varied set of political and military responses to the facts of terrorism.