68 SOCIAL SCIENTIST linguistic and consider how language serves as a medium of power and control. Linguistic activity is a social activity and the position of the writer is not priviliged-the reader (consumer) is in a position to resist. By 'resistant readings' it is possible to reconstruct the reality obfuscated by the hegemonic discourse. Traditional linguistic concerns revolve around phonological and syntactic structures, but discourse analysis takes the actual organization of naturally occuring expressions and deals with the flow of conversation. A discourse, if it is successful, makes the social into the natural and allows no room for argument. However, while producers of texts can marshall discourse into certain configuration, readers are in a position to reconstruct their own meanings. It is this emphasis on the important and active role of the reader which offers a way out of sterile linguistic debates and a methodology for understanding how ideas are planted in the head. The contributors are, however, clear that this is not the whole story and underline that, "it remains an important task to examine the social and political processes by which 'planting' can be done in the first place." The models and concepts developed to analyse ruling ideologies is employed in a number of case studies. Kress writes on the media's attitude arguing that, "All texts are constructed around a basic anti-Soviet attitude which maybe more or less present in the texts, or constructed by its absence." To give an example, the Daily Mail reporting on the protest at Greenham Common against the stationing of American cruise missiles stated, "But it was not only a triumph for the peace movement it was a coup for the Soviet propaganda machine." The anti-Soviet bias is related to the doctrine of deterrence, which is pro-pogated as if it were an objective scientific description, but is in fact a 'teaching or a dogma with ideological, physiological and cultural underpinnings.' (p. xix) Deterrence is a key concept in the nuclear strategic debate and its importance is underlined by the fact that one section deals with the issue. Bell rnd Claes use the semiotic theory of Greimas and the phychoanalydcal concepts ofj. Lacan to examine the logic of official NATO defence policy. Their understanding that there is a "mirror relationship" between the USA and the USSR ends on a note which equates the two. Thus they write that, "Both parties take the same position with regard to each other. And they have the same perception of each other : we arm because they do so; we will attack (defend ourselves offensively) if they attack us; we will stop armament if they disarm first etc." Such a view faHs to see how the relationship between the two powers developed after World War II. The fundamental fact to bear in mind when considering the rivalry of the two powers is that the USA emerged from the war with its strength intact and during the 1950's it enjoyed a position of overwhelming superiority. Not only was its arsenal bigger but it could deliver it to the USSR, while the USSR did not have the capability to attack (he USA. The protection which the USA enjoyed because of its geographical location enabled the doctrine of deterrence to be used effectively. Deterrence, grounded in the belief that a power must clearly indicate to