| ID | 113726 |
| Title Proper | Is securitization a 'negative' concept? Revisiting the normative debate over normal versus extraordinary politics |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Roe, Paul |
| Publication | 2012. |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | The purpose of this article is to revisit the normatively defined debate over securitization as a negative conception. Claudia Aradau's work has largely served to define this debate, with Aradau arguing that securitization/security is an inherently negative conception inasmuch as its mode of extraordinary politics necessarily both institutionalizes fast-track decisionmaking ('process') and produces categories of enemy others ('outcome'). In making evident the main assumptions therein, my argument is that this debate has taken place not only in terms of a specific - and indeed contestable - rendering of the securitization concept, but also in terms of a more general acceptance of an essentialized (Schmittian) logic of security. The article thus seeks ultimately to demonstrate the value of de-essentializing the practices evoked by speaking security and to show how this enables meaningful engagement with other emerging conceptions of 'positive' security. |
| `In' analytical Note | Security Dialogue Vol. 43, No.3; Jun 2012: p.249-266 |
| Journal Source | Security Dialogue Vol. 43, No.3; Jun 2012: p.249-266 |
| Key Words | Copenhagen School ; Securitization ; Positive Security ; Desecuritization ; Human Security |