| ID | 161266 |
| Title Proper | Can the subaltern securitize? Postcolonial perspectives on securitization theory and its critics |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Bertrand, Sarah |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Drawing on postcolonial and feminist writings, this article re-examines securitization theory’s so-called ‘silence-problem’. Securitization theory sets up a definably colonial relationship whereby certain voices cannot be heard, while other voices try to speak for those who are silenced. The article shows that the subaltern cannot securitize, first, because they are structurally excluded from the concept of security through one of three mechanisms: locutionary silencing, illocutionary disablement, or illocutionary frustration. Second, the subaltern cannot securitize because they are always already being securitized and spoken for – as in this case by the well-meaning intellectuals trying to highlight and remediate their predicament. Third, the subaltern cannot securitize because the popular rendering of securitization theory as critical obfuscates and rationalises their marginalisation. This article thus reveals the ‘colonial moment’ in securitization studies, showing how securitization theory is complicit with securitizations ‘for’ that marginalise and silence globally, not just locally outside ‘the West’. |
| `In' analytical Note | European Journal of International Security Vol. 3, No.3; Oct 2018: p.281-299 |
| Journal Source | European Journal of International Security Vol: 3 No 3 |
| Key Words | Critical Security Studies ; Epistemology ; Marginalisation ; Speech Act Theory ; Silencing ; Postcolonial and Feminist Critique ; Securitization Studies |