|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
085598
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this paper, I argue that critical international theory could benefit from a broader and deeper conception of the limits of knowledge-that what is needed is more attention to the role of ambiguity in contemporary politics. While not challenging the usefulness of the more prevalent concepts of uncertainty and risk used by scholars applying the frameworks of global governmentality and world risk society, this essay proposes that we understand risk and uncertainty as two specific categories of indeterminacy that have come to preoccupy contemporary neoliberal thinkers and policy-makers, and hence their critics, but which nonetheless tend to downplay the interpretive dimensions of the limits of knowledge. Drawing on Michel Foucault's The Order of Things, as well as the ideas of John Maynard Keynes, I develop an analysis of the role of ambiguity in global governance-as an object of global governance, a tool to be exploited by it, and a limit to its operation. Concluding with the case of international financial governance, this essay suggests that not only will a focus on ambiguity shed light on the historical evolution of global finance, but it also provides us with some clues to the sources of the current subprime financial crisis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
085594
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article takes as its starting point legal arguments deployed by the United Nations on the situation of detainees held in Guantánamo Bay. This case raises a series of provocative questions about the contemporary relation between borders, territory, and law. First, it challenges dominant assumptions about the nature and location of authority in world politics based upon a conventional logic of inside/outside. Second, it raises the issue of what critical theoretical/philosophical resources might be available in order to rethink the above relation. Third, it summons the need to develop alternative border imaginaries. It is argued that some prospects for addressing these questions are found in the work of Benjamin, Derrida, Schmitt, and Agamben.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
085593
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article argues that the contemporary IR literature on global order and American hegemony has limitations. First, the critical discourse on hegemony fails to adequately examine the deeply embedded nature of regularized practices that are often a key component of the acceptance of certain state and social behaviours as natural. Second, much of the (neo)Gramscian literature has given primacy to the economic aspects of hegemonic order at the expense of examining global military/security relations. Lastly, much of the literature on global order and hegemony has failed to fully immerse itself within a detailed research program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
085600
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Psychiatric researchers recently have published evidence of eating disorders in regions around the world, despite previous conceptions of eating disorders as "culture-bound syndromes." What pressures or processes encourage this apparent spread of eating disorders diagnoses, and what do they tell us about state mental health policy? This paper argues that the spread of diagnoses results from global-level instances of assemblage: conglomerations of scientific expertise, state policy, international institutions, and practices employed with a will to improve the lives of perceived sufferers of mental disorder. Cases of global mental-health policy illustrate the ways in which mental health assemblage produces a "distrust in the 'self-governing' governed."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
085592
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The study of international relations (IR) took an important disciplinary turn in the 1950s, when a number of scholars sought to develop a distinct theory of international politics. This turn, however, should not be understood as a tendency toward specialization, but rather as a separatist movement, meant to insulate the study of international politics from the behavioral revolution that was transforming the practice of political science in postwar America. Promoted by the Rockefeller Foundation, the "theorization" of IR encapsulated a very specific intellectual and ultimately political agenda at odds with the kind of liberalism dominant at the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
085595
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Politics of borders and the distinction between inside/outside have become an important security practice of liberal states. Borders are strategically used to change the balance between security and liberties. This article analyzes the legal constitution of border zones and argues that security is not exceptional in its constitution but results from ordinary law and practices. Illiberal practices at border zones are embedded in ordinary politics of the liberal state.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|