|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
132383
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Current revelations about the secret US-NSA program, PRISM, have confirmed the large-scale mass surveillance of the telecommunication and electronic messages of governments, companies, and citizens, including the United States' closest allies in Europe and Latin America. The transnational ramifications of surveillance call for a re-evaluation of contemporary world politics' practices. The debate cannot be limited to the United States versus the rest of the world or to surveillance versus privacy; much more is at stake. This collective article briefly describes the specificities of cyber mass surveillance, including its mix of the practices of intelligence services and those of private companies providing services around the world. It then investigates the impact of these practices on national security, diplomacy, human rights, democracy, subjectivity, and obedience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
132386
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
"Climate anarchy" describes the divergence of climate politics from established mechanisms of global governance and an emergent political order. This new (dis)order represents alternative governances and politics, and a challenge to national governmental perspectives on world politics. When interstate policymaking, such as that on climate change, falters at the point of agreement-as it has from Copenhagen in 2009 to Rio+20, and on to Warsaw in 2013-different global relationships are engendered. This occurs as the narrowly defined anarchy of national jurisdictions is superseded by a wider anarchic diversity in political practices. If states must respond to climate change, they are not leading climate policy effectively, and state-centric perspectives cannot account for such political disorder. The ensuing discomfort about the fragmentation of climate governance should be embraced as an opportunity for political innovation, and the diverse responses to climate change viewed as an emerging paradigmatic shift in world politics. The argument thus informs broader debates on policy and governance, as well as conceptual and disciplinary developments, by testing the construction, governance, and anarchy of climate issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
132385
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper examines the Indian government's Unique Identification (UID) program, the largest digital biometric program in history. UID is intended to provide a new model of security based on a complex interrelation between welfare, identity and rights. The program resembles the kind of liberal governmentality and biopolitical imperative described by Foucault, yet it is also inseparable from the specific socio-historic conditions in India that constitute the strategic need for UID. This paper contributes to an ongoing debate as to the suitability of Foucault's thought for international studies by suggesting a productive line of inquiry: tracing the variance between the rationality of government programs and the technologies of enactment. The paper utilizes three methodological "prescriptives" from Foucault's concept of the dispositif, which are applied to the case study. This paper argues that the concrete application of the program challenges the perception that biometric technologies can guarantee the identity and inclusion of the political subject when applied across different geographies with different socio-historical conditions. The specific discursive and non-discursive conditions present in the application of UID lead to unexpected political strategies. While India's UID program seeks to augment the population with the biometric identity necessary for consumer citizenship, frugal government and expanded surveillance, those whose bodies are not "readable" by the biometric technology are excluded. It is exactly those subjects that the program aims to help that are most likely to be excluded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
132387
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Allegations of police brutality, unlawful detention, and other breaches of civil liberties during the G20 in Toronto in June 2010 provide an important case through which to understand the changing nature of security and policing, raising questions about the political implications of such shifts in terms of police accountability, transparency, and democracy. Within the field of public policing, scholars predicted that globalization processes would weaken public policing as a dominant policing institution. Instead, it has expanded, in part, through the convergence of internal and international dimensions of security, whereby new policy networks cooperate in matters of policing and security in a new integrated model, the result of which is a further militarization of urban space and expanded markets for security, leading to the securitization of everyday life. This article examines the case of Toronto's hosting of the G20 and the role that the Integrated Security Unit-led by the RCMP and including private security firms-played. By focusing on the role of multilateral networks that include private sector actors, we examine the implications of the privatization and securitization of policing for democracy, citizenship, and accountability, looking at how they affect the ability of publics to engage in public debate, to consult, or to protest policies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
132388
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
For several decades, the field of International Relations theory has been preoccupied with its own methodological and theoretical plurality. As a consequence, IR scholars have proposed a range of different solutions to this "problem." In doing so, they have drawn from different sources of social capital in the field, allowing them to base their legitimacy on the ways they relate to "progress" and the status quo. Drawing from Bourdieu's sociology, this article will explore five different strategies for "saving the discipline" and show how they relate to different kinds of scientific capital and power relations in the field. It will also explore the ways in which social conventions (such as politesse) can be used as tools for symbolic violence. The article will finish by arguing that rather than a problem to be resolved, plurality functions as an organizing principle regulating social power relations in the field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
132384
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
We examine how an unassuming domestic technology-the fuel-efficient stove-came to be construed as an effective tool for reducing sexual violence globally. Highlighting the process of problematization, the linking of problems with actionable solutions, we show how US-based humanitarian advocacy organizations drew upon spatial, gender, perpetrator, racial, and interventionist representations to advance the notion that "stoves reduce rape" in Darfur. Though their effectiveness in Darfur remains questionable, efficient stoves were consequently adopted as a universal technical panacea for sexual violence in any conflict or refugee camp context. By examining the emergence and global diffusion of the rape-stove problematization, our study documents an important example of the technologizing of humanitarian space. We postulate fuel-efficient stoves to be a technology of Othering able to simplify, combine, decontextualize, and transform problematizations from their originating contexts elsewhere. When humanitarian advocates construe immensely complex crises as "manageable problems," the promotion of simple technical panaceas may inadvertently increase the burden of poverty for user-beneficiaries and silence the voices of those they claim to champion and serve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|