| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
145208
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Queer isn’t a word you see much in the pages of Diplomatic History or the program for SHAFR’s annual conference. Indeed, a quick lexical check of article titles since the journal began publication in 1977 for “gay,” “homosexual,” “lesbian,” “transgender,” and “queer” brings up absolutely nothing (bracketing the single title reference to the Enola Gay). You may not be surprised. You should be. Queer history and queer studies occupy an increasingly central place in many historical subfields and in the work of other disciplines. Even for the redoubtable guardians of realism among political scientists in international relations, one can detect a queer turn.1 The time has more than come to better understand how queering the history of American foreign relations might transform our own scholarly practice, and the field itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
138615
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
IN FEBUARY 2013, Senator Rand Paul delivered a speech at the Heritage Foundation. It was called “Restoring the Founders’ Vision of Foreign Policy.” In it Paul sought to outline a fresh foreign-policy path for the Republican Party, which was tepidly beginning to debate the limits of intervention abroad. At the outset Paul declared, “I see the world as it is. I am a realist, not a neoconservative, nor an isolationist.” He argued that radical Islam posed a threat to the United States but that the best way to defang it wasn’t to engage in permanent wars in the Middle East.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|