|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
152732
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article engages in an experiment that aims to push critical/post-structuralist thought beyond its comfort zone. Despite its commitment to critiquing modern, liberal ontologies, the article claims that these same ontologies are often tacitly reproduced, resulting in a failure to grasp contemporary structures and histories of violence and domination. The article brings into conversation five selected critical scholars from a range of theoretical approaches and disciplines who explore the potential of the notion of “fracture” for that purpose. The conversation revolves around political struggles at various sites—migrant struggles in Europe, decolonial struggles in Mexico, workers and peasant struggles in Colombia—in order to pinpoint how these struggles “fracture” or “crack” modern political frames in ways that neither reproduce them, nor lead to mere moments of disruption in otherwise smoothly functioning governmental regimes. Nor does such “fracturing” entail the constructing of a “complete” or “coherent” vision of a politics to come. Instead, we detail the incoherent, tentative, and multiple character of frames and practices of thought in struggle that nevertheless produce an (albeit open and contested) “whole.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
152727
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Using a combination of migration studies, political sociology, and policy studies, this paper explores the contradictions and violence of immigration detention, its architectures, and its audiences. The concept of “detention-as-spectacle” is developed to make sense of detention’s hypervisible and obscured manifestations in the European Union. We focus particularly on two case studies, the United Kingdom and Malta, which occupy different geopolitical positions within the EU. Detention-as-spectacle demonstrates that detention is less related to deterrence and security than to displaying sovereign enforcement, control, and power. A central aspect of the sovereign spectacle is detention’s purported ability to order and even halt “crises” of irregular immigration, while simultaneously creating and reinforcing these crises. The paper concludes by examining recent disruptions to the spectacle, and their implications.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
152730
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In past decades, social and cultural theory as well as international relations theory and political theory have been preoccupied with the subject of fear. In this article, I return the conversation about fear as a political factor to what may be the oldest subject in the book: the connection between fear and political authority. Today, I suggest, we are in the midst of a shift in our understanding of this relationship, prompted not least by efforts to come to terms, analytically and politically, with the challenges of climate change. The article seeks to get a clearer view of this shift by identifying and analyzing three distinct stories in academic and public discourse about fear and political authority. By way of conclusion, I venture that these mutations in our ways of thinking, speaking, and feeling about political authority and fear point toward a model of political authority for post-sovereign conditions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
152725
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Using Hannah Arendt as our guide, we examine the imperfect and at times curious mechanisms through which state projects enact an aura of secrecy and deception. To date, International Political Sociology (IPS) has paid strikingly little attention to the workings of secrecy and deception in politics. Arendt’s contributions to international political sociologies of state secrecy are threefold. First, Arendt’s reflections on lying and secrecy occur across a wide historico-philosophical field, generating insights that a focus on liberal democracy alone cannot. Second, Arendt draws our attention to important variations in the arts of secrecy and deception, and their ethico-political implications. Third, Arendt highlights the limits of traditional scholarly methods for research on lying and secrecy and offers an important tool that we conceptualize as a twist. We demonstrate these three contributions through a case study of a foggy Anglo-American intelligence project called Cobra Mist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
152729
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article evaluates the emergence of rights for nature in global politics, focusing particularly on questions surrounding the politics and ontology of collective personhood in Ecuador and New Zealand. Rather than assuming international space to be largely populated by state persons who in turn grant personhood to nature, these cases suggest that it is more productive to start by asking what kinds of collective persons populate world spaces, and in what ways they are made political. Augmenting conceptions of Westphalian personification rooted largely in human symbolic practices, the article advocates for an understanding of persons as figures that are sometimes produced by relations between human and nonhuman actors. It then suggests that the rights of nature are, paradoxically, not a politics over whether a singular nature should be a rights holder but, rather, are partial challenges to the universality of secular law and the sovereign state. As such, they raise important questions about the politics of translation and the commensurability of multiple conceptions of collective personhood.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
152731
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In the wake of the disclosures by Edward Snowden about NSA surveillance practices, a series of public hearings was held before the Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs (LIBE) Committee of the European Parliament in 2013–2014. These hearings offer a wealth of information concerning the details of Snowden’s claims, their implications for privacy rights, and the way in which the transatlantic political dialogue on these issues is unfolding. However, they have yet to receive academic attention. This article suggests that the LIBE Hearings were an important platform that rendered the contested Snowden files into public evidence of contemporary surveillance practices. Drawing on the concept of “material publics” proposed by Noortje Marres and others, we examine how the material setting of LIBE was crucial to the ways in which the Snowden files were made public in Europe. Valid evidence was produced, legal issues were identified, technological solutions were fostered, and responsibilities were enacted and denied.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|