|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
155143
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In recent years, revisionist readings of midcentury realists have permitted accommodation with research traditions typically at odds with realist sensibilities, including constructivist approaches and critical theories of International Relations (IR). In this essay, I amplify this literature, arguing that there are unexpected resonances to be found between realist and postcolonial thinking. Specifically, I show how a spiritual affinity to difference is embedded in a shared critique of liberal ways of violence and conceptions of history. In order to make these connections, I first outline a particular strategy of argumentation, one that substantially differs from the extant revisionist literature. Foregrounding an anti-imperial politics, I reflexively consider this argument as a political practice to confront the contemporary dominance of liberal imperial formations. As such, I theoretically work on the contingent connections between realist and postcolonial lines of thought neither to establish a synthetic analytical framework nor to show how classical realists were proto-postcolonial theorists, but rather to make a “counter-imperial machine,” to produce a political alliance that draws minor traditions in realism toward postcolonial critiques of liberal imperialism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
185024
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Since the 1960s, “the stakeholder,” or affected party, has emerged as a novel democratic subject whose participation in varied institutional sites—from universities to government agencies, corporate boardrooms to international organizations—is seen as necessary for the management of complex problems. However, few specifically attend to the stakeholder as a distinct political subject and consider its implications for democratic practice. This paper presents a genealogy of the stakeholder, documenting its appearance in corporate managerialism and US public administration and showing how racial mobilization, rapid technological progress, and the political rationality of systems thinking provided the conditions of possibility for its emergence. Though orienting democracy around stakeholders permits opportunities for participation in political life, I argue that this subject is predicated on a circumscribed form of participatory politics that erodes habits of discovering a common good, erases distinctions between individuals and corporate bodies, and amplifies the problem of expertise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|