»Global« is everywhere - recent years have seen a significant proliferation of the adjective »global« across discourses. But what do social actors actually do when using this term?Written from within the political studies and International Relations disciplines, and with a particular interest in the US, this book demonstrates that the widespread use of »global« is more than a linguistic curiosity. It constitutes a distinct political phenomenon of major importance: the negotiation and reproduction of the »new world«. As such, the analysis of the use of »global« provides fascinating insights into an influential and politically loaded aspect of contemporary imaginations of the world
"Global" is everywhere - recent years have seen a significant proliferation of the adjective "global" across discourses. But what do social actors actually do when using this term? Written from within the political studies and International Relations disciplines, and with a particular interest in the US, this book demonstrates that the widespread use of "global" is more than a linguistic curiosity. It constitutes a distinct political phenomenon of major importance: the negotiation and reproduction of the "new world". As such, the analysis of the use of "global" provides fascinating insights into an influential and politically loaded aspect of contemporary imaginations of the world.
Global is everywhere - recent years have seen a significant proliferation of the adjective "global" across discourses. But what do social actors actually do when using this term? Written from within the political studies and International Relations disciplines, and with a particular interest in the US, this book demonstrates that the widespread use of "global" is more than a linguistic curiosity. It constitutes a distinct political phenomenon of major importance: the negotiation and reproduction of the "new world". As such, the analysis of the use of "global" provides fascinating insights into an influential and politically loaded aspect of contemporary imaginations of the world.
AbstractIn this article, I contribute to the debate on Ulrich Beck's idea of 'methodological cosmopolitanism' from a political science perspective. How fruitful is Beck's idea for the study of world politics? How can a political science perspective turn 'methodological cosmopolitanism' into a more transdisciplinary subject of debate? Guided by these questions, I speak to two audiences. First, I offer political scientists a distinct strategy for empirical 'cosmopolitan political science' research. At the heart of this strategy is a novel object of research, the 'cosmopolitan outlook', understood as a discourse that breaks with the 'national outlook' to open possibilities for a world beyond 'reflexive modernization'. With that, I shift the perspective from structure to discourse and broaden the normative grounds on which to assess cosmopolitan reality. Rather than just considering the emergence of normative cosmopolitan ideals, I build into cosmopolitan research the normative, empirical question of whether we see an emergence of a world beyond reflexive modernization. Second, I address scholars outside the field of political science who are interested in methodological cosmopolitanism by offering the 'cosmopolitan outlook' as a novel object of study that could also be explored from other disciplinary perspectives and by proposing they put the question of the purpose of methodological cosmopolitanism centre stage. This question can, I argue, constitute grounds for substantial debates on methodological cosmopolitanism not already precluded through disciplinary premises and concerns. Contributing to such a transdisciplinary debate, I distinguish between the long‐term and immediate purpose of methodological cosmopolitanism, the former being about the development of a cosmopolitan language and grammar and the latter about empirical explorations of the reality of the 'cosmopolitan outlook', eventually and in a collective and transdisciplinary endeavour building up to contribute to the former.
"Global" is everywhere – recent years have seen a significant proliferation of the adjective "global" across discourses. But what do social actors actually do when using this term? Written from within the political studies and International Relations disciplines, and with a particular interest in the US, this book demonstrates that the widespread use of "global" is more than a linguistic curiosity. It constitutes a distinct political phenomenon of major importance: the negotiation and reproduction of the "new world". As such, the analysis of the use of "global" provides fascinating insights into an influential and politically loaded aspect of contemporary imaginations of the world.
'Global' is everywhere – recent years have seen a significant proliferation of the adjective 'global' across discourses. But what do social actors actually do when using this term? Written from within the political studies and international relations disciplines, and with a particular interest in the US, this book demonstrates that the widespread use of 'global' is more than a linguistic curiosity. It constitutes a distinct political phenomenon of major importance: the negotiation of and play with the notion of the 'new world'. As such, the analysis of the use of 'global' provides fascinating insights into an influential and politically loaded aspect of contemporary imaginations of the world.
»Global« is everywhere - recent years have seen a significant proliferation of the adjective »global« across discourses. But what do social actors actually do when using this term?Written from within the political studies and International Relations disciplines, and with a particular interest in the US, this book demonstrates that the widespread use of »global« is more than a linguistic curiosity. It constitutes a distinct political phenomenon of major importance: the negotiation and reproduction of the »new world«. As such, the analysis of the use of »global« provides fascinating insights into an influential and politically loaded aspect of contemporary imaginations of the world.
Access options:
The following links lead to the full text from the respective local libraries:
»Global« is everywhere - recent years have seen a significant proliferation of the adjective »global« across discourses. But what do social actors actually do when using this term? Written from within the political studies and international relations disciplines, and with a particular interest in the US, this book demonstrates that the widespread use of »global« is more than a linguistic curiosity. It constitutes a distinct political phenomenon of major importance: the negotiation of and play with the notion of the »new world«. As such, the analysis of the use of »global« provides fascinating insights into an influential and politically loaded aspect of contemporary imaginations of the world
While it is Ulrich Beck's concept of 'risk society' that has mostly attracted attention in the field of security studies, in this article I argue that if we want to take Beck seriously, we need to go beyond his 'risk society' thesis and acknowledge that his main thesis was that we live in a social reality that is qualitatively new and, consequently, calls for a radical shift in how we look at and talk about it. To bring Beck into security studies, then, means to study 'security' from within Beck's 'new world'. For that, I argue, a sharper conception of what characterizes that world is needed. At the heart of my article I provide such a conception – the 'cosmopolitized world' – which I identify as being shaped by non-linearity and the interplay of two moments: the 'cosmopolitized reality' and the 'tradition of the national perspective'. Building on this concept and experimenting with it, I turn to reading the 'US national security' discourse as this is constructed in the text of the 2015 National Security Strategy from within this 'cosmopolitized world'. Reflecting on this experiment, I conclude by highlighting the potential that bringing Beck in this way into security studies holds, as well as pointing to the need for future work on the vocabulary of the 'cosmopolitized world'.
Under US President Obama, the words resilience and resilient have been applied beyond the odd occasion in the National Security Strategy (NSS) document. Through a systematic analysis of the NSS 2010, the research behind this article sought to determine if there was anything in this linguistic phenomenon of interest to scholars in political studies. The article argues that what makes the appearance of the two words in the NSS 2010 relevant is not what these words do but what is done to them in the text. It shows how the document constructs resilience and resilient in a distinct way as symbolic tools with a high degree of semantic openness, a particular positive connotation and deontic meaning. The article argues that the use of the two words in the NSS 2010 can be seen as an exercise in 'occupying' them with ideologically loaded meanings, which can be interpreted as the actualisation of both words as 'political keywords'. The article demonstrates the relevance of this insight for political scholars as the ground for future explorations of the popular discourse of 'resilience' through the concept of 'political keywords'.
Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have come to be a central military technology in the current era and have also recently entered the civil sector. Like any technology, UAVs are not just a technical object with distinct technical qualities but also the product of social negotiations and imaginations in public discourses. This article takes the word drone as a distinct component of these negotiations and imaginations of UAVs. With an interest in the German imagination of UAVs, the article presents an analysis of what is captured in the word Drohne (drone) in a corpus generated from an established German news platform. This analysis provides insight into the meanings attached to the word Drohne, such as 'military power', 'hyper-progress' and 'threat to extant technology'. Importantly, it uncovers the distinction between two kinds of 'Drohnen': actors and tool, and unveils a geography of 'Drohne', in and through which 'Drohnen' are 'managed'. With that the analysis reveals an intriguing subtle theme in the social negotiation of UAVs in Germany. In this theme the technology 'Drohne' (drone) is imagined as potentially 'game changing' in nature. At the same time, it is symbolically 'tamed' and organised through a (modern) understanding of bordered social 'containers', in which 'Drohnen' are imagined to exist and are subject to 'compartmentalised' responsibilities.
