Suchergebnisse

Abstract
This paper invokes Edward Said's notion of counterpoint to present a transnational sociological account of the Spanish Civil War, 1936–1939. This contrapuntal reading raises questions of sovereignty, violence, and identity, which—filtered through a political sociological lens—offer novel perspectives on the power of empire and colonialism in relation to these key IR categories. Specifically, I argue that the Spanish colonial frontier in Morocco served as a laboratory for distinctive expressions of transnational state-building, violence, and identity-formation, which were reproduced in the metropolitan heartlands of the Iberian Peninsula during the interwar years. The complex interaction between core and periphery in this period had momentous implications for both Spanish and Moroccan history, many of which continue to play out in contemporary politics across the Gibraltar Strait.

Introduction to forum on the sociology of international politics with respect to key concepts in phenomenology.

Jacobi, D.: Introduction. - S. 87 Kessler, O.: Artificial horizons. - S. 87-91 Michel, T.: Intentionality and the publicness of mind. - S. 91-94 Jacobi, D.: On the "construction" of knowledge and the knowledge of "construction". - S. 94-97 Caraccioli, M. J.: Spatial structures and the phenomenology of inter-national identity. - S. 98-101 Brighton, S.: Three propositions on the phenomenology of war. - S.101-105

"International/Global Political Sociology" published on by Oxford University Press.

Discusses the personal, disciplinary, methodological, & professional difficulties in engaging in fruitful interdisciplinary scholarship for the fields of international law, international relations, & sociology. References. D. Edelman

For some time, the theoretical debate in international relations has occupied an ambiguous place in the discipline. For some, the remarkable diversity of theoretical production expresses the dynamism of a field that has grown thanks to its capacity for dialogue with a wide range of disciplines from the humanities and social sciences, and even the exact sciences. Others, however, see this process as a symptom of the decline of the discipline, reflected in its fragmentation and inability to produce a more or less coherent (or consensual) set of research problems. We could also mention a current of opinion that sees the supposed exhaustion of International Relations as a process that we should not regret, since the evolution of the field would be irremediably associated with a colonial power project that produced unequal and discriminatory world orders. For the latter, the theories of International Relations offer few possibilities for the construction of a critique of world politics and, therefore, would not deserve significant intellectual investment. This view echoes the controversial debate about the 'end of IR theory' waged in the pages of the European Journal of International Relations in 2013 (Dunne, Hansen, and Wight 2013). This declaration of death seems premature, yet the current state of the debate may suggest a fund of truth for pessimistic assessments. Had the 'critical turn' project fallen victim to its own success? Has the drive towards greater theoretical pluralism produced a fragmentation that impedes the evolution of the discipline? Has the critique of the limits of international studies - in particular its supposed universality - compromised our ability to think of the international as a planetary political space? This diffuse dissatisfaction with international theoretical work has a very broad scope, reaching both Anglo-American and continental European academic cultures and the many other continents where research in International Relations is conducted today, testifying to the increasingly ...