Suchergebnisse

This article critically examines the performative politics of resilience in the context of the current UK Civil Contingencies (UKCC) agenda. It places resilience within a wider politics of (in)security that seeks to govern risk by folding uncertainty into everyday practices that plan for, pre-empt, and imagine extreme events. Moving beyond existing diagnoses of resilience based either on ecological adaptation or neoliberal governmentality, we develop a performative approach that highlights the instability, contingency, and ambiguity within attempts to govern uncertainties. This performative politics of resilience is investigated via two case studies that explore 1) critical national infrastructure protection and 2) humanitarian emergency preparedness. By drawing attention to the particularities of how resilient knowledge is performed and what it does in diverse contexts, we repoliticize resilience as an ongoing, incomplete, and potentially self-undermining discourse.

European-East Asian Borders is an international, trans-disciplinary volume that breaks new ground in the study of borders and bordering practices in global politics. It explores the insights and limitations of border theory developed primarily in the European context to a range of historical and contemporary border-related issues and phenomena in East Asia. The essays presented here question, rather than assume, the various borders between inclusion/exclusion, here/there, us/them, that condition the (im)possibility of translating between histories, cultures and identities. Contributors suggest

The performance of International Relations (IR) scholarship – as in all scholarship – acts to close and police the boundaries of the discipline in ways that reflect power–knowledge relations. This has led to the development of two strands of work in ontological security studies in IR, which divide on questions of ontological choice and the nature of the deployment of the concept of dread. Neither strand is intellectually superior to the other and both are internally heterogeneous. That there are two strands, however, is the product of the performance of IR scholarship, and the two strands themselves perform distinct roles. One allows ontological security studies to engage with the 'mainstream' in IR; the other allows 'international' elements of ontological security to engage with the social sciences more generally. Ironically, both can be read as symptoms of the discipline's issues with its own ontological (in)security. We reflect on these intellectual dynamics and their implications and prompt a new departure by connecting ontological security studies in IR with the emerging interdisciplinary fields of the 'vernacular' and 'everyday' via the mutual interest in biographical narratives of the self and the work that they do politically.

"This inter-disciplinary edited volume critically examines the dynamics of the War on Terror, focusing on the theme of the politics of response. The book explores both how responses to terrorism - by politicians, authorities and the media - legitimise particular forms of sovereign politics, and how terrorism can be understood as a response to global inequalities, colonial and imperial legacies, and the dominant idioms of modern politics. The investigation is made against the backdrop of the 7 July 2005 bombings in London and their aftermath, which have gone largely unexamined in the academic literature to date. The case offers a provocative site for analysing the diverse logics implicated in the broader context of the War on Terror, for examining how terrorist events are framed, and how such framings serve to legitimise particular policies and political practices ."--Publisher's website

In recent years the concept of the border has been reconceptualised: borders are no longer viewed primarily as static lines at the outer edge of the state, but increasingly as mobile, bio-political and virtual apparatuses of control. While such a reconceptualisation resonates with western border security practices, however, it is vulnerable to the critique that such a totalising vision of sovereign space does not take into account the varied responses, resistances and contestations among populations targeted by those bordering practices. This article responds to such a critique by developing an interlocking account of the gendered and racialised logics that condition the possibility for contemporary border security practices. We illustrate our approach via an analysis of two visions of contemporary British society and border politics: one offered by Prime Minister David Cameron in his 'Muscular liberalism' speech delivered in February 2011; the other contained in Chris Morris' jihadist comedy 'Four Lions'. Adapted from the source document.

In recent years the concept of the border has been reconceptualised: borders are no longer viewed primarily as static lines at the outer edge of the state, but increasingly as mobile, bio-political and virtual apparatuses of control. While such a reconceptualisation resonates with western border security practices, however, it is vulnerable to the critique that such a totalising vision of sovereign space does not take into account the varied responses, resistances and contestations among populations targeted by those bordering practices. This article responds to such a critique by developing an interlocking account of the gendered and racialised logics that condition the possibility for contemporary border security practices. We illustrate our approach via an analysis of two visions of contemporary British society and border politics: one offered by Prime Minister David Cameron in his 'Muscular liberalism' speech delivered in February 2011; the other contained in Chris Morris' jihadist comedy 'Four Lions'.