Suchergebnisse

Frontmatter -- CONTENTS -- ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS -- INTRODUCTION -- Chapter 1 WAR AS PEACE, PEACE AS PACIFICATION -- Chapter 2 WAR ON WASTE; OR, INTERNATIONAL LAW AS PRIMITIVE ACCUMULATION -- Chapter 3 'O EFFEMINACY! EFFEMINACY!': MARTIAL POWER, MASCULINE POWER, LIBERAL PEACE -- Chapter 4 THE POLICE OF CIVILISATION: WAR AS CIVILISING OFFENSIVE -- Chapter 5 AIR POWER AS POLICE POWER I -- Chapter 6 AIR POWER AS POLICE POWER II -- Chapter 7 UNDER THE SIGN OF SECURITY: TRAUMA, TERROR, RESILIENCE -- NOTES -- INDEX

Why is liberalism so obsessed with waste? Is there a drone above you now? Are you living in a no-fly zone? What is the role of masculinity in the 'war on terror'? And why do so many liberals say they love peace while finding new ways to justify slaughter in the name of security? In this, the first book to deal with the concepts of war power and police power together, Mark Neocleous deals with these questions and many more by using critical theory to radically rethink war power. Neocleous generates a provocative set of claims about state power and capital accumulation, the role of violence in the making of liberal order, the police wars at the heart of this violence, and the ways in which these processes come to be called 'peace'. And he takes the reader down some unexpected paths: the 'war on waste', debates about effeminacy, the proliferation of resilience and trauma-talk, drones as the culmination of colonial bombing campaigns, and no-fly zones as the perfect accompaniment for drones. The result is a compelling book that articulates a vision of war/police power beyond the military and the police. Key Features. The first book to deal with the concepts of war power and police power together Looks beyond the institutions of 'the military' and 'the police' Thinks critically about how powers of war and powers of police coincide in the exercise of state violence and social ordering

Challenging the common assumption that treats security as an unquestionable good, Neocleous explores the ways in which security has been deployed towards a vision of social order in which state power and liberal subjectivity have been inscribed into human experience. He uncovers the violence which underlies the politics of security, the ideological circuit between security and emergency powers, and the security fetishism dominating modern politics

This book brings together a range of diverse discussions about security in order to sustain a genuine critique of the subject. It is unique in its examination of the historical and political links between social security and national security and in its assessment of the way that emergency powers (as the most intense realisation of the rhetoric of 'national security') have been synthesised with 'normal' law. Among other ideas and concepts, Mark Neocleous discusses the place of security in the liberal tradition of political theory. Building on insights from Foucault and Marx, he argues that liberalism's central category is not liberty, but security. He also deals with the role of security in justifying the introduction and continuation of emergency powers through a historical excavation of the state of emergency, a political reading of the way emergency powers are only tangentially concerned with warfare, and a theoretical reading of the debate between Schmitt and Benjamin. Key Features Makes original use of diverse historical materials concerning the question of security Provides a distinctive account of theoretical debates about security within the tradition of social and political theory Gives a genuinely interdisciplinary account of security, moving between political thought, history, sociology, and law Presents the first fully-fledged critique of security

Examines the way that the state has been imagined in terms traditionally associated with human subjectivity: body, mind, personality and home. This book weaves a set of arguments concerning the three icons of the political imagination - the political collective, the sovereign agency and the enemy figure.

Debt is pacification's dirtiest little secret and its cleanest weapon. Pacification is the name we give to the fabrication of social order; it is the goal of the police power and the police wars that dominate our political landscape. To understand pacification, we need to pay close attention not only to professional violence workers, but also to the far more subtle ways in which subjects are rendered obedient to a social order of exploitation and alienation. As critical theories of police power have shown, the wage is crucial to this process. But so too is debt. This article argues that we need to understand debt as pacification. In the process, the article also aims to strengthen and deepen the concept of pacification and the idea of police power.

This article unearths the political logic of the police kettle. Rather than add to the mundane debate about civil liberties or models of policing, this article argues that the kettle reveals nothing less than the police war at the heart of modernity. This is a police war carried out as a logic of containment against the enemy within—within the kettle and within society. The kettle is a microcosm of the police war of containment.