Unfit to Bounce Back: On the Martial Politics of Resilience in WWI-Weimar Germany and Austerity Britain

IF 3.5 2区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS International Political Sociology Pub Date : 2023-10-19 DOI:10.1093/ips/olad017
Laura Jung
{"title":"Unfit to Bounce Back: On the Martial Politics of Resilience in WWI-Weimar Germany and Austerity Britain","authors":"Laura Jung","doi":"10.1093/ips/olad017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Resilience discourse, with its implicit assumption of a return to health and productivity following a crisis, is often mobilized to target disabled people. Yet while resilience scholarship has rapidly expanded and become prevalent in various fields over recent decades, it has largely failed to analyze the multiple connections between resilience, disability, and eugenics. This article argues that resilience discourse is a form of martial politics, wielded against disabled people to protect the health and prosperity of the political community. A martial politics of resilience works through three registers, responsibilizing disabled subjects by withdrawing state support, dehumanizing them as unproductive and a burden, and exposing these subjects to abandonment/death through medical and policy interventions. I use the lens of martial politics to think through relationships between resilience, disability, and security in Germany and Britain in the early twentieth and twenty-first centuries, respectively, focusing on psychiatric treatment of trauma in the former and the implementation of austerity policies in the latter. The article thus expands our understanding of relationships between resilience, subjectivity, and security by highlighting the ableist and lethal contours of resilient subjects, polities, and economies.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Political Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olad017","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Resilience discourse, with its implicit assumption of a return to health and productivity following a crisis, is often mobilized to target disabled people. Yet while resilience scholarship has rapidly expanded and become prevalent in various fields over recent decades, it has largely failed to analyze the multiple connections between resilience, disability, and eugenics. This article argues that resilience discourse is a form of martial politics, wielded against disabled people to protect the health and prosperity of the political community. A martial politics of resilience works through three registers, responsibilizing disabled subjects by withdrawing state support, dehumanizing them as unproductive and a burden, and exposing these subjects to abandonment/death through medical and policy interventions. I use the lens of martial politics to think through relationships between resilience, disability, and security in Germany and Britain in the early twentieth and twenty-first centuries, respectively, focusing on psychiatric treatment of trauma in the former and the implementation of austerity policies in the latter. The article thus expands our understanding of relationships between resilience, subjectivity, and security by highlighting the ableist and lethal contours of resilient subjects, polities, and economies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不适合反弹:论二战魏玛德国和紧缩英国的弹性军事政治
复原力话语,其隐含的假设是在危机后恢复健康和生产力,经常被动员起来针对残疾人。然而,尽管近几十年来适应力研究在各个领域迅速发展并变得普遍,但它在很大程度上未能分析适应力、残疾和优生学之间的多重联系。本文认为,弹性话语是一种军事政治形式,对残疾人挥舞,以保护政治共同体的健康和繁荣。恢复力的军事政治通过三种登记方式起作用,通过撤回国家支持来对残疾主体负责,将他们作为非生产性和负担加以非人化,并通过医疗和政策干预使这些主体面临遗弃/死亡。我用军事政治的视角分别思考了二十世纪初和二十一世纪初德国和英国的恢复力、残疾和安全之间的关系,重点关注前者对创伤的精神治疗和后者对紧缩政策的实施。因此,这篇文章通过强调有弹性的主体、政治和经济的健康和致命的轮廓,扩展了我们对弹性、主观性和安全之间关系的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: International Political Sociology (IPS), responds to the need for more productive collaboration among political sociologists, international relations specialists and sociopolitical theorists. It is especially concerned with challenges arising from contemporary transformations of social, political, and global orders given the statist forms of traditional sociologies and the marginalization of social processes in many approaches to international relations. IPS is committed to theoretical innovation, new modes of empirical research and the geographical and cultural diversification of research beyond the usual circuits of European and North-American scholarship.
期刊最新文献
Bio/Necropolitical Capture and Evasion on Africa–Europe Migrant Journeys Justice “to Come”? Decolonial Deconstruction, from Postmodern Policymaking to the Black Horizon “I Flip, Therefore I Am”: Smartphone Detoxing as a Practice of Sovereignty Nomads’ Land: Exploring the Social and Political Life of the Nomad Category Thinking through 1492: IR's Historiographic Operation(s) and the Politics of Benchmark Dates
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1