Pub Date : 2021-10-19DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211056377
Minda Holm, Nicholas Michelsen
{"title":"Editorial: The New Right’s internationalism","authors":"Minda Holm, Nicholas Michelsen","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211056377","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211056377","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89395061","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1177/2336825x211036952
Nicholas Michelsen
The Editorial team welcomes you to the September 2021 issue of New Perspectives. The relationship between protest and memory runs through this issue. All forms of societal critique treat the past and present as the ‘antechamber’ to what may come next (Koselleck, 1988). This means every protest movement is bound up with historical storytelling, today increasingly framed by the unravelling of the post-cold war order visible in domestic political contestation, rising populism and geopolitical tensions in Europe. Standing behind this is a degree of loss of faith in the utopian philosophies of history invented to resolve the crisis of the enlightenment’s challenge to autocracy in Europe. Liberal historiography made it possible to craft memory into a stable vision of political hope during and after the cold war, and to locate societal protest within the progression from the past into a brighter future. Some of those hopes have now faded. This has particular implications for Central and Eastern Europe, linking anti-liberal populism to liberal revolt against established or rising autocracies. The contributions of this issue all, in some way, speak to this folding together of the problematisation of progress with societal crisis at the ‘end of the end of history’ (Hochuli et al., 2021). Themes taken up in this issue relating to questions of rights and gender, ontological security, the nature of the authentic national self, or the emancipatory potential of popular culture, are entangled with liberal historiography, as is the problem of what to do with the memory of a totalitarian and genocidal past. In complex ways, liberalism and its political legacies remain the principle figure at work. Too confident proclamations of the decline of liberal order can fail to recognise the continuing weight that its concepts place on the present, in and beyond Central and Eastern Europe, in forming the conditions of possibility for nationalist resurgence on the one hand (against liberal politics), and underpinning the hopes for a more democratic future (liberalism against autocracy). As Brad Evans (2021: 12) argues in his excellent recent book, Ecce Humanitas, the conceptualisation of victims has always been central to the problem of liberal modernity, because the entanglement of ideas about historical and societal progress with ‘‘the intolerable’’ is the central problem in conceiving a politics fit for humanity. Taking Arendt as a point of departure, the fact that, as she put it, ‘the world found nothing sacred in the abstract nakedness of being human’ in the holocaust was both spur and nagging problem for the liberal humanism that emerged in its aftermath. Liberal politics hoped to overcome the limits of sovereign states, and inscribe a new inclusive vision of the future, but this carried with it a variety of paradoxes, not least interventionism in the name of the human itself. What to do with horror is the problem of liberal secular modernity, argues Evans, but this is
{"title":"On protest and memory","authors":"Nicholas Michelsen","doi":"10.1177/2336825x211036952","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825x211036952","url":null,"abstract":"The Editorial team welcomes you to the September 2021 issue of New Perspectives. The relationship between protest and memory runs through this issue. All forms of societal critique treat the past and present as the ‘antechamber’ to what may come next (Koselleck, 1988). This means every protest movement is bound up with historical storytelling, today increasingly framed by the unravelling of the post-cold war order visible in domestic political contestation, rising populism and geopolitical tensions in Europe. Standing behind this is a degree of loss of faith in the utopian philosophies of history invented to resolve the crisis of the enlightenment’s challenge to autocracy in Europe. Liberal historiography made it possible to craft memory into a stable vision of political hope during and after the cold war, and to locate societal protest within the progression from the past into a brighter future. Some of those hopes have now faded. This has particular implications for Central and Eastern Europe, linking anti-liberal populism to liberal revolt against established or rising autocracies. The contributions of this issue all, in some way, speak to this folding together of the problematisation of progress with societal crisis at the ‘end of the end of history’ (Hochuli et al., 2021). Themes taken up in this issue relating to questions of rights and gender, ontological security, the nature of the authentic national self, or the emancipatory potential of popular culture, are entangled with liberal historiography, as is the problem of what to do with the memory of a totalitarian and genocidal past. In complex ways, liberalism and its political legacies remain the principle figure at work. Too confident proclamations of the decline of liberal order can fail to recognise the continuing weight that its concepts place on the present, in and beyond Central and Eastern Europe, in forming the conditions of possibility for nationalist resurgence on the one hand (against liberal politics), and underpinning the hopes for a more democratic future (liberalism against autocracy). As Brad Evans (2021: 12) argues in his excellent recent book, Ecce Humanitas, the conceptualisation of victims has always been central to the problem of liberal modernity, because the entanglement of ideas about historical and societal progress with ‘‘the intolerable’’ is the central problem in conceiving a politics fit for humanity. Taking Arendt as a point of departure, the fact that, as she put it, ‘the world found nothing sacred in the abstract nakedness of being human’ in the holocaust was both spur and nagging problem for the liberal humanism that emerged in its aftermath. Liberal politics hoped to overcome the limits of sovereign states, and inscribe a new inclusive vision of the future, but this carried with it a variety of paradoxes, not least interventionism in the name of the human itself. What to do with horror is the problem of liberal secular modernity, argues Evans, but this is","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78558092","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211032900
Aliaksei Kazharski, Monika Kubová
The article uses the ontological security framework and the concept of liminality to analyze Belarus liminal status vis-a-vis Russia and the role it has played in Russia’s ontological security seeking before and after the 2020 Belarus Awakening. It argues that while the entire near-abroad, and, in particular, Ukraine have been important in terms of Russia’s post-imperial ontological security seeking strategies, Belarus occupies a unique position with respect to Russia’s securitized identity because of its perfectly marginal or liminal status. This has to do with the fact that, in the Russian geopolitical gaze, Belarus has remained almost unseparated from the Russian Self. Furthermore, the 2020 protests challenged this status but did not entirely eliminate it, leading to a restructuration of Belarus’ liminality.
{"title":"Belarus as a liminal space for Russia’s ontological security before and after the 2020 protests","authors":"Aliaksei Kazharski, Monika Kubová","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211032900","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211032900","url":null,"abstract":"The article uses the ontological security framework and the concept of liminality to analyze Belarus liminal status vis-a-vis Russia and the role it has played in Russia’s ontological security seeking before and after the 2020 Belarus Awakening. It argues that while the entire near-abroad, and, in particular, Ukraine have been important in terms of Russia’s post-imperial ontological security seeking strategies, Belarus occupies a unique position with respect to Russia’s securitized identity because of its perfectly marginal or liminal status. This has to do with the fact that, in the Russian geopolitical gaze, Belarus has remained almost unseparated from the Russian Self. Furthermore, the 2020 protests challenged this status but did not entirely eliminate it, leading to a restructuration of Belarus’ liminality.","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76236636","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-12DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211029126
V. Navumau, O. Matveieva
One of the distinctive traits of the Belarusian ‘revolution-in-the-making’, sparked by alleged falsifications during the presidential elections and brutal repressions of protest afterwards, has been a highly visible gender dimension. This article is devoted to the analysis of this gender-related consequences of protest activism in Belarus. Within this research, the authors analyse the role of the female movement in the Belarusian uprising and examine, and to which extent this involvement expands the public sphere and contributes to the changes in gender-related policies. To do this, the authors conducted seven semi-structured in-depth interviews with the gender experts and activists – four before and four after the protests.
{"title":"The gender dimension of the 2020 Belarusian protest: Does female engagement contribute to the establishment of gender equality?","authors":"V. Navumau, O. Matveieva","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211029126","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211029126","url":null,"abstract":"One of the distinctive traits of the Belarusian ‘revolution-in-the-making’, sparked by alleged falsifications during the presidential elections and brutal repressions of protest afterwards, has been a highly visible gender dimension. This article is devoted to the analysis of this gender-related consequences of protest activism in Belarus. Within this research, the authors analyse the role of the female movement in the Belarusian uprising and examine, and to which extent this involvement expands the public sphere and contributes to the changes in gender-related policies. To do this, the authors conducted seven semi-structured in-depth interviews with the gender experts and activists – four before and four after the protests.","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73367660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-09DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211030426
Rudolf Fürst
A comparison of the former Eastern Bloc and China’s ways of dealing with the social implications of rock music as an alien cultural import from the West reveals significant analogies. The paper traces the process of politicisation of rock music and compares the two different cultural spaces by mapping each space’s state ideology, aesthetic traditions and identities, and discriminative political and economic tools used to marginalise rock. Here the term politicisation refers mainly to the polarisation between the communist regimes’ restrictive policies, and the attempts of the rock scenes to sustain their discriminating characteristics and relationship to protest. While in European communist states rock played a relevant subversive role, conversely, in China any ‘rocking’ of the state has largely been averted. The Chinese rock scene as an off-mainstream urban subculture has received less popular support than its counterpart in Europe and has also proved less politically significant. This comparative case study discusses the relationship between popular music and politics by tracing analogies and differences between the former Czechoslovakia, where the ideologisation and politicisation of rock reached the highest point in the Eastern Bloc, and contemporary China.
{"title":"Taming rock music in communist states: Politicisation of Western popular culture in East Europe and mainland China","authors":"Rudolf Fürst","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211030426","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211030426","url":null,"abstract":"A comparison of the former Eastern Bloc and China’s ways of dealing with the social implications of rock music as an alien cultural import from the West reveals significant analogies. The paper traces the process of politicisation of rock music and compares the two different cultural spaces by mapping each space’s state ideology, aesthetic traditions and identities, and discriminative political and economic tools used to marginalise rock. Here the term politicisation refers mainly to the polarisation between the communist regimes’ restrictive policies, and the attempts of the rock scenes to sustain their discriminating characteristics and relationship to protest. While in European communist states rock played a relevant subversive role, conversely, in China any ‘rocking’ of the state has largely been averted. The Chinese rock scene as an off-mainstream urban subculture has received less popular support than its counterpart in Europe and has also proved less politically significant. This comparative case study discusses the relationship between popular music and politics by tracing analogies and differences between the former Czechoslovakia, where the ideologisation and politicisation of rock reached the highest point in the Eastern Bloc, and contemporary China.","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88902680","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-07DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211026448
B. Steele, Amy E. Eckert, Benjamin Meiches, S. Neumeier, Brent E. Sasley, Jelena Subotić
Jelena Subotic’s Yellow Star, Red Star examines how Holocaust memorializing changed over time in Serbia, Croatia, and Lithuania in ways that attended to national identity and EU membership. The book displays Professor Subotic’s painstaking historical work accrued from years of primary source research via archival, fieldwork, as well as a comprehensive secondary source review, and is written in an immensely tangible way. The dynamics of Holocaust memorializing, Subotic demonstrates, are as much about the present as they are about the past. The work is an achievement of historical, theoretical, political and ethical proportions. Thus, the book appeals to a broad number of audiences, disciplines, and critical reflections on the politics of historical memory. What follows is a forum that comes out of a book roundtable on Subotic’s study held at the 2019 International Studies Association-West meeting in Pasadena, California. The book had just been published by that September, and as a fresh study it proved to be a good forum to introduce the book to would-be readers and also provide some good ‘‘early’’ takes on the book in light of the research interests of the respondents and, also, how it might bear upon or be put into conversation with a variety of research fields.
{"title":"Forum: Jelena Subotic’s Yellow Star, Red Star","authors":"B. Steele, Amy E. Eckert, Benjamin Meiches, S. Neumeier, Brent E. Sasley, Jelena Subotić","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211026448","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211026448","url":null,"abstract":"Jelena Subotic’s Yellow Star, Red Star examines how Holocaust memorializing changed over time in Serbia, Croatia, and Lithuania in ways that attended to national identity and EU membership. The book displays Professor Subotic’s painstaking historical work accrued from years of primary source research via archival, fieldwork, as well as a comprehensive secondary source review, and is written in an immensely tangible way. The dynamics of Holocaust memorializing, Subotic demonstrates, are as much about the present as they are about the past. The work is an achievement of historical, theoretical, political and ethical proportions. Thus, the book appeals to a broad number of audiences, disciplines, and critical reflections on the politics of historical memory. What follows is a forum that comes out of a book roundtable on Subotic’s study held at the 2019 International Studies Association-West meeting in Pasadena, California. The book had just been published by that September, and as a fresh study it proved to be a good forum to introduce the book to would-be readers and also provide some good ‘‘early’’ takes on the book in light of the research interests of the respondents and, also, how it might bear upon or be put into conversation with a variety of research fields.","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72965318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-01DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211010985
S. Fishel
Anatol Lieven brings considerable experience in foreign affairs and journalism to the topic of climate change and responses to the risks and dangers that a changing earth climate demands of humans and human institutions. In his book Climate Change and the Nation State, he argues that focusing on the interests of nations is a way out of inaction on climate change: a strong civic nationalism is necessary and must rely on the sovereign territorial state for meaningful action on climate change. He further argues that the imagined community that makes up a nation can create the spatiotemporal political space that can envision and ‘demand the sacrifices necessary to combat climate change’ (p. xx). I will focus my comments around a framework that takes climate change to be a ‘wicked problem’ and that its roots lie in economic, political, cultural, and social problems that demand attention, justice and reparation to truly be addressed. I also note that the broad term ‘climate change’ serves as a shorthand term that encompasses a complex set of planetary processes that humans now influence through terraforming, the burning of fossil fuels, and overand misuse of shared resources (Woods, 2014). This is a crisis of our own making and, furthermore, some states and regions are more responsible than others for causing, and responding to, the issues of concern in Lieven’s book. Climate change is not only a policy puzzle (a very complex one, but more on that shortly), it also reveals a crisis at the root of world order and our treatment of one another, nonhuman animals, and the natural world and its resources. While it is tempting to respond to the urgency of the climate crisis using the tools already present, this moment affords humans an opportunity to interrogate the ways in which we arrived at this crisis. To repeat a quote attributed to Albert Einstein ‘We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used to create them’. We must be very mindful in our solutions that we do not unthinkingly slip in the poisons that made us sick to begin with. Pragmatically, of course, with the urgency of the problems we face, we cannot reinvent all institutions from the ground up, but we do need to be cautious, thoughtful, and aware of history. This includes listening to and respecting the experiences of those who have suffered through colonialization, resource extraction, and the postand endocolonial vestiges of the very nation states to which Lieven turns to as a solution to climate change response (Christ, 2013; Yusoff,
{"title":"Can Climate Nationalism Save Us?","authors":"S. Fishel","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211010985","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211010985","url":null,"abstract":"Anatol Lieven brings considerable experience in foreign affairs and journalism to the topic of climate change and responses to the risks and dangers that a changing earth climate demands of humans and human institutions. In his book Climate Change and the Nation State, he argues that focusing on the interests of nations is a way out of inaction on climate change: a strong civic nationalism is necessary and must rely on the sovereign territorial state for meaningful action on climate change. He further argues that the imagined community that makes up a nation can create the spatiotemporal political space that can envision and ‘demand the sacrifices necessary to combat climate change’ (p. xx). I will focus my comments around a framework that takes climate change to be a ‘wicked problem’ and that its roots lie in economic, political, cultural, and social problems that demand attention, justice and reparation to truly be addressed. I also note that the broad term ‘climate change’ serves as a shorthand term that encompasses a complex set of planetary processes that humans now influence through terraforming, the burning of fossil fuels, and overand misuse of shared resources (Woods, 2014). This is a crisis of our own making and, furthermore, some states and regions are more responsible than others for causing, and responding to, the issues of concern in Lieven’s book. Climate change is not only a policy puzzle (a very complex one, but more on that shortly), it also reveals a crisis at the root of world order and our treatment of one another, nonhuman animals, and the natural world and its resources. While it is tempting to respond to the urgency of the climate crisis using the tools already present, this moment affords humans an opportunity to interrogate the ways in which we arrived at this crisis. To repeat a quote attributed to Albert Einstein ‘We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used to create them’. We must be very mindful in our solutions that we do not unthinkingly slip in the poisons that made us sick to begin with. Pragmatically, of course, with the urgency of the problems we face, we cannot reinvent all institutions from the ground up, but we do need to be cautious, thoughtful, and aware of history. This includes listening to and respecting the experiences of those who have suffered through colonialization, resource extraction, and the postand endocolonial vestiges of the very nation states to which Lieven turns to as a solution to climate change response (Christ, 2013; Yusoff,","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87779059","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-01DOI: 10.1177/2336825x211013312
A. Lieven
I must thank the authors for their most interesting responses to my book, and their contributions to the debate on climate change – which, as we all agree, is by far the greatest threat now facing humanity. Hans Morgenthau stated that the main guiding intellectual principle of Realism is ‘interest defined in terms of power’. As a Realist, I would say that the overriding long term vital interest of all major states is the need to limit climate change; and the overriding need is to mobilize the power necessary to achieve this. I regard nationalism as a potentially useful tool in this regard, though by no means the only one. Pace Dr Braun, I do not regard it as a ‘doctrine’. As a follower of Edmund Burke, one thing I try very hard not to be is doctrinaire. If anthropogenic climate change is indeed a real and deadly threat – as all the panelists seem to agree that it is – then two points follow. The first is that we cannot afford to be too scrupulous about the tactics we use in response. History has not on the whole been kind to those who, faced with an obvious and overwhelming threat, chose instead to let rigid political ideologies stand in the way of the measures and alliances needed to defeat it. One thinks of those socialists in the 1920s and 30s who, faced with the rise of Fascism, rigidly refused to form alliances with ‘bourgeois’ liberal parties, and shelve their ideological Marxist demands for total nationalization of property, state atheism and so on. Like Dr Matejova, I too come from an East European background (albeit at one remove, on my father’s side), and perhaps in both our cases our Realism owes something to an awareness of the appalling possibilities latent even in highly developed societies, when these come under too great a combination of strains. My fear is that if we cannot limit climate change, then combined with migration (in part driven by climate change) and AI it will indeed produce dreadful strains on our societies and democracies in the decades to come, leading to dreadful political outcomes. Trump has been bad. What may come in future could be infinitely worse. The other point is that of time. Either we accept the overwhelming scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change or we don’t. If we don’t, then why are we having this conversation? If we do, then we must also accept the consensus that we need to take action urgently if disaster is to be avoided. As Dr Braun writes, the IPCC goal of keeping the rise in temperatures below
{"title":"Response from Anatol Lieven","authors":"A. Lieven","doi":"10.1177/2336825x211013312","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825x211013312","url":null,"abstract":"I must thank the authors for their most interesting responses to my book, and their contributions to the debate on climate change – which, as we all agree, is by far the greatest threat now facing humanity. Hans Morgenthau stated that the main guiding intellectual principle of Realism is ‘interest defined in terms of power’. As a Realist, I would say that the overriding long term vital interest of all major states is the need to limit climate change; and the overriding need is to mobilize the power necessary to achieve this. I regard nationalism as a potentially useful tool in this regard, though by no means the only one. Pace Dr Braun, I do not regard it as a ‘doctrine’. As a follower of Edmund Burke, one thing I try very hard not to be is doctrinaire. If anthropogenic climate change is indeed a real and deadly threat – as all the panelists seem to agree that it is – then two points follow. The first is that we cannot afford to be too scrupulous about the tactics we use in response. History has not on the whole been kind to those who, faced with an obvious and overwhelming threat, chose instead to let rigid political ideologies stand in the way of the measures and alliances needed to defeat it. One thinks of those socialists in the 1920s and 30s who, faced with the rise of Fascism, rigidly refused to form alliances with ‘bourgeois’ liberal parties, and shelve their ideological Marxist demands for total nationalization of property, state atheism and so on. Like Dr Matejova, I too come from an East European background (albeit at one remove, on my father’s side), and perhaps in both our cases our Realism owes something to an awareness of the appalling possibilities latent even in highly developed societies, when these come under too great a combination of strains. My fear is that if we cannot limit climate change, then combined with migration (in part driven by climate change) and AI it will indeed produce dreadful strains on our societies and democracies in the decades to come, leading to dreadful political outcomes. Trump has been bad. What may come in future could be infinitely worse. The other point is that of time. Either we accept the overwhelming scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change or we don’t. If we don’t, then why are we having this conversation? If we do, then we must also accept the consensus that we need to take action urgently if disaster is to be avoided. As Dr Braun writes, the IPCC goal of keeping the rise in temperatures below","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85528451","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-01DOI: 10.1177/2336825X211010054
J. Burgess
Security happens in the future. Threats to our security concern the potential of a future event, of possibility and uncertainty. Fear, omnipresent in popular culture is thereby non-uniform. Like time itself, it intensifies and softens, accelerates and slows, and disrupts and destabilises as a function of many variables. This article re-interprets the phenomenon of insecurity by reading it together with Heidegger’s analytic of time as a function of our proximity to being as fundamental ontological question, one which unfolds in the form of a threatening future.
{"title":"On being insecure: Heidegger’s fears","authors":"J. Burgess","doi":"10.1177/2336825X211010054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2336825X211010054","url":null,"abstract":"Security happens in the future. Threats to our security concern the potential of a future event, of possibility and uncertainty. Fear, omnipresent in popular culture is thereby non-uniform. Like time itself, it intensifies and softens, accelerates and slows, and disrupts and destabilises as a function of many variables. This article re-interprets the phenomenon of insecurity by reading it together with Heidegger’s analytic of time as a function of our proximity to being as fundamental ontological question, one which unfolds in the form of a threatening future.","PeriodicalId":42556,"journal":{"name":"New Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87100925","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：