This paper delves into the debates on digital technologies, algorithms, artificial intelligence, Big Data, and Big Tech in the journal International Political Sociology (IPS). Acknowledging the promises of IPS to challenge the way established problematiqués in international relations (IR) are addressed and reflecting on knowledge production and its implications, it speaks to a general audience in IPS by asking where—and how—phenomena linked to digital technologies are addressed within IPS. I provide a sociology of debates that touch upon digital technologies broadly and link this to the promises of IPS. A citation network and cluster analysis of articles in IPS, therefore, uncovers the orientations within IPS scholarship on digital technologies broadly, showcasing the importance of concepts such as security, surveillance, migration, and risk. It also shows that analytical lenses broaden from Foucault-inspired accounts toward perspectives relying on actor–network theory and practice theories. Drawing from these findings, the paper extrapolates lessons for future research, advocating for a heightened emphasis on including contemporary sociological discussions on digital capitalism. It points to the emphasis of interdisciplinarity and sociology in the name of IPS and offers an illustrative discussion to showcase the potentials that lie in IPS to broaden discussions and perspectives vital for IR generally.
{"title":"Algorithms, AI, Big Data, and Big Tech: IPS Scholarship on Digital Technologies","authors":"Madeleine Böhm","doi":"10.1093/ips/olaf019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olaf019","url":null,"abstract":"This paper delves into the debates on digital technologies, algorithms, artificial intelligence, Big Data, and Big Tech in the journal International Political Sociology (IPS). Acknowledging the promises of IPS to challenge the way established problematiqués in international relations (IR) are addressed and reflecting on knowledge production and its implications, it speaks to a general audience in IPS by asking where—and how—phenomena linked to digital technologies are addressed within IPS. I provide a sociology of debates that touch upon digital technologies broadly and link this to the promises of IPS. A citation network and cluster analysis of articles in IPS, therefore, uncovers the orientations within IPS scholarship on digital technologies broadly, showcasing the importance of concepts such as security, surveillance, migration, and risk. It also shows that analytical lenses broaden from Foucault-inspired accounts toward perspectives relying on actor–network theory and practice theories. Drawing from these findings, the paper extrapolates lessons for future research, advocating for a heightened emphasis on including contemporary sociological discussions on digital capitalism. It points to the emphasis of interdisciplinarity and sociology in the name of IPS and offers an illustrative discussion to showcase the potentials that lie in IPS to broaden discussions and perspectives vital for IR generally.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144513360","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article explores and theorizes an aspect of war in the 2020s that has not previously been recognized in social science literature: The practice of soldiers freezing their semen before joining the military. The security–demography nexus has been studied mainly as a state concern—whether a state should limit or expand its population depending on different factors. In this context, women have been the main targets of biopolitical reproduction efforts. However, societal and political shifts, coupled with advancements in reproductive technology that enhance accessibility, necessitate a re-evaluation of the gendered dynamics within the security–demography relationship. The war between Russia and Ukraine represents an unusual example of two industrialized states involved in an interstate war. The practice of soldiers freezing their semen constitutes a new masculinization of the security–demography nexus. We argue that the theoretical concept of reproductive insurance implies a form of self-governance that can manage shifting masculinities in ways that allow the male individual to protect the capacity to have children before risking life on the battlefield. The shifting gender dynamic of the security–demography nexus means that Western militaries may have to adapt their policies and offer reproductive insurance to both women and men within their ranks.
{"title":"“Freeze my Semen and I Will Join the War”: The Masculinization of the Security–Demography Nexus","authors":"Arita Holmberg, Aida Alvinius","doi":"10.1093/ips/olaf020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olaf020","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores and theorizes an aspect of war in the 2020s that has not previously been recognized in social science literature: The practice of soldiers freezing their semen before joining the military. The security–demography nexus has been studied mainly as a state concern—whether a state should limit or expand its population depending on different factors. In this context, women have been the main targets of biopolitical reproduction efforts. However, societal and political shifts, coupled with advancements in reproductive technology that enhance accessibility, necessitate a re-evaluation of the gendered dynamics within the security–demography relationship. The war between Russia and Ukraine represents an unusual example of two industrialized states involved in an interstate war. The practice of soldiers freezing their semen constitutes a new masculinization of the security–demography nexus. We argue that the theoretical concept of reproductive insurance implies a form of self-governance that can manage shifting masculinities in ways that allow the male individual to protect the capacity to have children before risking life on the battlefield. The shifting gender dynamic of the security–demography nexus means that Western militaries may have to adapt their policies and offer reproductive insurance to both women and men within their ranks.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"89 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144269397","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sites of mass trauma, or “sites of conscience,” have symbolic power that makes them ideal locations for honoring the people who suffered there, educating about history, and advocating for human rights. This article argues that sites of conscience can also be resources for victimized groups because these sites are places, not just spaces, and therefore hold authenticity, symbolism, and moral power. It further argues that, when victims have a personal connection to places of trauma, this connection amplifies the effectiveness and strengthens the framing of protests held there by people who were victimized at the site. With the example of German Sinti and Roma in the late 1970s–early 1980s, I show how using sites of conscience as a resource for protests enabled Romani Germans to frame their claims in a way that attracted more attention and support than they otherwise garnered. Ultimately, I demonstrate that when victims use the sites of their own victimization as resources for protest, they are more likely to advance their rights claims than if they protest at less symbolically meaningful locations.
{"title":"Sites of Conscience as Sites of Protest: How Victims Use Place to Advance Their Claims","authors":"Claire Greenstein","doi":"10.1093/ips/olaf021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olaf021","url":null,"abstract":"Sites of mass trauma, or “sites of conscience,” have symbolic power that makes them ideal locations for honoring the people who suffered there, educating about history, and advocating for human rights. This article argues that sites of conscience can also be resources for victimized groups because these sites are places, not just spaces, and therefore hold authenticity, symbolism, and moral power. It further argues that, when victims have a personal connection to places of trauma, this connection amplifies the effectiveness and strengthens the framing of protests held there by people who were victimized at the site. With the example of German Sinti and Roma in the late 1970s–early 1980s, I show how using sites of conscience as a resource for protests enabled Romani Germans to frame their claims in a way that attracted more attention and support than they otherwise garnered. Ultimately, I demonstrate that when victims use the sites of their own victimization as resources for protest, they are more likely to advance their rights claims than if they protest at less symbolically meaningful locations.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"61 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144251994","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Critical border studies have gone a significant way in emphasizing the social character of international political phenomena by broadening the ontology of security and utilizing sociological methods to reveal the aspects and agents of politics that have been otherwise left in the margins. This article argues that most of these studies, more specifically those that adopt a practice approach, still have weaknesses in comprehending the agency of the Global South in their analyses of EU border security externalization. It falls into three parts, answering three questions: What is the limit in the literature? Why does it matter? What to offer as an alternative? First, the article introduces a novel classification of research on the EU’s border security practices in the Mediterranean based on their depiction of non-EU actors. Second, it reflects on the need and significance of overcoming these limits to incorporate the agency of the Global South. Third, it proposes an approach to scrutinizing externalization to better locate the agency of non-EU parties applying a multi-layered and processual analysis of how Turkey (as a case to illustrate claims on theory and method) has constituted its border regime through encounters with Europe/EU. The paper emphasizes two insights: border externalization is a relational, social, and dynamic process; and it is co-constituted by not only implementation actors but also multiple agents from different levels of politics and policing. Analyzing the process of dynamic encounters, it seeks to locate the agency and responsibility of multiple parties in the making of insecurity while decentering the actors of the EU.
{"title":"Decentering the Study of EU Border Externalization and Why This Matters","authors":"Çağla Lüleci-Sula","doi":"10.1093/ips/olaf014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olaf014","url":null,"abstract":"Critical border studies have gone a significant way in emphasizing the social character of international political phenomena by broadening the ontology of security and utilizing sociological methods to reveal the aspects and agents of politics that have been otherwise left in the margins. This article argues that most of these studies, more specifically those that adopt a practice approach, still have weaknesses in comprehending the agency of the Global South in their analyses of EU border security externalization. It falls into three parts, answering three questions: What is the limit in the literature? Why does it matter? What to offer as an alternative? First, the article introduces a novel classification of research on the EU’s border security practices in the Mediterranean based on their depiction of non-EU actors. Second, it reflects on the need and significance of overcoming these limits to incorporate the agency of the Global South. Third, it proposes an approach to scrutinizing externalization to better locate the agency of non-EU parties applying a multi-layered and processual analysis of how Turkey (as a case to illustrate claims on theory and method) has constituted its border regime through encounters with Europe/EU. The paper emphasizes two insights: border externalization is a relational, social, and dynamic process; and it is co-constituted by not only implementation actors but also multiple agents from different levels of politics and policing. Analyzing the process of dynamic encounters, it seeks to locate the agency and responsibility of multiple parties in the making of insecurity while decentering the actors of the EU.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144228451","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper asks how and by whom knowledge on permafrost thaw is produced, and how politics is implicated in this (non)knowledge production. Through interviews and fieldwork in Fairbanks, Alaska, the paper argues that knowledge production on climate change should interest International Relations (IR) much more than it does. What is at stake is IR's ability to discern which political actors and priorities affect our knowledge of climate change. An analytical shift of perspective is necessary to better grasp the politics of climate science, and this begins with an analytical focus on the knowledge production itself, including analytical attention to the role of nonknowledge. Towards this, the article draws on Ignorance Studies to identify types of nonknowledge present in permafrost science in Fairbanks. An important insight from the fieldwork and interviews, however, is that nonknowledge has a social function; it ties together civilian and military permafrost knowledge producers across institutional divides in their efforts to understand permafrost. As Arctic and global politics head towards a more competitive state—and as climatic changes accelerate—a consequence of this symbiosis could be that civilian scientists increasingly come to prioritize climate knowledge in strategically important locations, exactly because this symbiosis is based on nonknowledge.
{"title":"Permafrost, Science, and Security: Producing Climate (Non)Knowledge in a Thawing City","authors":"Lin Alexandra Mortensgaard","doi":"10.1093/ips/olaf015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olaf015","url":null,"abstract":"This paper asks how and by whom knowledge on permafrost thaw is produced, and how politics is implicated in this (non)knowledge production. Through interviews and fieldwork in Fairbanks, Alaska, the paper argues that knowledge production on climate change should interest International Relations (IR) much more than it does. What is at stake is IR's ability to discern which political actors and priorities affect our knowledge of climate change. An analytical shift of perspective is necessary to better grasp the politics of climate science, and this begins with an analytical focus on the knowledge production itself, including analytical attention to the role of nonknowledge. Towards this, the article draws on Ignorance Studies to identify types of nonknowledge present in permafrost science in Fairbanks. An important insight from the fieldwork and interviews, however, is that nonknowledge has a social function; it ties together civilian and military permafrost knowledge producers across institutional divides in their efforts to understand permafrost. As Arctic and global politics head towards a more competitive state—and as climatic changes accelerate—a consequence of this symbiosis could be that civilian scientists increasingly come to prioritize climate knowledge in strategically important locations, exactly because this symbiosis is based on nonknowledge.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144153358","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article concerns the challenge of making postcolonial and decolonial art under postcolonial capitalism. A pioneer in the Gulf's growing art scene, the Sharjah Biennial has carved a niche for itself as an incubator of postcolonial and decolonial art. This article first locates the biennial's focus within the trajectories of postcolonial, decolonial, and Black radical theory across the increasingly connected fields of art and academic production. Starting with a close reading of a performance piece by queer Black Cuban artist, Carlos Martiel, observed at the Sharjah Biennial 14, it then blends ethnographic, interview, and historical material to reconstruct the tangible histories of labor, commodity production, and art market liberalization that condition articulations of postcolonial and decolonial art in the Gulf. This political economic prism reveals how capitalist markets dislocate postcolonial and decolonial representation from the specific material conditions of its production. While offering greater visibility to racialized subjects, geographies, and epistemologies, such art thus recalibrates, extends, and embeds the specific racial and colonial hierarchies that structure the international art market and capital accumulation in the Gulf. Observing the imbrication of art and academia, the article therefore also offers a grounded critique of less materialist strands of postcolonial and decolonial theory.
{"title":"Tasting Tears at the Sharjah Biennial: The International Political Economy of Postcolonial and Decolonial Art","authors":"Maia Holtermann Entwistle","doi":"10.1093/ips/olaf005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olaf005","url":null,"abstract":"This article concerns the challenge of making postcolonial and decolonial art under postcolonial capitalism. A pioneer in the Gulf's growing art scene, the Sharjah Biennial has carved a niche for itself as an incubator of postcolonial and decolonial art. This article first locates the biennial's focus within the trajectories of postcolonial, decolonial, and Black radical theory across the increasingly connected fields of art and academic production. Starting with a close reading of a performance piece by queer Black Cuban artist, Carlos Martiel, observed at the Sharjah Biennial 14, it then blends ethnographic, interview, and historical material to reconstruct the tangible histories of labor, commodity production, and art market liberalization that condition articulations of postcolonial and decolonial art in the Gulf. This political economic prism reveals how capitalist markets dislocate postcolonial and decolonial representation from the specific material conditions of its production. While offering greater visibility to racialized subjects, geographies, and epistemologies, such art thus recalibrates, extends, and embeds the specific racial and colonial hierarchies that structure the international art market and capital accumulation in the Gulf. Observing the imbrication of art and academia, the article therefore also offers a grounded critique of less materialist strands of postcolonial and decolonial theory.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144133765","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article asks what reflexive practices one can learn from, with and against Pierre Bourdieu’s works on and in Algeria and later contributions. Addressing the question enables a revision of Bourdieusian reflexivity and a new contribution to the methodological reflexivity debate in international relations (IR) and International Political Sociology (IPS). It furthers the identification of three reflexive practices: avoidance of theoretical and conceptual fetishism, methodological experimentation and operationalization of methodological polytheism, or what is often called multi-method research, and alternations between engaged research and critical distancing; it is often forgotten that Bourdieu’s research encourages assumptions of epistemic asymmetry and suspicion of power struggles and emotionally engaged research. I include examples of how the practices can be performed from current IR and sociology to enhance the pedagogical value of this intervention. Even if the practices originated in colonial research situations privileging researchers from colonizing societies, the examples show that researchers with different positions can use the practices if they mind varying patterns of symbolic violence. In the tradition of Bourdieu’s early research and considering research I am familiar with, I selected examples dealing with “Global South” themes or themes evolving in the researcher’s own milieu.
{"title":"Pierre Bourdieu, Colonial Experiences, and Methodological Reflexivity in International Relations","authors":"Leonie Holthaus","doi":"10.1093/ips/olaf013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olaf013","url":null,"abstract":"This article asks what reflexive practices one can learn from, with and against Pierre Bourdieu’s works on and in Algeria and later contributions. Addressing the question enables a revision of Bourdieusian reflexivity and a new contribution to the methodological reflexivity debate in international relations (IR) and International Political Sociology (IPS). It furthers the identification of three reflexive practices: avoidance of theoretical and conceptual fetishism, methodological experimentation and operationalization of methodological polytheism, or what is often called multi-method research, and alternations between engaged research and critical distancing; it is often forgotten that Bourdieu’s research encourages assumptions of epistemic asymmetry and suspicion of power struggles and emotionally engaged research. I include examples of how the practices can be performed from current IR and sociology to enhance the pedagogical value of this intervention. Even if the practices originated in colonial research situations privileging researchers from colonizing societies, the examples show that researchers with different positions can use the practices if they mind varying patterns of symbolic violence. In the tradition of Bourdieu’s early research and considering research I am familiar with, I selected examples dealing with “Global South” themes or themes evolving in the researcher’s own milieu.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144097088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Human rights rationales have in recent years been increasingly mobilized in international efforts to bring national legal frameworks on migrant smuggling in line with international law. This article explores the role of human rights in borderwork during the externally funded legal reform process of Senegal's legal framework on migrant smuggling. Adopting a multiscalar governmentality lens, it sheds light on human rights governance rationales and their underlying justice logics in the reform process. The article extends work on the human rights/containment/protection nexus and points to the co-existence of fragmented yet emancipatory human rights rationales that center questions of economic self-determination. In exploring underlying justice logics reproduced through human rights governance rationales by drawing on Mahmood Mamdani's conceptualization of justice responses in conjunction with Tendayi Achiume's work on neocolonial interconnection, it advances often overlooked questions of socio-economic self-determination and structurally induced precarity in debates on human rights in borderwork.
{"title":"“Protecting” Rights of Smuggled Migrants in the Context of State-Enforced Immobility: Legal Borderwork in Senegal","authors":"Leonie Felicitas Jegen","doi":"10.1093/ips/olaf011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olaf011","url":null,"abstract":"Human rights rationales have in recent years been increasingly mobilized in international efforts to bring national legal frameworks on migrant smuggling in line with international law. This article explores the role of human rights in borderwork during the externally funded legal reform process of Senegal's legal framework on migrant smuggling. Adopting a multiscalar governmentality lens, it sheds light on human rights governance rationales and their underlying justice logics in the reform process. The article extends work on the human rights/containment/protection nexus and points to the co-existence of fragmented yet emancipatory human rights rationales that center questions of economic self-determination. In exploring underlying justice logics reproduced through human rights governance rationales by drawing on Mahmood Mamdani's conceptualization of justice responses in conjunction with Tendayi Achiume's work on neocolonial interconnection, it advances often overlooked questions of socio-economic self-determination and structurally induced precarity in debates on human rights in borderwork.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144097093","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Is the state monopoly on the use of legitimate violence a modern invention that refers exclusively to a particular provincial sociohistorical phenomenon that emerged in seventeenth-century Europe? The answer this paper presents is no. Instead, I argue that the canonical Eurocentric epistemic communities have sought to displace other systems of governance and administration and replace them with European and Westphalian-like models. Yet, an urgent question remains unanswered: Why were political scientists and political sociology scholars from the Global South forced to adopt these [Eurocentric] theses and apply them to other, diverse regions, which have had different and prior historical, social, political, cultural, and economic experiences from Europe? To answer these questions, the paper adopts a decolonial approach to examine the following hypothesis: internal violence, repression, and control (from above) were the constitutive factors of forming and preserving political authority necessary for the establishment and development of modern states outside the Western hemisphere. To do so, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ibn Ḵẖaldūn’s (1332–1406) theses on the ontological and constitutive role of violence are deployed to critique the Weberian principle of the state’s monopoly over the legitimate use of physical force. I present what I call the Ḵẖaldūnian trilogy of ʿasabiyya, al-Daʿwa al-Diīniyah, al-shāwkāh wa al-ghālbāh wa al-qāhr (i.e., the dominant group, religious-ideological discourse, force majeure, and repression-domination), upon which state/authority relies to constitute and consolidate its power and legitimacy, without being occupied with either the legality or the justice of this violence, as epistemic alternative of the Eurocentric conceptions of state-building.
国家对合法暴力使用的垄断是一种现代发明，仅仅是指17世纪欧洲出现的一种特殊的地方性社会历史现象吗？本文给出的答案是否定的。相反，我认为规范的以欧洲为中心的认知共同体试图取代其他的治理和行政体系，并以欧洲和威斯特伐利亚式的模式取而代之。然而，一个迫切的问题仍然没有得到回答：为什么来自全球南方的政治科学家和政治社会学学者被迫采用这些[以欧洲为中心]的论点，并将其应用于其他不同的地区，这些地区有着与欧洲不同的历史、社会、政治、文化和经济经验？为了回答这些问题，本文采用了一种非殖民化的方法来检验以下假设：内部暴力、镇压和（来自上层的）控制是形成和维护西半球以外现代国家建立和发展所必需的政治权威的构成因素。为此，阿卜杜拉al-Raḥmān伊本Ḵẖaldūn（1332-1406）关于暴力的本体论和构成作用的论文被用来批判韦伯关于国家垄断合法使用武力的原则。我提出了我所称的Ḵẖaldūnian三部曲：al- asabiyya、al-Da - wa al- di niyah、al-shāwkāh wa al-ghālbāh wa al-qāhr（即，统治群体、宗教-意识形态话语、不可抗力和镇压-统治），国家/权威依靠这些三部曲来构建和巩固其权力和合法性，而不被这种暴力的合法性或正义性所占据，作为欧洲中心主义国家建设概念的认识选择。
{"title":"Violence as a Constitutive of States","authors":"A M Abozaid","doi":"10.1093/ips/olae038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olae038","url":null,"abstract":"Is the state monopoly on the use of legitimate violence a modern invention that refers exclusively to a particular provincial sociohistorical phenomenon that emerged in seventeenth-century Europe? The answer this paper presents is no. Instead, I argue that the canonical Eurocentric epistemic communities have sought to displace other systems of governance and administration and replace them with European and Westphalian-like models. Yet, an urgent question remains unanswered: Why were political scientists and political sociology scholars from the Global South forced to adopt these [Eurocentric] theses and apply them to other, diverse regions, which have had different and prior historical, social, political, cultural, and economic experiences from Europe? To answer these questions, the paper adopts a decolonial approach to examine the following hypothesis: internal violence, repression, and control (from above) were the constitutive factors of forming and preserving political authority necessary for the establishment and development of modern states outside the Western hemisphere. To do so, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ibn Ḵẖaldūn’s (1332–1406) theses on the ontological and constitutive role of violence are deployed to critique the Weberian principle of the state’s monopoly over the legitimate use of physical force. I present what I call the Ḵẖaldūnian trilogy of ʿasabiyya, al-Daʿwa al-Diīniyah, al-shāwkāh wa al-ghālbāh wa al-qāhr (i.e., the dominant group, religious-ideological discourse, force majeure, and repression-domination), upon which state/authority relies to constitute and consolidate its power and legitimacy, without being occupied with either the legality or the justice of this violence, as epistemic alternative of the Eurocentric conceptions of state-building.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143863029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Visual politics is a thriving subfield of international relations (IR) that traces its origin to the “visual turn” at the turn of the century. However, visual politics hardly engages with the central visuality of modernity: race. This article argues that visual politics has a longer history than the current disciplinary history suggests, and it deploys a sociographical analysis to explore the central role of the visual politics of racial difference in articulating the racial imaginary that frames IR. The article explores the “shadow archive of global difference,” the mass project of the visual taxonomization of colonial peoples that haunted subsequent projects of visual production by aligning them with an implicit hierarchy, and in turn was central to the articulation of the doctrine of “global difference,” which framed early IR and still influences its racial imaginary. This intervention amounts to a prevision of visual politics and its reorientation around racial visualities to revise its disciplinary imaginary and encourage scholarship that engages with the global prevalence of oppressive visualities.
{"title":"The Racial Visual Imaginary of International Relations","authors":"Yoav Galai","doi":"10.1093/ips/olaf008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olaf008","url":null,"abstract":"Visual politics is a thriving subfield of international relations (IR) that traces its origin to the “visual turn” at the turn of the century. However, visual politics hardly engages with the central visuality of modernity: race. This article argues that visual politics has a longer history than the current disciplinary history suggests, and it deploys a sociographical analysis to explore the central role of the visual politics of racial difference in articulating the racial imaginary that frames IR. The article explores the “shadow archive of global difference,” the mass project of the visual taxonomization of colonial peoples that haunted subsequent projects of visual production by aligning them with an implicit hierarchy, and in turn was central to the articulation of the doctrine of “global difference,” which framed early IR and still influences its racial imaginary. This intervention amounts to a prevision of visual politics and its reorientation around racial visualities to revise its disciplinary imaginary and encourage scholarship that engages with the global prevalence of oppressive visualities.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143857726","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：