检视拉丁美洲的政治与军事力量:对基督教古德胡斯的回应

Marcia Esparza
{"title":"检视拉丁美洲的政治与军事力量:对基督教古德胡斯的回应","authors":"Marcia Esparza","doi":"10.21039/JPR.2.1.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While Gudehus’ views have opened up a necessary theoretical debate about categories used to analyze perpetration, we should be cautious when considering such arguments, particularly when examining the concept of political violence. Hence, in this essay I argue that Gudehus’ claim that “political” is too narrow of a concept when accounting for episodes of collective violence might not be the case when examining the Latin American experience with extreme forms of violence, such as genocide.","PeriodicalId":152877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Perpetrator Research","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining the Political and Military Power in Latin America: a Response to Christian Gudehus\",\"authors\":\"Marcia Esparza\",\"doi\":\"10.21039/JPR.2.1.9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While Gudehus’ views have opened up a necessary theoretical debate about categories used to analyze perpetration, we should be cautious when considering such arguments, particularly when examining the concept of political violence. Hence, in this essay I argue that Gudehus’ claim that “political” is too narrow of a concept when accounting for episodes of collective violence might not be the case when examining the Latin American experience with extreme forms of violence, such as genocide.\",\"PeriodicalId\":152877,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Perpetrator Research\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Perpetrator Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21039/JPR.2.1.9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Perpetrator Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21039/JPR.2.1.9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然Gudehus的观点开启了一场必要的理论辩论,讨论用于分析犯罪的类别,但我们在考虑这些论点时应该谨慎,尤其是在研究政治暴力的概念时。因此,在这篇文章中,我认为Gudehus关于“政治”这个概念在解释集体暴力事件时过于狭隘的说法,在研究拉丁美洲极端形式的暴力(如种族灭绝)时可能并不成立。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Examining the Political and Military Power in Latin America: a Response to Christian Gudehus
While Gudehus’ views have opened up a necessary theoretical debate about categories used to analyze perpetration, we should be cautious when considering such arguments, particularly when examining the concept of political violence. Hence, in this essay I argue that Gudehus’ claim that “political” is too narrow of a concept when accounting for episodes of collective violence might not be the case when examining the Latin American experience with extreme forms of violence, such as genocide.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Christian Chaplains and the Holocaust Between What They Are and What They Were: Power Dynamics and Knowledge Production in Fieldwork with Argentine Perpetrators Before, During, After: Difficulties and Controversies in Fieldwork with Retired Officers from the Argentine Army Special Section on Perpetrators in Argentina: Introduction New Forms of Genocide Documentaries: The Duel and the Quiet Interview
×
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