我不觉得自己是典型的权利捍卫者":俄罗斯残疾人组织中的权利主体性和身份认同

IF 0.8 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Voluntary Sector Review Pub Date : 2023-12-26 DOI:10.1332/20408056y2023d000000006
Philippa Mullins
{"title":"我不觉得自己是典型的权利捍卫者\":俄罗斯残疾人组织中的权利主体性和身份认同","authors":"Philippa Mullins","doi":"10.1332/20408056y2023d000000006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Drawing on in-depth interviews, this article investigates how Russian civil society actors organising around disability understand and use human rights discourses. It asks whether and how these actors mobilise distinctions between social and political human rights. It argues that civil society actors perceive the Russian State as legitimising social action and delegitimising political action. However, these actors also disidentify with this binary division by taking a third position; they identify their apparently social work as forming another kind of politics, different from that dominantly perceived as political. The article thus identifies a non-apparent or infra-political strategy by which political organising evades perception as political through the dominant depoliticisation of social rights. Actors instrumentalise this dominant perception to continue to engage in work which they identify as political, thus repoliticising the social sphere.","PeriodicalId":45084,"journal":{"name":"Voluntary Sector Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘I don’t feel like a classic rights defender’: rights subjectivities and disidentification in Russian disability organising\",\"authors\":\"Philippa Mullins\",\"doi\":\"10.1332/20408056y2023d000000006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Drawing on in-depth interviews, this article investigates how Russian civil society actors organising around disability understand and use human rights discourses. It asks whether and how these actors mobilise distinctions between social and political human rights. It argues that civil society actors perceive the Russian State as legitimising social action and delegitimising political action. However, these actors also disidentify with this binary division by taking a third position; they identify their apparently social work as forming another kind of politics, different from that dominantly perceived as political. The article thus identifies a non-apparent or infra-political strategy by which political organising evades perception as political through the dominant depoliticisation of social rights. Actors instrumentalise this dominant perception to continue to engage in work which they identify as political, thus repoliticising the social sphere.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45084,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Voluntary Sector Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Voluntary Sector Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1332/20408056y2023d000000006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Voluntary Sector Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/20408056y2023d000000006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文通过深入访谈,调查了围绕残疾问题组织起来的俄罗斯民间社会行动者是如何理解和使用人权话语的。文章询问这些行动者是否以及如何调动社会人权和政治人权之间的区别。文章认为,公民社会行动者认为俄罗斯国家使社会行动合法化,使政治行动非法化。然而,这些行动者也采取了第三种立场,从而与这种二元划分不相认同;他们认为自己的社会工作显然形成了另一种政治,不同于人们普遍认为的政治。因此,文章指出了一种非显性或次政治策略,通过社会权利的非政治化,政治组织规避了被视为政治的看法。行动者利用这种主流观念,继续从事他们认为具有政治性的工作,从而使社会领域重新政治化。
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
‘I don’t feel like a classic rights defender’: rights subjectivities and disidentification in Russian disability organising
Drawing on in-depth interviews, this article investigates how Russian civil society actors organising around disability understand and use human rights discourses. It asks whether and how these actors mobilise distinctions between social and political human rights. It argues that civil society actors perceive the Russian State as legitimising social action and delegitimising political action. However, these actors also disidentify with this binary division by taking a third position; they identify their apparently social work as forming another kind of politics, different from that dominantly perceived as political. The article thus identifies a non-apparent or infra-political strategy by which political organising evades perception as political through the dominant depoliticisation of social rights. Actors instrumentalise this dominant perception to continue to engage in work which they identify as political, thus repoliticising the social sphere.
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
Voluntary Sector Review
Voluntary Sector Review SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
40.00%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: The journal covers the full range of issues relevant to voluntary sector studies, including: definitional and theoretical debates; management and organisational development; financial and human resources; philanthropy; volunteering and employment; regulation and charity law; service delivery; civic engagement; industry and sub-sector dimensions; relations with other sectors; social enterprise; evaluation and impact. Voluntary Sector Review covers voluntary sector studies from a variety of disciplines, including sociology, social policy, politics, psychology, economics, business studies, social anthropology, philosophy and ethics. The journal includes work from the UK and Europe, and beyond, where cross-national comparisons are illuminating. With dedicated expert policy and practice sections, Voluntary Sector Review also provides an essential forum for the exchange of ideas and new thinking.
期刊最新文献
The role of NGOs in homelessness services in Greece Collective co-production of health and care services – a systematic review of research from the United Kingdom, Germany and Norway The role of NGOs in homelessness services in Greece Collective co-production of health and care services – a systematic review of research from the United Kingdom, Germany and Norway Explaining a decline in volunteering in the UK
×
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