美国安全话语:地缘政治的持续存在

Simon Dalby
{"title":"美国安全话语:地缘政治的持续存在","authors":"Simon Dalby","doi":"10.1016/0260-9827(90)90017-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper explores the relationship between geopolitics and security in post Second World War American political discourse. Geopolitics is one of four security discourses (the others being sovietology, strategy and the realist approach in international relations) which American ‘security intellectuals’ have drawn on in constructing the ‘Soviet threat’, America's predominant ‘Other’ in the last four decades. The ‘Soviet threat’ is the rationale used in the US foreign policy of containment militarism designed ultimately to ensure US national security. Using a formulation of geopolitics in terms of discourse this paper widens the conventional understanding of geopolitics to show how geopolitical conceptions operate ideologically. Focusing on the practices of the discourses of security shows that a broader understanding of geopolitics in terms of discourse reveals a persistence of geopolitical thinking in US discussions of security. A final section briefly suggests how the concept of security can be reformulated and outlines the role of a critical geopolitics in revealing how geopolitical discourse operates.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101034,"journal":{"name":"Political Geography Quarterly","volume":"9 2","pages":"Pages 171-188"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1990-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0260-9827(90)90017-5","citationCount":"79","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"American security discourse: the persistence of geopolitics\",\"authors\":\"Simon Dalby\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0260-9827(90)90017-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper explores the relationship between geopolitics and security in post Second World War American political discourse. Geopolitics is one of four security discourses (the others being sovietology, strategy and the realist approach in international relations) which American ‘security intellectuals’ have drawn on in constructing the ‘Soviet threat’, America's predominant ‘Other’ in the last four decades. The ‘Soviet threat’ is the rationale used in the US foreign policy of containment militarism designed ultimately to ensure US national security. Using a formulation of geopolitics in terms of discourse this paper widens the conventional understanding of geopolitics to show how geopolitical conceptions operate ideologically. Focusing on the practices of the discourses of security shows that a broader understanding of geopolitics in terms of discourse reveals a persistence of geopolitical thinking in US discussions of security. A final section briefly suggests how the concept of security can be reformulated and outlines the role of a critical geopolitics in revealing how geopolitical discourse operates.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101034,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Geography Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"9 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 171-188\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1990-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0260-9827(90)90017-5\",\"citationCount\":\"79\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Geography Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0260982790900175\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Geography Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0260982790900175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 79

摘要

本文探讨了二战后美国政治话语中地缘政治与安全的关系。地缘政治是美国“安全知识分子”在构建“苏联威胁”(美国在过去四十年中占主导地位的“他者”)时所借鉴的四个安全话语之一(其他三个是苏联学、战略和国际关系中的现实主义方法)。“苏联威胁”是美国遏制军国主义外交政策的基本原理,最终目的是确保美国的国家安全。本文利用地缘政治话语的表述,拓宽了对地缘政治的传统理解,以展示地缘政治概念如何在意识形态上运作。关注安全话语的实践表明,从话语的角度更广泛地理解地缘政治,揭示了美国安全讨论中地缘政治思维的持续存在。最后一节简要地建议如何重新制定安全概念,并概述了关键地缘政治在揭示地缘政治话语如何运作方面的作用。
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
American security discourse: the persistence of geopolitics

This paper explores the relationship between geopolitics and security in post Second World War American political discourse. Geopolitics is one of four security discourses (the others being sovietology, strategy and the realist approach in international relations) which American ‘security intellectuals’ have drawn on in constructing the ‘Soviet threat’, America's predominant ‘Other’ in the last four decades. The ‘Soviet threat’ is the rationale used in the US foreign policy of containment militarism designed ultimately to ensure US national security. Using a formulation of geopolitics in terms of discourse this paper widens the conventional understanding of geopolitics to show how geopolitical conceptions operate ideologically. Focusing on the practices of the discourses of security shows that a broader understanding of geopolitics in terms of discourse reveals a persistence of geopolitical thinking in US discussions of security. A final section briefly suggests how the concept of security can be reformulated and outlines the role of a critical geopolitics in revealing how geopolitical discourse operates.

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
Interstate conflict over exchanges of homeland territory, 1816–1980 The global environmental movement: Reclaiming paradise The capitalist imperative: Territory, technology and industrial growth The new geopolitics of minerals: Canada and international resource trade Caring for workers' dependents
×
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