为什么遵守规则不能阻止他们:

Lambda Nordica Pub Date : 2023-03-13 DOI:10.34041/ln.v27.832
L. Martinsson, Diana Mulinari
{"title":"为什么遵守规则不能阻止他们:","authors":"L. Martinsson, Diana Mulinari","doi":"10.34041/ln.v27.832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The last few decades have witnessed the emergence of several knowledge traditions within academic clusters inspired by and engaged in productive dialogue with transnational social movements such as feminist, queer, trans* and Crip studies, critical race theory, indigenous studies, and degrowth scholarship (Choudry & Kappor 2010; Bhattacharyya & Murji 2013; Carruthers 2018; Salisbury & Connelly 2021). Despite significant theoretical and methodological differences, these traditions share a recognition of the fundamental role played by social actors outside academia in the struggle for social justice in academic knowledge production. Recent decades have also witnessed the emergence of ethnonationalist and anti-gender social movements, networks, and political parties attacking these academic traditions and focusing on the university as a fundamental arena for generating and reproducing their ideologies of hate (Perry 2009). These attacks target academic fields and individual scholars sharing a commitment to social justice issues (Floyd 2009) and an understanding of knowledge production inside academia as contributing to visions of social justice beyond academia (Young 2000). Central to these threats against scholars working within social justice paradigms is the argument that their scholarly production is “political” and hence unscientific. In this article, we explore the politics of knowledge claims among key anti-gender and right-wing actors within and related to academic institutions in Sweden. Inspired by the concepts of neoliberal depoliticising and neoliberal governance, we analyse arguments and strategies from 2015 to 2021 designed to undermine gender studies and to create and establish arenas for right-wing ethnonationalist knowledge production within the academia.","PeriodicalId":33274,"journal":{"name":"Lambda Nordica","volume":"65 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why Following the Rules Will Not Stop Them:\",\"authors\":\"L. Martinsson, Diana Mulinari\",\"doi\":\"10.34041/ln.v27.832\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The last few decades have witnessed the emergence of several knowledge traditions within academic clusters inspired by and engaged in productive dialogue with transnational social movements such as feminist, queer, trans* and Crip studies, critical race theory, indigenous studies, and degrowth scholarship (Choudry & Kappor 2010; Bhattacharyya & Murji 2013; Carruthers 2018; Salisbury & Connelly 2021). Despite significant theoretical and methodological differences, these traditions share a recognition of the fundamental role played by social actors outside academia in the struggle for social justice in academic knowledge production. Recent decades have also witnessed the emergence of ethnonationalist and anti-gender social movements, networks, and political parties attacking these academic traditions and focusing on the university as a fundamental arena for generating and reproducing their ideologies of hate (Perry 2009). These attacks target academic fields and individual scholars sharing a commitment to social justice issues (Floyd 2009) and an understanding of knowledge production inside academia as contributing to visions of social justice beyond academia (Young 2000). Central to these threats against scholars working within social justice paradigms is the argument that their scholarly production is “political” and hence unscientific. In this article, we explore the politics of knowledge claims among key anti-gender and right-wing actors within and related to academic institutions in Sweden. Inspired by the concepts of neoliberal depoliticising and neoliberal governance, we analyse arguments and strategies from 2015 to 2021 designed to undermine gender studies and to create and establish arenas for right-wing ethnonationalist knowledge production within the academia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33274,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lambda Nordica\",\"volume\":\"65 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lambda Nordica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34041/ln.v27.832\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lambda Nordica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34041/ln.v27.832","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

在过去的几十年里,学术集群中出现了几种知识传统,这些传统受到跨国社会运动的启发,并与这些运动进行了富有成效的对话,如女权主义、酷儿、跨性别和Crip研究、批判种族理论、土著研究和去生长学术(Choudry & Kappor 2010;Bhattacharyya & Murji 2013;卡拉瑟斯2018;索尔兹伯里和康纳利2021)。尽管在理论和方法上存在重大差异,但这些传统都承认学术界以外的社会行动者在学术知识生产中争取社会正义的斗争中所发挥的基本作用。近几十年来,也出现了民族主义和反性别社会运动、网络和政党,攻击这些学术传统,并将大学作为产生和复制其仇恨意识形态的基本舞台(Perry 2009)。这些攻击的目标是学术领域和个人学者,他们共同致力于社会正义问题(Floyd 2009),并理解学术界内部的知识生产有助于学术界之外的社会正义愿景(Young 2000)。这些针对在社会正义范式内工作的学者的威胁的核心是,他们的学术成果是“政治的”,因此是不科学的。在本文中,我们探讨了瑞典学术机构内部和相关的关键反性别和右翼行动者之间的知识主张政治。受新自由主义去政治化和新自由主义治理概念的启发,我们分析了2015年至2021年旨在破坏性别研究并为学术界内右翼民族民族主义知识生产创造和建立舞台的论点和策略。
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
Why Following the Rules Will Not Stop Them:
The last few decades have witnessed the emergence of several knowledge traditions within academic clusters inspired by and engaged in productive dialogue with transnational social movements such as feminist, queer, trans* and Crip studies, critical race theory, indigenous studies, and degrowth scholarship (Choudry & Kappor 2010; Bhattacharyya & Murji 2013; Carruthers 2018; Salisbury & Connelly 2021). Despite significant theoretical and methodological differences, these traditions share a recognition of the fundamental role played by social actors outside academia in the struggle for social justice in academic knowledge production. Recent decades have also witnessed the emergence of ethnonationalist and anti-gender social movements, networks, and political parties attacking these academic traditions and focusing on the university as a fundamental arena for generating and reproducing their ideologies of hate (Perry 2009). These attacks target academic fields and individual scholars sharing a commitment to social justice issues (Floyd 2009) and an understanding of knowledge production inside academia as contributing to visions of social justice beyond academia (Young 2000). Central to these threats against scholars working within social justice paradigms is the argument that their scholarly production is “political” and hence unscientific. In this article, we explore the politics of knowledge claims among key anti-gender and right-wing actors within and related to academic institutions in Sweden. Inspired by the concepts of neoliberal depoliticising and neoliberal governance, we analyse arguments and strategies from 2015 to 2021 designed to undermine gender studies and to create and establish arenas for right-wing ethnonationalist knowledge production within the academia.
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
20
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Tensions and Ambivalences of Pride Politics in Uncertain Times Contextual Queer Theologies in Norway “The Pride Revolution” Exploring LGBT+ People’s Experiences of Pride Events in the UK Big Pride, Little Pride, and the Cunning of (In)Visibility in the Southern Caribbean
×
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