Distinction within the ‘global north’? A Bourdieusian approach for analysing development discourse: The case of U.S. and E.U. relations with the Colombian state (2016–2022): A comparative analysis

Hugo Corten
{"title":"Distinction within the ‘global north’? A Bourdieusian approach for analysing development discourse: The case of U.S. and E.U. relations with the Colombian state (2016–2022): A comparative analysis","authors":"Hugo Corten","doi":"10.1177/09579265241245130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper conducts a comparative analysis of EU (91 texts) and US (93 texts) discourses concerning post-peace accord Colombia (late 2016 to mid-2022). Employing a Bourdieu-influenced methodology, our proposal aims to reconcile Post-Development theories with International Relations research. This innovative and multidimensional approach illuminates both discursive continuities within Global North while concurrently providing a framework that allows to identify and interpret internal political divergences. Our findings highlight a shared commitment to a liberal conception of peacebuilding, alongside internal distinction strategies employed to legitimize respective policies towards Colombia.","PeriodicalId":432402,"journal":{"name":"Discourse & Society","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discourse & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265241245130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The paper conducts a comparative analysis of EU (91 texts) and US (93 texts) discourses concerning post-peace accord Colombia (late 2016 to mid-2022). Employing a Bourdieu-influenced methodology, our proposal aims to reconcile Post-Development theories with International Relations research. This innovative and multidimensional approach illuminates both discursive continuities within Global North while concurrently providing a framework that allows to identify and interpret internal political divergences. Our findings highlight a shared commitment to a liberal conception of peacebuilding, alongside internal distinction strategies employed to legitimize respective policies towards Colombia.
全球北方 "内部的区别?分析发展话语的布尔迪厄斯方法:美国和欧盟与哥伦比亚国家关系的案例(2016-2022 年):比较分析
本文对欧盟(91 篇文本)和美国(93 篇文本)有关后和平协议哥伦比亚(2016 年末至 2022 年中)的论述进行了比较分析。我们的建议采用受布迪厄影响的方法,旨在调和后发展理论与国际关系研究。这种创新的多维方法既能揭示全球北方内部话语的连续性,又能提供一个框架来识别和解释内部政治分歧。我们的研究结果强调了对建设和平的自由理念的共同承诺,以及为使各自对哥伦比亚的政策合法化而采用的内部区别策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信