Security as white privilege: Racializing whiteness in critical security studies

IF 2.8 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
L. Guerra
{"title":"Security as white privilege: Racializing whiteness in critical security studies","authors":"L. Guerra","doi":"10.1177/09670106211027797","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I argue that whiteness and white privilege are structural and structuring of concepts and assumptions central to critical security studies, even though they oftentimes remain unnamed and unmarked in discussions within the field. I owe this discussion to a set of important contributions in international relations pointing to and reflecting upon the centrality of race and racism as structuring categories of modern world politics (Anievas et al., 2015; Henderson, 2013; Sabaratnam, 2020; Vitalis, 2015).1 More specifically, I owe it to reflections from critical security studies pointing to the racist implications of traditional frameworks in security studies, which naturalize political categories that reinforce white supremacy, such as sovereignty, ‘humanitarian’ intervention, and the primacy of the nation-state (Barkawi and Laffey, 2006; Bhuta, 2008; Hill, 2005; Wai, 2012). In spite of these important contributions, critical security studies authors often mobilize race and racism as referring to racialized non-white Others, who are somehow brought from outside to within the field in order to disturb some of its main assumptions. In such framing of critical approaches, whiteness within critical security studies remains an unmarked, unnamed, and nonracialized norm, taken for granted and therefore naturalized.2 With this in mind, here I propose to racialize whiteness as a structural and structuring power position within critical security studies. I stand for the urgent necessity of naming whiteness, making it visible, and recognizing its implications for our knowledge production and political activism. Any discussion on race, racism, and ‘reparative possibilities’ for critical security studies, as proposed in this special issue, must acknowledge whiteness as the dominant part of racial oppressive systems, along with the role that white critical security studies scholars play within racist systems of social domination. At this point, I think it is important to mark my own positionality as author. Here I ‘speak’ from a privileged position of whiteness within the racial regime of a deeply racist country: Brazil. Moreover, it is important to highlight the institutional context within which I write this article: between the air-conditioned walls of an elitist university in the whiter and richer region of Rio de","PeriodicalId":21670,"journal":{"name":"Security Dialogue","volume":"52 1","pages":"28 - 37"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Security Dialogue","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09670106211027797","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In this article, I argue that whiteness and white privilege are structural and structuring of concepts and assumptions central to critical security studies, even though they oftentimes remain unnamed and unmarked in discussions within the field. I owe this discussion to a set of important contributions in international relations pointing to and reflecting upon the centrality of race and racism as structuring categories of modern world politics (Anievas et al., 2015; Henderson, 2013; Sabaratnam, 2020; Vitalis, 2015).1 More specifically, I owe it to reflections from critical security studies pointing to the racist implications of traditional frameworks in security studies, which naturalize political categories that reinforce white supremacy, such as sovereignty, ‘humanitarian’ intervention, and the primacy of the nation-state (Barkawi and Laffey, 2006; Bhuta, 2008; Hill, 2005; Wai, 2012). In spite of these important contributions, critical security studies authors often mobilize race and racism as referring to racialized non-white Others, who are somehow brought from outside to within the field in order to disturb some of its main assumptions. In such framing of critical approaches, whiteness within critical security studies remains an unmarked, unnamed, and nonracialized norm, taken for granted and therefore naturalized.2 With this in mind, here I propose to racialize whiteness as a structural and structuring power position within critical security studies. I stand for the urgent necessity of naming whiteness, making it visible, and recognizing its implications for our knowledge production and political activism. Any discussion on race, racism, and ‘reparative possibilities’ for critical security studies, as proposed in this special issue, must acknowledge whiteness as the dominant part of racial oppressive systems, along with the role that white critical security studies scholars play within racist systems of social domination. At this point, I think it is important to mark my own positionality as author. Here I ‘speak’ from a privileged position of whiteness within the racial regime of a deeply racist country: Brazil. Moreover, it is important to highlight the institutional context within which I write this article: between the air-conditioned walls of an elitist university in the whiter and richer region of Rio de
安全作为白人特权:关键安全研究中的白人种族化
在本文中,我认为白人和白人特权是关键安全研究的核心概念和假设的结构和结构,尽管它们在该领域的讨论中经常未被命名和标记。我将这一讨论归功于在国际关系方面的一系列重要贡献,这些贡献指出并反思了种族和种族主义作为现代世界政治结构类别的中心地位(Anievas等人,2015;亨德森,2013;萨,2020;的方法,2015年)。1更具体地说,我将其归功于批判性安全研究的反思,这些研究指出了安全研究中传统框架的种族主义含义,这些框架将加强白人至上主义的政治类别归化,如主权、“人道主义”干预和民族国家的首要地位(Barkawi和Laffey, 2006;Bhuta, 2008;希尔,2005;围,2012)。尽管有这些重要的贡献,关键的安全研究作者经常动员种族和种族主义,指的是种族化的非白人其他人,他们以某种方式从外部带到该领域内,以扰乱其一些主要假设。在这种批判性方法的框架中,关键安全研究中的白人仍然是一种未标记的、未命名的、非种族化的规范,被认为是理所当然的,因此被归化了考虑到这一点,我在这里建议将白人种族化,作为关键安全研究中的结构性和结构性权力地位。我认为迫切需要为白人命名,使其可见,并认识到它对我们的知识生产和政治活动的影响。正如本期特刊所提出的,任何关于种族、种族主义和批判性安全研究的“修复可能性”的讨论,都必须承认白人是种族压迫制度的主要部分,以及白人批判性安全研究学者在社会统治的种族主义制度中所扮演的角色。在这一点上,我认为重要的是要标记自己作为作者的地位。在这里,我从一个白人的特权地位“发言”,这个白人处于一个种族主义根深蒂固的国家——巴西——的种族制度之下。此外,重要的是要强调我写这篇文章的制度背景:在白人和富裕地区的一所精英大学的空调墙之间
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
Security Dialogue
Security Dialogue INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: Security Dialogue is a fully peer-reviewed and highly ranked international bi-monthly journal that seeks to combine contemporary theoretical analysis with challenges to public policy across a wide ranging field of security studies. Security Dialogue seeks to revisit and recast the concept of security through new approaches and methodologies.
×
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