{"title":"不适合反弹:论二战魏玛德国和紧缩英国的弹性军事政治","authors":"Laura Jung","doi":"10.1093/ips/olad017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Resilience discourse, with its implicit assumption of a return to health and productivity following a crisis, is often mobilized to target disabled people. Yet while resilience scholarship has rapidly expanded and become prevalent in various fields over recent decades, it has largely failed to analyze the multiple connections between resilience, disability, and eugenics. This article argues that resilience discourse is a form of martial politics, wielded against disabled people to protect the health and prosperity of the political community. A martial politics of resilience works through three registers, responsibilizing disabled subjects by withdrawing state support, dehumanizing them as unproductive and a burden, and exposing these subjects to abandonment/death through medical and policy interventions. I use the lens of martial politics to think through relationships between resilience, disability, and security in Germany and Britain in the early twentieth and twenty-first centuries, respectively, focusing on psychiatric treatment of trauma in the former and the implementation of austerity policies in the latter. The article thus expands our understanding of relationships between resilience, subjectivity, and security by highlighting the ableist and lethal contours of resilient subjects, polities, and economies.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unfit to Bounce Back: On the Martial Politics of Resilience in WWI-Weimar Germany and Austerity Britain\",\"authors\":\"Laura Jung\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ips/olad017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Resilience discourse, with its implicit assumption of a return to health and productivity following a crisis, is often mobilized to target disabled people. Yet while resilience scholarship has rapidly expanded and become prevalent in various fields over recent decades, it has largely failed to analyze the multiple connections between resilience, disability, and eugenics. This article argues that resilience discourse is a form of martial politics, wielded against disabled people to protect the health and prosperity of the political community. A martial politics of resilience works through three registers, responsibilizing disabled subjects by withdrawing state support, dehumanizing them as unproductive and a burden, and exposing these subjects to abandonment/death through medical and policy interventions. I use the lens of martial politics to think through relationships between resilience, disability, and security in Germany and Britain in the early twentieth and twenty-first centuries, respectively, focusing on psychiatric treatment of trauma in the former and the implementation of austerity policies in the latter. The article thus expands our understanding of relationships between resilience, subjectivity, and security by highlighting the ableist and lethal contours of resilient subjects, polities, and economies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Political Sociology\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Political Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olad017\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Political Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olad017","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Unfit to Bounce Back: On the Martial Politics of Resilience in WWI-Weimar Germany and Austerity Britain
Abstract Resilience discourse, with its implicit assumption of a return to health and productivity following a crisis, is often mobilized to target disabled people. Yet while resilience scholarship has rapidly expanded and become prevalent in various fields over recent decades, it has largely failed to analyze the multiple connections between resilience, disability, and eugenics. This article argues that resilience discourse is a form of martial politics, wielded against disabled people to protect the health and prosperity of the political community. A martial politics of resilience works through three registers, responsibilizing disabled subjects by withdrawing state support, dehumanizing them as unproductive and a burden, and exposing these subjects to abandonment/death through medical and policy interventions. I use the lens of martial politics to think through relationships between resilience, disability, and security in Germany and Britain in the early twentieth and twenty-first centuries, respectively, focusing on psychiatric treatment of trauma in the former and the implementation of austerity policies in the latter. The article thus expands our understanding of relationships between resilience, subjectivity, and security by highlighting the ableist and lethal contours of resilient subjects, polities, and economies.
期刊介绍:
International Political Sociology (IPS), responds to the need for more productive collaboration among political sociologists, international relations specialists and sociopolitical theorists. It is especially concerned with challenges arising from contemporary transformations of social, political, and global orders given the statist forms of traditional sociologies and the marginalization of social processes in many approaches to international relations. IPS is committed to theoretical innovation, new modes of empirical research and the geographical and cultural diversification of research beyond the usual circuits of European and North-American scholarship.