废除的呼吁:在关键的安全研究中对种族的否认和取代

IF 2.8 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
D. Chandler, Farai Chipato
{"title":"废除的呼吁:在关键的安全研究中对种族的否认和取代","authors":"D. Chandler, Farai Chipato","doi":"10.1177/09670106211024413","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction In 2020, Security Dialogue issued a call for interventions on race and racism in critical security studies, responding to a tumultuous year of global upheaval and academic controversy surrounding racial issues in contemporary society. In the call, the editors highlighted the lack of engagement with race in the field, requesting submissions that interrogate these issues and propose reparative framings to inform future research. Our response to this call seeks to raise some notes of caution, to indicate that the depth and nature of the problem require full acknowledgement prior to the consideration of what, if any, reparative work may be undertaken. We do not think that the call is problematic in its statement that ‘the spectres of race and racism haunt the field of critical security studies, not just the broader discipline of International Relations’ (Security Dialogue, 2020). However, we question the ability of the field to provide reparative perspectives that are adequate to the task of grappling with these spectres. Since its beginnings, critical security studies has sought to move discussions of security away from traditional, state-centric perspectives, towards broader and deeper approaches, often focusing on the possibility of security as emancipation or interrogating its conceptual foundations. Studies emerged that focused on gender, securitization, new materialism, ontological security and many other issues, as well as race, as critical security scholars found new and diverse subjects to centre their research on. Recent ground-breaking work has highlighted how spectres of race within the canon of thought in international relations continue to shape disciplinary approaches and assumptions, with Meera Sabaratnam’s (2020) and Olivia Rutazibwa’s (2020) work being just two examples. Despite these interventions, issues of race and racism remain peripheral to the field, understood as an addition to the discussion rather than a foundational factor at the core of notions of security and the world they seek to secure. The question, then, is whether it is possible or desirable to disentangle critical security studies from its racial foundations, to salvage or redeem it, and, if so, how","PeriodicalId":21670,"journal":{"name":"Security Dialogue","volume":"566 1","pages":"60 - 68"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A call for abolition: The disavowal and displacement of race in critical security studies\",\"authors\":\"D. Chandler, Farai Chipato\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09670106211024413\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction In 2020, Security Dialogue issued a call for interventions on race and racism in critical security studies, responding to a tumultuous year of global upheaval and academic controversy surrounding racial issues in contemporary society. In the call, the editors highlighted the lack of engagement with race in the field, requesting submissions that interrogate these issues and propose reparative framings to inform future research. Our response to this call seeks to raise some notes of caution, to indicate that the depth and nature of the problem require full acknowledgement prior to the consideration of what, if any, reparative work may be undertaken. We do not think that the call is problematic in its statement that ‘the spectres of race and racism haunt the field of critical security studies, not just the broader discipline of International Relations’ (Security Dialogue, 2020). However, we question the ability of the field to provide reparative perspectives that are adequate to the task of grappling with these spectres. Since its beginnings, critical security studies has sought to move discussions of security away from traditional, state-centric perspectives, towards broader and deeper approaches, often focusing on the possibility of security as emancipation or interrogating its conceptual foundations. Studies emerged that focused on gender, securitization, new materialism, ontological security and many other issues, as well as race, as critical security scholars found new and diverse subjects to centre their research on. Recent ground-breaking work has highlighted how spectres of race within the canon of thought in international relations continue to shape disciplinary approaches and assumptions, with Meera Sabaratnam’s (2020) and Olivia Rutazibwa’s (2020) work being just two examples. Despite these interventions, issues of race and racism remain peripheral to the field, understood as an addition to the discussion rather than a foundational factor at the core of notions of security and the world they seek to secure. The question, then, is whether it is possible or desirable to disentangle critical security studies from its racial foundations, to salvage or redeem it, and, if so, how\",\"PeriodicalId\":21670,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Security Dialogue\",\"volume\":\"566 1\",\"pages\":\"60 - 68\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Security Dialogue\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09670106211024413\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"Security Dialogue","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09670106211024413","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: 2

摘要

引言2020年,安全对话呼吁在关键的安全研究中对种族和种族主义进行干预,以应对当代社会围绕种族问题的全球动荡和学术争议的动荡一年。在电话中,编辑们强调了该领域缺乏对种族的参与,要求提交材料来质疑这些问题,并提出修复性框架,为未来的研究提供信息。我们对这一呼吁的回应试图提出一些警告,以表明在考虑可能进行的修复工作(如果有的话)之前,需要充分认识到问题的深度和性质。我们认为,这一呼吁在其声明中没有问题,即“种族和种族主义的幽灵困扰着关键安全研究领域,而不仅仅是更广泛的国际关系学科”(安全对话,2020)。然而,我们质疑该领域是否有能力提供足以应对这些幽灵的修复性视角。从一开始,批判性安全研究就试图将对安全的讨论从传统的以国家为中心的视角转向更广泛、更深入的方法,通常侧重于安全作为解放的可能性或质疑其概念基础。随着批判性安全学者发现了新的、多样化的研究主题,出现了关注性别、证券化、新唯物主义、本体论安全和许多其他问题以及种族的研究。最近的突破性工作突显了国际关系中思想经典中的种族幽灵如何继续塑造学科方法和假设,Meera Sabaratnam(2020)和Olivia Rutazibwa(2020)的工作只是两个例子。尽管采取了这些干预措施,但种族和种族主义问题仍然是该领域的外围问题,被理解为对讨论的补充,而不是安全概念及其所寻求的世界的核心基础因素。那么,问题是,是否有可能或可取地将批判性安全研究从其种族基础中分离出来,以挽救或救赎它,如果是,如何
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A call for abolition: The disavowal and displacement of race in critical security studies
Introduction In 2020, Security Dialogue issued a call for interventions on race and racism in critical security studies, responding to a tumultuous year of global upheaval and academic controversy surrounding racial issues in contemporary society. In the call, the editors highlighted the lack of engagement with race in the field, requesting submissions that interrogate these issues and propose reparative framings to inform future research. Our response to this call seeks to raise some notes of caution, to indicate that the depth and nature of the problem require full acknowledgement prior to the consideration of what, if any, reparative work may be undertaken. We do not think that the call is problematic in its statement that ‘the spectres of race and racism haunt the field of critical security studies, not just the broader discipline of International Relations’ (Security Dialogue, 2020). However, we question the ability of the field to provide reparative perspectives that are adequate to the task of grappling with these spectres. Since its beginnings, critical security studies has sought to move discussions of security away from traditional, state-centric perspectives, towards broader and deeper approaches, often focusing on the possibility of security as emancipation or interrogating its conceptual foundations. Studies emerged that focused on gender, securitization, new materialism, ontological security and many other issues, as well as race, as critical security scholars found new and diverse subjects to centre their research on. Recent ground-breaking work has highlighted how spectres of race within the canon of thought in international relations continue to shape disciplinary approaches and assumptions, with Meera Sabaratnam’s (2020) and Olivia Rutazibwa’s (2020) work being just two examples. Despite these interventions, issues of race and racism remain peripheral to the field, understood as an addition to the discussion rather than a foundational factor at the core of notions of security and the world they seek to secure. The question, then, is whether it is possible or desirable to disentangle critical security studies from its racial foundations, to salvage or redeem it, and, if so, how
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
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