差异的积累与地域的逻辑

IF 0.4 4区 社会学 0 ASIAN STUDIES
G. Walker
{"title":"差异的积累与地域的逻辑","authors":"G. Walker","doi":"10.1215/10679847-7251819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Today, in a world characterized by the dispersion of the concentration of the productive forces, an increasingly multinational composition of global finance capital and its specialized class of handlers, it is relatively common to hear that the problems of “area studies” and its critique are no longer relevant. This argument tends to be made as follows. Area studies depended on a world characterized by the classic mid-twentieth century structures of alignment: the US-aligned world, the USSR-aligned world, the so-called nonaligned world, and so on. But, so this logic goes, today the world that is implied by this organizational schema itself no longer exists, and therefore the problem of area studies has ceased to be an essential target: it is a “remnant” that is “withering away.” But it is in fact exactly the opposite, that we will miss something crucial in the question of area studies if we imagine that it is no longer a problem for thought and politics simply because of the process of “globalization.” In fact, paradoxically, it is the current moment of the integration of the world in which the problem of area studies becomes most decisive.","PeriodicalId":44356,"journal":{"name":"Positions-Asia Critique","volume":"209 1","pages":"67 - 98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Accumulation of Difference and the Logic of Area\",\"authors\":\"G. Walker\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/10679847-7251819\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Today, in a world characterized by the dispersion of the concentration of the productive forces, an increasingly multinational composition of global finance capital and its specialized class of handlers, it is relatively common to hear that the problems of “area studies” and its critique are no longer relevant. This argument tends to be made as follows. Area studies depended on a world characterized by the classic mid-twentieth century structures of alignment: the US-aligned world, the USSR-aligned world, the so-called nonaligned world, and so on. But, so this logic goes, today the world that is implied by this organizational schema itself no longer exists, and therefore the problem of area studies has ceased to be an essential target: it is a “remnant” that is “withering away.” But it is in fact exactly the opposite, that we will miss something crucial in the question of area studies if we imagine that it is no longer a problem for thought and politics simply because of the process of “globalization.” In fact, paradoxically, it is the current moment of the integration of the world in which the problem of area studies becomes most decisive.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44356,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Positions-Asia Critique\",\"volume\":\"209 1\",\"pages\":\"67 - 98\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Positions-Asia Critique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/10679847-7251819\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ASIAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Positions-Asia Critique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/10679847-7251819","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

摘要:今天,在一个以生产力集中度分散、全球金融资本的跨国构成及其专业化处理阶层为特征的世界中,“区域研究”及其批评的问题不再具有相关性,这是相对常见的。这一论点往往是这样的。区域研究依赖于一个以经典的20世纪中期结盟结构为特征的世界:与美国结盟的世界,与苏联结盟的世界,所谓的不结盟世界,等等。但是,按照这种逻辑,今天这个组织模式本身所暗示的世界已经不存在了,因此,区域研究的问题已经不再是一个重要的目标:它是一个正在“枯萎”的“残余”。但事实恰恰相反,如果我们认为仅仅因为“全球化”的进程,区域研究不再是一个思想和政治问题,我们就会错过一些至关重要的东西。事实上,矛盾的是,正是在世界一体化的当前时刻,区域研究的问题变得最具决定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Accumulation of Difference and the Logic of Area
Abstract:Today, in a world characterized by the dispersion of the concentration of the productive forces, an increasingly multinational composition of global finance capital and its specialized class of handlers, it is relatively common to hear that the problems of “area studies” and its critique are no longer relevant. This argument tends to be made as follows. Area studies depended on a world characterized by the classic mid-twentieth century structures of alignment: the US-aligned world, the USSR-aligned world, the so-called nonaligned world, and so on. But, so this logic goes, today the world that is implied by this organizational schema itself no longer exists, and therefore the problem of area studies has ceased to be an essential target: it is a “remnant” that is “withering away.” But it is in fact exactly the opposite, that we will miss something crucial in the question of area studies if we imagine that it is no longer a problem for thought and politics simply because of the process of “globalization.” In fact, paradoxically, it is the current moment of the integration of the world in which the problem of area studies becomes most decisive.
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
Positions-Asia Critique
Positions-Asia Critique ASIAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信