JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for RADIX Archives


RADIX Archives

RADIX Archives


RADIX@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

RADIX Home

RADIX Home

RADIX  May 2020

RADIX May 2020

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Academic debate: racism in securitisation theory

From:

Jessica Field <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Jessica Field <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 20 May 2020 16:16:06 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (37 lines)

Hi all,

I'm a recent subscriber and just wanted to share an interesting (and heated!) IR/security debate that has snowballed on Twitter in recent days. It's not directly disaster-related, but it raises important questions for radical scholarship as a whole... and I'd be interested to hear any thoughts (and thanks to Maureen for encouraging me to post this here)!

Last summer, Alison Howell and Melanie Richter-Monpetit published an article in Security Dialogue: "Is securitization theory racist? Civilizationism, methodological whiteness, and antiblack thought in the Copenhagen School". https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0967010619862921

In short, these two scholars have taken a decolonial approach to dissect the foundational assumptions behind securitization theory/speech acts theory, highlighting (as the title suggests) its inherent civilisationalism, methodological whiteness and antiblack racism. They also argue that this scholarship - developed mainly by Copenhagen School scholars Buzan and Waever in the late 90s - is built on the back of other scholarship that contains racist/civilisationalist ideas: Arendt, Durkheim, Hobbes etc. Howell and Richter-Monpetit do actually state that their critique is not a personal one against these scholars as individuals, but is rather a take-down of the racist knowledge-foundations that the scholarship is built on.

It's an interesting article and offers some thought-provoking arguments about how we need to look differently (decolonially) at the foundations of paradigm-shaping theories in IR... and of course elsewhere in scholarship. But the most interesting/concerning thing is how it has enraged much of the IR academic world and the Twittersphere. See the hashtags: #securitizationtheory #SDscandal to start.

Buzan and Waever published an aggressive reply to the article last week, making very personal attacks against Howell and Richter-Monpetit's academic integrity - basically accusing them via Security Dialogue (and on Twitter) of academic malpractice, among other things (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0967010620916153?icid=int.sj-full-text.citing-articles.1). 

Another scholar cited in Howell and Richter-Monpetit's article, Lene Hansen, also published a sharp rebuttal. See: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0967010620907198

On Twitter, Howell and Richter-Monpetit have been attacked left, right and centre: for the integrity of their scholarship, for their suggestions that securitization theory is racist, and also for apparently jumping on the band-waggon of anti-black racism critique etc. There has been some support coming through for them too - in terms of general solidarity in the face of such aggressive criticism, and in defence of their arguments.

I've been absorbed by it all over the last few days and wondered what everyone else thinks?

Ali Howell used to be a lecturer of mine nearly a decade ago and is a great scholar, so to see this level of personal vitriol is disturbing. I am not an IR scholar so can't offer much comment on the details of the debates. But to me, Buzan and Waever's response primarily serves to shut down debate rather than enrich it. And tone of discussions embodies what I fear most as an (early career) academic - the aggressive nature of academic Twitter/public discourse, particularly on certain themes: feminism, race, and also climate change.* It also feels like this kind of reaction to a peer-reviewed piece in a top journal dissuades less confident/established scholars from pitching paradigm-challenging critiques of established theory - especially using feminist and decolonial methodologies. 

I'd be interested to hear what you all think - whether it's on these particular articles, or the possibilities to critique academic knowledge / foundational theories in the age of social media, or anything.

Warmly,

Jessica


*These thoughts have already benefitted from discussions with Maureen, Punam and Virginie on the issue - thanks very much! Glad to be able to share thoughts here, too.
 

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the RADIX list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=RADIX&A=1

This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/RADIX, a mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
February 2013


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager