Agonism, critical political geography, and the new geographies of peace
Agonism, critical political geography, and the new geographies of peace
复制标题
斗争、批判政治地理学和新的和平地理学
DOI：
10.1177/0309132516666687
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
7.1
通讯作者：
M. Jackson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Harry Bregazzi;M. Jackson
为什么批判的政治地理学难以处理和研究和平？最近在地理学上的努力确实寻求和平的积极解释，但我们认为，关键地理学仍然有问题地依赖于社会斗争。用于解决批判政治的主流理论镜头将分歧再现为批判社会性的因果语法和差异的构成效应。我们寻求和平与社会的另一种解释。本文的前半部分分析了批判特权斗争主义的主流概念方法。后半部分提出了对和平的积极描述，但没有失去后基础主义或相关政治见解的关键基调。
Why does critical political geography struggle to address, and research, peace? Recent efforts in geography do seek positive accounts of peace, but we argue that critical geographies remain problematically reliant on social agonism. Dominant theoretical lenses used to address critical politics reproduce dissension as the causal grammar of critical sociality and the constitutive effect of difference. We seek an alternative account of peace and sociality. The first half of the paper diagnoses how prevailing conceptual approaches to critique privilege agonism. The second half advances a positive account of peace, without losing the critical tenor of post-foundationalist or relational political insights.