Information is power? Transparency and fetishism in international relations
Information is power? Transparency and fetishism in international relations
复制标题
信息就是力量？
DOI：
10.1080/14747731.2018.1507698
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Daniel R. McCarthy
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Fluck;Daniel R. McCarthy
国际行为者，无论是国家的还是非国家的，都拥护透明度作为解决各种政治问题的办法。对这些过程的理论分析以一种恋物癖的方式展示了透明度，在这种方式下，产生透明度的社会关系被误解为信息本身的产物。本文将概述在国际关系理论中崇拜透明度促进时出现的理论问题。考察对透明的拜物教，我们将注意到它们产生的政治、公共领域和理性的有问题的概念。迷惑了数据、信息和知识之间的关系，盲目地对待透明度，掩盖了导致透明度作为一种政治实践出现的历史动态。这改变了我们对全球治理机构及其组成人员之间的关系以及知识生产本身的性质的理解。要实现透明的规范性承诺，就需要重新调整理论的方向，转向对知识政治具有社会和历史敏感性的方法。
ABSTRACT International actors, state and non-state, have embraced transparency as a solution to all manner of political problems. Theoretical analyses of these processes present transparency in a fetishtic manner, in which the social relations that generate transparency are misrecognized as the product of information itself. This paper will outline the theoretical problems that arise when transparency promotion is fetishized in International Relations theory. Examining the fetishism of transparency, we will note the problematic conceptions of politics, the public sphere, and rationality they generate. Confusing the relationship between data, information and knowledge, fetishized treatments of transparency obscure the historical dynamics responsible for the emergence of transparency as a political practice. This alters our understanding of the relationship between global governance institutions, their constituents, and the nature of knowledge production itself. Realizing the normative promise of transparency requires a reorientation of theory towards sociologically and historically sensitive approaches to the politics of knowledge.
全球民主和民主最低限度：为什么仅靠程序说明是不够的
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Dingwerth
通讯作者：
Dingwerth