Insurrection as anti-securitization communication
in The politics of attack
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

The lack of stable, centrally-located, canonical texts in insurrectionary anarchism is mirrored in other more traditional accounts of political violence. Insurrectionary theory aligns with the critical critique of securitization, labeling the statist determinations as "narrow, inadequate and immoral in the context of 'real' security threats to the individual". The poststructural reading of power, one wherein control is disembodied from a physical site and is instead transnational, omnipresent, and yet operating invisibly, is a highly influential aspect of modern insurrectionary critique. In a more generalized viewpoint, other insurrectionary thinkers have theorized on "The Totality" of oppression drawing more from Michel Foucault's reading of power than politics. Globally, the insurrectionary tendency is situated within the larger anarchist, communist, and anti-authoritarian movements but has served to redefine the subject vis-à-vis systemic violence.

The politics of attack

Communiqués and insurrectionary violence

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 152 23 1
Full Text Views 26 1 0
PDF Downloads 19 1 0