Recognition and Global Politics examines the potential and limitations of the discourse of recognition as a strategy for reframing justice and injustice within contemporary world affairs. Drawing on resources from social and political theory and international relations theory, as well as feminist theory, postcolonial studies and social psychology, this ambitious collection explores a range of political struggles, social movements and sites of opposition that have shaped certain practices and informed contentious debates in the language of recognition.
Focusing on the productive sense of recognition that queer theorists have articulated in relation to the Gothic, this article proposes that the relationship which has developed between queer theory and Gothic fiction reveals the significant role the genre has played in the construction of ‘queerness’ as an uncanny condition.
Introduction When looking at the role recognition plays in political contexts, the Islamic State presents a particularly complex and multifaceted case, reflecting the complexities of recognition relationships and their political consequences overall. Approaching our subject from a recognition theory perspective, we identify two main difficulties. First, the status that relevant actors ascribe to the Islamic State (and its predecessor organisations, which we include unless otherwise noted) is multifaceted and, at times
5302P Democracy MUP-PT/lb.qxd 23/10/09 16:08 Page 110 5 The brackets of recognition: recognition, espionage, camouflage Elizabeth A. Povinelli In Time and the other, Johannes Fabian characterized the relation between anthropology and its object as a ‘political cosmology’, at the centre of which lay a constitutive contradiction. On the one hand, ‘anthropology has its empirical foundation in ethnographic research, inquiries which even hard-nosed practitioners carry out as communicative interactions’, and, on the other hand, ‘when these same ethnographers
MCK5 1/10/2003 10:25 AM Page 86 5 Recognition without ethics? Nancy Fraser For some time now, the forces of progressive politics have been divided into two camps. On one side stand the proponents of ‘redistribution’. Drawing on long traditions of egalitarian, labour, and socialist organising, political actors aligned with this orientation seek a more just allocation of resources and goods. On the other side stand the proponents of ‘recognition’. Drawing on newer visions of a ‘difference-friendly’ society, they seek a world where assimilation to majority or
1 Recognition and the International: Meanings, Limits, Manifestations Patrick Hayden and Kate Schick Over the past two decades, critical debates and insights within philosophy, sociology and political theory have focused on the concept of recognition. From interpersonal relationships of self and other, to multiculturalism, identity
5 Recognition and Accumulation Tarik Kochi Introduction The latter years of the twentieth century saw the emergence of a number of very interesting reinterpretations of G.W.F. Hegel's moral and political philosophy in which the concept of ‘recognition’ ( Anerkennung ) was given pride of place
]). For Honneth, recognition relationships provide the optimal entry point for social research (see also McNay, 2008 : 47). The subject’s experience of denied recognition, of intersubjective ‘disrespect’, is held to possess remarkable insight, signalling a disconnect between society’s ‘moral grammar’ and the contingent norms of its practices and institutions (Honneth, 1995 [1992
With Honneth’s The Struggle for Recognition , a restrictive and ‘domesticated’ account of social pathology emerged. 1 In this chapter, I show how variations on the ‘pathologies of recognition’ framing achieved dominance across social theory which problematically impacted applied social research. As Onni Hirvonen, a leading
Recognition is key to understanding how representations influence foreign policymaking. Until recently, the role of recognition in IR has been largely overlooked, to the detriment of a fuller understanding of world politics. 1 The more traditional approaches of IR continue to focus on the power of material interests in defining foreign policy objectives, which are framed almost exclusively in terms of relative or absolute gains. This framing also relies on an understanding that states are rational actors, and that rationality can be defined