SCFI - Security K - SCFI 2010 Team Jabob & the STG's...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
SCFI 2010 Securitization K ___ of ___ Index 1 ZP ^ HC
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
SCFI 2010 Securitization K ___ of ___ Security 1NC A) The Links 1. Security Risks represent nothing more than subjective calculations premised upon international power politics. Security discourse actually creates the reality of threats through the Security/Insecurity Paradox. This discourse of danger is created only to legitimate the ontological basis for the existence of sovereign boundaries and the legitimate violence. Campbell 1998, (David, Professor of international politics at the University of Newcastle, “Writing Security’, (199-200)) Security and subjectivity are intrinsically linked , even in conventional understandings. Traditional discourses of international relations maintain that alliance is one where security is a goal to be achieved by a number of instrumentalities deployed by the state (defense and foreign policy, for example). But the linkage between the two can be understood in a different light, for just as Foreign Policy works to constitute the identity in whose name it operates, security functions to instantiate the subjectivity it purports to serve. Indeed, security (of which foreign policy/Foreign Policy is a part) is first and foremost a performative discourse constitutive of political order : after all, " securing something requires its differentiation, classification and definition. It has, in short, to be identified."21 An invitation to this line of thought can be found in the later work of Michel Foucault, in which he explicitly addresses the issue of security and the state through the rubric of "governmental rationality." 22 The incitement to Foucault's thinking was his observation that from the middle of the sixteenth century to the end of the eighteenth century, political treatises that previously had been written as advice to the prince were now being presented as works on the "art jf government." The concern of these treatises was not confined to the requirements of a specific sovereign, but with the more general problematic of government: a problematic that included the government of souls and lives, of children, of oneself, and finally, of the state by the sovereign. This problematic of governance emerges at the intersection of central and centralizing power relationships (those located in principles of universality, law, citizenship, sovereignty), and individual and individualizing power relationships (such as the pastoral relationships of the Christian church and the welfare state). 23 Accordingly, the state for Foucault is an ensemble of practices that are at one and the same time individualizing and totalizing: I don't think that we should consider the "modern state" as an entity which was developed above individuals, ignoring what they are and even their very existence, but on the contrary as a very sophisticated structure, in which individuals can be integrated, under one condition: that this individuality would be shaped in a new form, and submitted to a set of very specific patterns. In a way we can see the
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 100

SCFI - Security K - SCFI 2010 Team Jabob & the STG's...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online