Mobilisation, Resistances, and Popular Memory
Disponible en español: Movilización, Resistencias y Memoria Popular
Latin America, protests, resistance, social movements
Sobre esta publicación:
En marzo de 2024, movimientos sociales y activistas de las ciudades de Santiago de Chile y Santiago de Cali (Colombia) e investigadores del Arnold Bergstraesser Institut (ABI) de Friburgo se reunieron virtualmente para un intercambio de saberes y experiencias tomando como referencia las protestas masivas que tuvieron lugar en cada ciudad. Esta iniciativa tuvo como premisa central el reconocimiento que las comunidades y los movimientos sociales son parte activa de las dinámicas de producción de espacio y gobernanza de la ciudad, así como productores y portadores de diferentes formas de conocimiento. La reunión de movimientos sociales e iniciativas populares de Colombia y Chile estuvo motivada por el objetivo de crear conexiones reflexivas como lazos personales y colectivos entre los actores y experiencias de cada ciudad. Este documento recopila algunas de las principales reflexiones del intercambio.
Viviana García Pinzón and Fabricio Rodríguez are senior researchers at the Arnold Bergstraesser Institute (ABI) and members of the network “Postcolonial Hierarchies in Peace & Conflict”. In the framework of the network, their research addresses conflict and peace in urban contexts. Inspired by decolonial debates, their aim is to understand and confront epistemic hierarchies in academia by drawing on the political practice that takes shape and dynamism in the streets of Latin America.
The artistic illustrations of this policy paper were developed by Iván Garzón Mayorga in collaboration with Paula Rodríguez.
This policy paper gathers reflections that emerged in dialogue with social movements and activists in Chile and Colombia. From Chile: Corporación Umbrales, Movimiento Rangiñtulewfü and Movimiento por el Agua y los Territorios MAT. From Colombia: Juntanza Popular por la Transformación Social, Radiofónicas and Tribunal Popular de Siloé.
This contribution is part of the research project ‘Postcolonial Hierarchies in Peace & Conflict’ [grant number 01UG2205D], funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF).
Se permite el uso público de las ilustraciones con la condición de acreditar al ilustrador © Iván Garzón Mayorga.
Public use of the illustrations is permitted with attribution to the illustrator © Iván Garzón Mayorga.
Classic Approaches to Security
Traditionally, only states were actors of security in security research. This meant that states were seen as the ones who act and who were capable of performing security in the international arena, at least in the eyes of International Relations canon and particularly in terms of military security (Morgenthau, 1954Morgenthau, Hans Joachim. 1954. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. Knopf.; Waltz, 2001Waltz, Kenneth Neal. 2001. Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis. Columbia University Press., 2010Waltz, Kenneth Neal. 2010. Theory of International Politics. Waveland Press.). However, after the end of the Cold War and the subsequent widening of the security agenda, new research laid more emphasis on the social construction of security (Katzenstein, 1996Katzenstein, Peter J. 1996. The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York (etc.): Columbia University press.), and since the development of these new approaches to security the field has made substantial progress in understanding, conceptualising and utilising empirical and conceptual insights in the dynamics of producing, ordering and maintaining security within and beyond the state’s framework. These further developments range from security communities (Adler & Barnett, 1996Adler, Emanuel, und Michael N. Barnett. 1996. „Governing Anarchy: A Research Agenda for the Study of Security Communities“. Ethics & International Affairs 10 (März):63–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7093.1996.tb00004.x., 2008Adler, Emanuel, und Michael N. Barnett. 2008. Security Communities. Cambridge, UK ; New York: Cambridge University Press.) to the various constructions, controversies and (re-)negotiation of security and order in public-private relations (Abrahamsen & Williams, 2009Abrahamsen, Rita, und Michael C. Williams. 2009. „Security Beyond the State: Global Security Assemblages in International Politics“. International Political Sociology 3 (1): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-5687.2008.00060.x., 2010Abrahamsen, Rita, und Michael C. Williams. 2010. Security Beyond the State: Private Security in International Politics. Cambridge University Press.) and hybrid security governance (Schröder, Chappuis, & Kocak, 2014Schröder, Ursula C., Fairlie Chappuis, und Deniz Kocak. 2014. „Security Sector Reform and the Emergence of Hybrid Security Governance“. International Peacekeeping 21 (2): 214–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/13533312.2014.910405.).
How to cite this entry:
Ketzmerick-Calandrino 2024: “Security. Speaking with Fanon?”. Virtual Encyclopaedia – Rewriting Peace and Conflict. 08.10.2024. https://rewritingpeaceandconflict.net/security-speaking-with-fanon/.
Video-Interview
Dr. Selbi Durdiyeva in Dialogue
Podcast
Coloniality, Peace & Conflict – An introduction with Susanne Buckley Zistel and Siddharth Tripathi