| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,36 @@ |
|
1 |
+===K=== |
|
2 |
+ |
|
3 |
+ |
|
4 |
+====Representing the dangers of proliferation to third world nations relies on racist orientalism==== |
|
5 |
+**Gusterson '99** (Gusterson, Hugh,"Nuclear Weapons and the Other in Western Imagination" Cultural Anthropology, 14.1 Feb 1999 http://www.jstor.org/stable/656531 Aug 17/2009 TBC 6/29/10) |
|
6 |
+Thus in Western discourse nuclear weapons are represented so that "theirs" are a |
|
7 |
+AND |
|
8 |
+is also to be found in U.S. national security discourse. |
|
9 |
+ |
|
10 |
+ |
|
11 |
+====The 'proliferation' metaphor is epistemologically bankrupt —- their framing obscures the root cause of the spread of weapons, turning the case==== |
|
12 |
+**Mutimer 00** (David, Professor of Political Science – York University (Canada), The Weapons State: Proliferation and the Framing of Security, p. 58-63) |
|
13 |
+To this point I have discussed the various images through which weapons technology has been |
|
14 |
+AND |
|
15 |
+has constituted the object of those practices as a "proliferation" problem. |
|
16 |
+ |
|
17 |
+ |
|
18 |
+====immediate replacements for security are constructions of expert knowledge that rely on circular and epistemologically-closed narratives—- the drive for certainty and closure produces violence. It crowds out vital ethical questions about IR==== |
|
19 |
+**Biswas 7** (Shampa, Professor of Politics – Whitman College, "Empire and Global Public Intellectuals: Reading Edward Said as an International Relations Theorist", Millennium, 36(1), p. 117-125) |
|
20 |
+It has been 30 years since Stanley Hoffman accused IR of being an 'American |
|
21 |
+AND |
|
22 |
+expertise) in the most fundamental and important senses of the vocation.21 |
|
23 |
+ |
|
24 |
+ |
|
25 |
+====The alternative is to embrace an emancipatory post-colonial politics –must create a knowledge base that can foster cooperative attempts at meaningful political change. Brydon '06==== |
|
26 |
+**Diana Brydon, University of Western Ontario, '6 ~~Postcolonial Test 2.1, "Is There a Politics of Postcoloniality?" http://journals.sfu.ca/pocol/index.php/pct/article/viewArticle/508/175~~** |
|
27 |
+For Hasseler and Krebs, then, the politics of postcoloniality are academic politics, |
|
28 |
+AND |
|
29 |
+the implications of such transference for the practice of a politics of postcoloniality? |
|
30 |
+ |
|
31 |
+ |
|
32 |
+====Questions of framing are a meta-argument that must precede policy discussion==== |
|
33 |
+**Crawford 2** (Neta, Ph.D. and MA – MIT, Professor of Political Science – Boston University, Argument and Change in World Policy, p. 19-21) |
|
34 |
+Coherent arguments are unlikely to take place unless and until actors, at least on |
|
35 |
+AND |
|
36 |
+entrepreneurs without serious political wrangling." Hence framing is a meta-argument. |