| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accepted version | 898 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
This article is a contribution to transcending the dichotomy between deconstruction and reconstruction in critical security studies. In the first part, I review dominant (Western/liberal) logics of security and the main strands of critical security studies to argue for the need to: overcome the liberal framework of the balance among rights and freedom, with its inherent imbrication with the fantasy of absolute security; and, contra the ultimate conclusions of deconstructive critique, to take the desire for security seriously at the same time. By advocating for embracing the tensions that surface at this intersection, I then move to my reconstructive endeavor. I set out a meta-theory with both analytical and normative nature, agonistic security, inspired by the political theory developed by Mouffe and Laclau. Building on the opposition between antagonism and agonism, I argue that security belongs to the “political”, and that it constitutes a field of struggle for politicization. I then argue for three conceptual shifts, which concretely define agonistic security: i) from an absolute/static to a relational/dynamic understanding of security; ii) from universalism to pluralism at a world scale; and iii) from the dominance of individual rights in Western/liberal thinking toward security as a collective endeavor. In conclusion, I take a step back and discuss the implications of agonistic security for the role of critique in security studies.
Description
Keywords
agonism and antagonism emancipation human rights right to security security logics vulnerability
Pedagogical Context
Citation
Tulumello S. (2021). Agonistic security: Transcending (de/re)constructive divides in critical security studies. Security Dialogue, 52(4), 325-342 (First Published September 16, 2020). DOI: 10.1177/0967010620945081