precisely the fate of the late modern monarchs on film: they are ceremonial monarchs who merely reign, whose actions are limited by constitution and convention, whose political power is severely circumscribed. These are monarchs, then, who accede executive power to the elected politicians, the prime minister and the government. Obliged by constitutional law to stand above politics, their power is thereby
organised ( Boege et al. , 2009 ; de Waal, 2020 ). Politics in these systems is organised by different rules than in bureaucratic states. At the most basic level, political elites (mostly men) try to gain and retain power through near-constant bargaining using violence and material reward – the ‘twin currencies’ of political power ( Spatz, 2020 ). Alliances are fluid; elite members can compete one moment and collude the next, or indeed can do both
makes the intentionality required to demonstrate genocide somewhat more difficult to prove in court. What Guichaoua argues does not make what happened in Rwanda any less a genocide, because the goal was to wipe out Rwanda’s Tutsi, even if this goal developed as part of a strategy to consolidate political power. In fact, the idea that the genocide was not mapped out in advance reinforces the reality that the violence was not inevitable and could have been halted with effective international action. Ideology and the Motives of Those Who Killed Many of the early
. The humanitarian ideal was therefore ‘inaccessible to savage tribes that … follow their brute instincts without a second thought, while civilized nations … seek to humanize it’ ( Moynier, 1888 ). This goes to show that humanitarian principles, far from being a timeless good, are not immune to prevailing stereotypes or political power relationships. As a treaty aimed at an emblematic nineteenth-century battle was being signed, the conflicts and massacres of civil wars and
awaits its realisation. Hence, despite the impotence of violence, that doesn’t mean to say it cannot be put into service to reproduce or create entirely new regimes for political power and bio-political control. Violence is not simply negative. It conditions the possibility of political rule, setting out in the clearest ways the lines of belonging and expendability, the force that’s always measured versus the plight of the damned. This is why violence can so easily be accommodated by the technocratic wisdom of a progressive mind. We are governed, as Foucault noted, by
Virtual Universidad Católica del Norte , 62 , 308 – 40 , www.doi.org/10.35575/rvucn.n62a12 . Barnett , M. ( 2011 ), Empire of Humanity: A History of Humanitarianism ( Ithaca, NY : Cornell University Press ). Barnett , M. and Weiss , T. G. (eds) ( 2008 ), Humanitarianism in Question: Politics, Power, Ethics ( Ithaca, NY : Cornell University Press ). Benthall , J. and Bellion-Jourdan , J. ( 2003 ), The Charitable Crescent: Politics of Aid in the Muslim World ( London and New York : I.B. Tauris
approaches in humanitarian contexts (adapted from the IGWG Gender Equality Continuum Tool) Gender Blind Disregards the multidimensional roles, responsibilities and opportunities of men and boys, women and girls within the humanitarian context and society at large. Ignores local and global socio-political power dynamics (and its manifestations) between and among actors of diverse genders in humanitarian settings. Neglects the intersecting, gendered experiences/needs of humanitarian workers, volunteers, beneficiaries and other partners in the project
the room ’. This phenomenon was observed in nearly every consensus process. In short, some members assert their authority over a consensus-based process and overtly influence the outcome beyond consideration of the evidence. This may be based on the political power of the agency or the reputation or experience of the individual. In some cases, another influential member may be able to pull a consensus process back on track if it is going astray
Democratization is a major political phenomenon of the age and has been the focus of a burgeoning political science literature. This book considers democratization across a range of disciplines, from anthropology and economics, to sociology, law and area studies. The construction of democratization as a unit of study reflects the intellectual standpoint of the inquirer. The book highlights the use of normative argument to legitimize the exercise of power. From the 1950s to the 1980s, economic success enabled the authoritarian governments of South Korea and Taiwan to achieve a large measure of popular support despite the absence of democracy. The book outlines what a feminist framework might be and analyses feminist engagements with the theory and practice of democratization. It also shows how historians have contributed to the understanding of the processes of democratization. International Political Economy (IPE) has always had the potential to cut across the levels-of-analysis distinction. A legal perspective on democratization is presented by focusing on a tightly linked set of issues straddling the border between political and judicial power as they have arisen. Classic and contemporary sociological approaches to understanding democracy and democratization are highlighted, with particular attention being accorded to the post-1989 period. The book displays particularities within a common concern for institutional structures and their performance, ranging over the representation of women, electoral systems and constitutions (in Africa) and presidentialism (in Latin America). Both Europe and North America present in their different ways a kind of bridge between domestic and international dimensions of democratization.
sought in the language in which Duncan operated, in dance. Her revolution occurs within dance itself, not in the relationship between dance and other systems of signification. Their political power is the ability to affirm a new kind of movement, a new kind of subjectivity, while drawing upon and responding to previous inscriptions on the body. Dance for Duncan is a method of enabling new articulations to be seen and heard. It is a way to affirm the third dancer, dancing unknown systems of signification, who trumps not only the first dancer, representing ballet, but