Cold CASE: a manifesto for Canadian critical security studies

Larrinaga, Miguel de; Salter, Mark B.

doi:10.1080/21624887.2013.864911

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 92 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The so-called BMT schools—UBC, McGill and Toronto—are traditionally recognized as the most Americanized graduate programs, tending to hire US-trained scholars and following fashions of the American academy more closely than the rest of Canada (see, for example, Saideman 2016). On the other side, the Four Nodes of critical security studies—McMaster, Ottawa, Victoria and York—represent a kind of counterweight to the American influence, drawing more heavily on European and interdisciplinary sources (de Larrinaga and Salter, 2014). Cox (2014) is correct to note that these groupings are far from absolute descriptions: critical work occurs in BMT schools, just as more American-style work can be found in Four Nodes institutions, while other universities—such as Queen's University or Carleton University—are home to a mixture of approaches.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In their analysis of critical security studies in Canada, de Larrinaga and Salter (2014) suggest that the practice of BMT schools hiring mostly US-trained PhDs may be a strategic move to position themselves as the best in the nation. Following the assumption that the American approach is more prestigious, then the best schools in a country other than the United States would be the most “Americanized” schools.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Focussing not on Americanized IR in Canada but on the burgeoning field of critical security studies, Miguel de Larrinaga and Mark Salter (2014) identify Four Nodes of critically oriented scholarship at Canadian institutions—McMaster, Ottawa, Victoria and York. While critical IR is by no means a uniquely Canadian enterprise, their special issue drew attention to the development of critical-research networks in the Canadian context (focussing specifically on critical approaches to security studies).…”

Section: Background On the Canadian Questionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the institutional sample, we analyze the undergraduate, MA and PhD opportunities in IR at all 97 higher education institutions in Canada. We track the PhD training of the professoriate at institutions offering graduate studies in IR, following investigations that suggest isolating the three Americanized “BMT” schools (University of B ritish Columbia [UBC], M cGill University and University of T oronto [Saideman, 2016]) and the four most “critical” departments (the Four Nodes: McMaster University, University of Ottawa, University of Victoria and York University [de Larrinaga and Salter, 2014]). In the literature on Canadian IR, the term Americanized typically refers to both a focus on the approaches dominant within the American academy (positivism, as well as the three paradigms of realism, liberalism and constructivism) and a tendency to hire scholars trained at institutions in the United States and, to a lesser extent, writing on US-centric topics, such as American foreign policy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Assessing Three Elements of “Canadian” International Relations

Murphy

Heffernan

2020

Can J Pol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research note addresses the ongoing debate over the existence of a “Canadian” International Relations (IR) by interrogating the university setting, the professoriate and important institutions of IR in the Canadian context. We not only contribute an update to the data but also enrol a larger number of Canadian universities and a wider sample of journals and conferences. Our analysis is structured around three existing groupings of institutions: the three most “Americanized” departments (the BMT)—University of British Columbia, McGill University and University of Toronto; the four most “critical” departments (the Four Nodes)—McMaster University, University of Ottawa, University of Victoria and York University; and the four largest French-language institutions (the FLIs)—Université de Montréal, Université du Québec à Montréal, Université Laval and Université de Sherbrooke. The characteristic openness often taken to define IR in Canada is more often found at the Four Nodes, the FLIs or unclassified schools than at the BMT schools, which are not only more Americanized in training but also isolated from other Canadian institutions.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Background On the Canadian Questionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Assessing Three Elements of “Canadian” International Relations

Murphy

Heffernan

2020

Can J Pol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Salter, 2008;Salter & Piché, 2011;Watson, 2013). Moreover, this selection responds to recent calls for Canadian (critical) scholars of security to take issues of indigeneity and postcolonialism more seriously (de Larrinaga & Salter, 2014). This comes from recognizing the inherent tension between a field largely defined by a focus on sovereignty and territory, but largely oblivious to how contention over these same issues often forms the crux indigenous and postcolonial politics.…”

Section: Selecting Casesmentioning

confidence: 97%

The Fragility of Fear: The Contentious Politics of Emotion and Security in Canada

Rythoven¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International Relations (IR) theory commonly holds security arguments as powerful instruments of political mobilization because they work to instill, circulate, and intensify popular fears over a threat to a community. Missing from this view is how security arguments often provoke a much wider range of emotional reactions, many of which frustrate and constrain state officials' attempts to frame issues as security problems. This dissertation offers a corrective by outlining a theory of the contentious politics of emotion and security. Drawing inspiration from a variety of different social theorists of emotion, including Goffman's interactionist sociology, this approach treats emotions as emerging from distinctive repertoires of social interaction. These emotions play a key role in enabling audiences to sort through the sound and noise of security discourse by indexing the significance of different events to our bodies. Yet popular emotions are rarely harmonious; they're socialized and circulated through a myriad of different pathways. Different repertoires of interaction in popular culture, public rituals, and memorialization leave audiences with different ways of feeling about putative threats. The result is mixed and contentious emotions which shape both opportunities and constraints for new security policies. The empirical purchase of this theory is illustrated with two cases drawn from the Canadian context: indigenous protest and the F-35 procurement. Both represent cases where attempts by state officials to frame an issue as a security problem were frustrated and constrained by a contentious politics of emotion. In the conclusion, I argue these findings should push IR theorists to adopt a more circumspect view of the mobilization of This was an emotional and contentious project. As much as I enjoyed writing it, there were periods wracked by serious doubt and uncertainty. Pulling me through these periods was an extensive community of friends, family, and colleagues. Carleton's Department of Political Science has been my home for the entirety of this project. It includes an exceptional group of faculty, students, and administrators-all of which work hard to make the Department a rich and creative home. I would like to thank the administrative staff, especially Brookes Fee, for consistently helping me navigate the University bureaucracy. I'd also like to thank the Department's faculty

show abstract

Introduction: Why Critical Approaches in Foreign Policy Analysis?

Erdogan

Hisarlıoğlu

2022

Critical Readings of Turkey’s Foreign Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cold CASE: a manifesto for Canadian critical security studies

Cited by 12 publications

References 92 publications

Assessing Three Elements of “Canadian” International Relations

Assessing Three Elements of “Canadian” International Relations

The Fragility of Fear: The Contentious Politics of Emotion and Security in Canada

Introduction: Why Critical Approaches in Foreign Policy Analysis?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About