2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.polgeo.2019.102094
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Functions of sovereign violence: Contesting and establishing order in Darjeeling, India

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These anxieties over sovereignty are distinct from those experienced by postcolonial state subjects. First, states are not the only provider of protection and belonging in these contexts, as sovereignty is often multiple and highly contested (Baruah, 2020;Hansen & Stepputat, 2001;Sidaway, 2003;Wenner, 2020). In Myanmar, BRI projects have been delayed or suspended, in part, because they intersect with areas claimed by ethnic armed organisations (Dean, 2020;Kiik, 2016).…”
Section: Towards An Emotional Geopolitics Of Infrastructurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…These anxieties over sovereignty are distinct from those experienced by postcolonial state subjects. First, states are not the only provider of protection and belonging in these contexts, as sovereignty is often multiple and highly contested (Baruah, 2020;Hansen & Stepputat, 2001;Sidaway, 2003;Wenner, 2020). In Myanmar, BRI projects have been delayed or suspended, in part, because they intersect with areas claimed by ethnic armed organisations (Dean, 2020;Kiik, 2016).…”
Section: Towards An Emotional Geopolitics Of Infrastructurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a similar way, the dehumanisation of black people in the context of slavery might be understood as an exception that “is always in place” in the sense of a permanent state of exception that serves to assert sovereign power. Alternatively, we might stretch the very notion of sovereignty to encompass any de facto formation of colonial and postcolonial power, akin to Thomas Blom Hansen and Finn Stepputat’s (2006) heuristic notion of “de facto sovereignty”, understood as a “form of authority grounded in violence” that is “tentative and always emergent” (Hansen and Stepputat 2006:297; see also Wenner 2020). 7…”
Section: From Shifting Sovereignties To Sovereign Necropoliticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Hansen and Stepputat build on Agamben when, in a much‐cited paraphrase, they define “de facto sovereignty” as the “ability to kill, punish, and discipline with impunity” (2006:296; see also Wenner 2020). …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%