2010
DOI: 10.1177/0967010610388208
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The ‘Western-Centrism’ of Security Studies: ‘Blind Spot’ or Constitutive Practice?

Abstract: Unlike some other staples of security studies that do not even register the issue, Buzan & Hansen’s (2009) The Evolution of International Security Studies unambiguously identifies ‘Western-centrism’ as a problem. This article seeks to make the point, however, that treating heretofore-understudied insecurities (such as those experienced in the non-West) as a ‘blind spot’ of the discipline may prevent us from fully recognizing the ways in which such ‘historical absences’ have been constitutive of security bo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
43
0
4

Year Published

2010
2010
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 102 publications
(47 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
43
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…In that sense, we do side with nontraditionalists who have fought to be recognized as doing work not only on 'their own agenda' but on 'security' proper. As Bilgin (2010) points out in her contribution on the Western-centrism of international security studies, this means that The Evolution of International Security Studies devotes more space to non-traditionalist approaches than these take up on the terrain of international security studies, whether measured in terms of how much is published or how much attention and citation is generated. The question of how much and who are included is one side of the normative coin; the other is whether a conflictual or a dialogical history is brought out.…”
Section: Special Section On the Evolution Of International Security Smentioning
confidence: 96%
“…In that sense, we do side with nontraditionalists who have fought to be recognized as doing work not only on 'their own agenda' but on 'security' proper. As Bilgin (2010) points out in her contribution on the Western-centrism of international security studies, this means that The Evolution of International Security Studies devotes more space to non-traditionalist approaches than these take up on the terrain of international security studies, whether measured in terms of how much is published or how much attention and citation is generated. The question of how much and who are included is one side of the normative coin; the other is whether a conflictual or a dialogical history is brought out.…”
Section: Special Section On the Evolution Of International Security Smentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Bilgin 2010). This course has been taught at our University since 2011, but it is only with the introduction of audio-visual assignments that many students devised projects which dealt directly with our city and immediate surroundings.…”
Section: This Connected To the Course's Theoretical Investigations Onmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Over the past years an increasing body of literature has developed that deals with the important question of how to decentre the study of international relations (IR) (see, for example, Bilgin, 2010;Nayak and Selbin, 2010;Sabaratnam, 2013). Building on a critique of the Western-centric character of much IR scholarship, Nayak and Selbin (2010: 4) called for research with 'different "starting" points', Sabaratnam (2013: 260) for a 'repoliticization of assumptions of "difference"' and Bilgin (2010) for a treatment of said Western-centrism not merely as 'blind spot', but as having important constitutive effects. A 2007 study by Finkel, Pérez Liñan and Seligson provides us with a good example of conventional IR scholarship on the topic of democracy promotion.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%