首页> 外文期刊>Review of African Political Economy >Sudan's uncivil war: the global-historical constitution of political violence
【24h】

Sudan's uncivil war: the global-historical constitution of political violence

机译:苏丹的非内战:政治暴力的全球历史构成

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

It is commonplace to characterise political violence and war in Africa as ‘internal’, encapsulated in the apparently neutral term ‘civil war’. As such, accounts of political violence tend to focus narrowly on the combatants or insurrectionary forces, failing to recognise or address the extent to which political violence is historically and globally constituted. The article addresses this problematic core assumption through examination of the case of Sudan, seeking to contribute to a rethinking of protracted political violence and social crisis in post-colonial Africa. The article interjects in such debates through the use and detailed exposition of a distinct methodological and analytical approach. It interrogates three related dimensions of explanation which are ignored by orthodox framings of ‘civil war’: (1) the technologies of colonial rule which (re)produced and politicised multiple fractures in social relations, bequeathing a fissiparous legacy of racial, religious and ethnic ‘identities’ that have been mobilised in the context of post-colonial struggles over power and resources; (2) the major role of geopolitics in fuelling and exacerbating conflicts within Sudan and the region, particularly through the cold war and the ‘war on terror’; and (3) Sudan's terms of incorporation within the capitalist global economy, which have given rise to a specific character and dynamics of accumulation, based on primitive accumulation and dependent primary commodity production. The article concludes that political violence and crisis are neither new nor extraordinary nor internal, but rather, crucial and constitutive dimensions of Sudan's neo-colonial condition. As such, to claim that political violence in Sudan is ‘civil’ is to countenance the triumph of ideology over history.View full textDownload full textKeywordsSudan, ‘civil war’, conflict, global political economyRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03056244.2010.483888
机译:将非洲的政治暴力和战争描述为“内部”是很平常的事,用内在的中性术语“内战”来概括。因此,对政治暴力的叙述往往只集中在战斗人员或起义部队上,而未能认识或解决政治暴力在历史和全球范围内构成的程度。该文章通过审查苏丹案件解决了这个有问题的核心假设,力求有助于重新思考后殖民时期非洲旷日持久的政治暴力和社会危机。这篇文章通过使用和详细阐述一种独特的方法论和分析方法来介入此类辩论。它质疑了三个相关的解释维度,而“内战”的正统框架则忽略了这些解释维度:(1)殖民统治的技术,将社会关系中的多重破裂(重新)政治化,并遗弃了种族主义的遗留遗产,在后殖民的权力和资源斗争中动员起来的宗教和种族“身份”; (2)地缘政治在加剧和加剧苏丹及该地区内部冲突中的主要作用,特别是通过冷战和“反恐战争”; (3)苏丹在资本主义全球经济中的纳入条件,在原始积累和依赖的初级商品生产的基础上,产生了特定的特征和积累动态。文章得出结论,政治暴力和危机既不是新的,也不是非常规的,也不是内部的,而是苏丹新殖民主义条件的关键和构成层面。因此,宣称苏丹的政治暴力是“公民”,是为了表达意识形态在历史上的胜利。查看全文下载全文关键词苏丹,“内战”,冲突,全球政治经济ui_cobrand:“ Taylor&Francis Online”,servicescompact:“ citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多”,发布:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03056244.2010.483888

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号