Militantly ‘studying up’? (Ab)using whiteness for oppositional research

Abstract

This paper develops the idea of militantly 'studying up'. Through a discussion of research into the relationship between migrants and social/labour movements in Buenos Aires, Argentina, it explores the way in which my positionality both helped and hindered the (militant) research process. As the possibility for militant research seemed to recede, by interrogating the antagonisms bound up in the disjuncture between my perceived and my performed positionality, I was able to retain a commitment to militant research/research militancy. The movement to a form of oppositional (auto)ethnography was underpinned by an (ab)use of my whiteness. This touched on new possibilities for militant research, and also afforded further reflection on the structuring power of whiteness itself. Situating itself against-and-beyond discussions of militant research, this paper explores not only the rich potential but also the difficulties and limitations of such a methodology. In this regard it foregrounds discussion of failure as a key reflexive strategy. Ultimately it argues that there is potentially value in 'studying up' within militant (migration) research, but that concerns surround the (re-)reification of the very identities and structures that are intended to be deconstructed.

The unknowing expert: Talking to a man about supply chains

“…In this instance my status as a postdoctoral researcher with a newly‐awarded PhD, and my relatively sustained engagement with Nick's employer, may have made me appear sufficiently unthreatening that Nick felt little obligation to assert his credentials as an expert by feigning extensive knowledge of his firm's supply chains. My relatively junior professional status may thus have helped me to make my expert interviewee feel comfortable in offering candid reflections during this interview, as elite interviewing literatures often suggest (Clare, 2017; Desmond, 2004; Welch et al, 2002). However, my project's affiliation with the FSA may also have made it difficult for Nick to dismiss my questions as irrelevant or inappropriately formulated and left him feeling unusually compelled to attempt to answer them (Rice, 2010).…”

Reclaiming failure in geography: Academic honesty in a neoliberal world

“…we thought. For some time, geographers had poked around the edges of failure, with words like 'messy' creeping into the geographic lexicon as a euphemism for the tricky realities of doing geography (see Law 2004;Horton 2008;Kay and Oldfield 2011;Clare 2017;Gibbes and Emily Skop 2020), but a sustained confrontation with the wider notion of outright 'failure' was long overdue. Instead, in the peer-reviewed utopia of "Journal Land" it seemed as if everything in academia was plain sailing and anxiety-free: research methods worked; projects resulted in clear and satisfying outcomes; findings were published and helped researchers contribute to their community of knowledge and practice.…”

A cartography of the possible: Reflections on militant ethnography in and against the edu‐factory

“…This paper critically reflects on my experiences attempting to navigate and negate the activist-academic divide through experimentation with forms of militant ethnography and action research that were orientated towards the co-creation of what I term "minor knowledge". Building on the recent discussion of militant research within this journal and geography more broadly (cf Clare, 2017;Russell, 2015, Halvorsen, 2015 it explores lines of tension and contradiction in experimenting with militant ethnography. It is hoped that this discussion will be useful both for those wishing to experiment with forms of engaged and participatory research, as well as militant forms of research more specifically, and those interested in broader debates around marketization of the university and the developing area of critical university studies.…”