‘Omnus et Singulatim’: Establishing the Relationship Between Transitional Justice and Neoliberalism

Bowsher, Josh

doi:10.1007/s10978-017-9198-3

Cited by 30 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is part of its coming into being as an epistemic community not born of a distinct intellectual tradition but rather a bricolage of activism and practice that has only latterly led to the establishment of a community of scholars increasingly critical in their approach. The field of transitional justice developed as ‘an international web of individuals and institutions whose internal coherence is held together by common concepts, practical aims’ that crystallised in the wake of experiments with justice and the transitions from communism in Eastern Europe ( Bowsher, 2018 : 84).…”

Section: The Intersection Between Knowledge and Transitional Justice: Constructing That Which We Namementioning

confidence: 99%

The performance and persistence of transitional justice and its ways of knowing atrocity

Jones¹

2020

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transitional justice, like other peacebuilding endeavours, strives to create change in the world and to produce knowledge that is useful. However, the politics of how this knowledge is produced, shared and rendered legitimate depends upon the relationships between different epistemic communities, the way in which transitional justice has developed as a field and the myriad contexts in which it is embedded at local, national and international levels. In particular, forms of ‘expert’ knowledge tend to be legal, foreign and based on models to be replicated elsewhere. Work on epistemic communities of peacebuilding can be usefully brought to bear on transitional justice, speaking to current debates in the literature on positionality, justice from below, marginalisation and knowledge imperialism. This article offers two contributions to the field of transitional justice: (1) an analysis of the way the field has developed as an epistemic community(ies) and the relevance of this for a politics of knowledge; and (2) an argument for the politics of knowledge to be more widely discussed and understood as a factor in shaping transitional justice policy and practice, and as a call to a more ethical relationship with the supposed beneficiaries of transitional justice interventions.

show abstract

Section: The Intersection Between Knowledge and Transitional Justice: Constructing That Which We Namementioning

confidence: 99%

The performance and persistence of transitional justice and its ways of knowing atrocity

Jones¹

2020

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, in neoliberalism, subjectivities and social relations are essentially remade according to entrepreneurial patterns. Contemporary neoliberal rationality 'configures human beings exhaustively as market actors, always, only, and everywhere as homo oeconomicus' (Brown, 2015: 31;Foucault, 2008;Bowsher, 2018).…”

Section: Memory and Neoliberalism: Concurrent Unfoldingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, 'it sketches out the conditions for a present where the antagonisms wrought by the economic relations of production' are not seen in any way as relevant and hence are not critically addressed (Bowsher, 2018: 104). Furthermore, processes of juridificationunderlying the functioning of both transitional justice and neoliberalism -are also an indication of the interwoven character of transitional justice (or memory as transitional justice) and neoliberalism (Bowsher, 2018; see also Bugarič, 2016).…”

Section: Entanglements: Lines Of Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a Disentanglement of the Links between the Memory Boom and the Neoliberal Turn

Cercel¹

2020

Intersections

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The memory boom and the related emergence of cosmopolitan victimhood-centred memories, increasingly criticized for depoliticizing the past and thus contributing to the depoliticization of the present, have been simultaneous with the curtailment of the welfare state, the abandonment of the politics of redistribution, the erosion of social and economic rights, and the growth in social and economic inequalities. Yet if the latter are often being considered to be among the reasons leading to the current right-wing populist wave in Europe and elsewhere or at least are seen as entangled therewith, the relevance of the memory boom for these developments has not been properly interrogated. Against this background, this contribution makes a plea for a critical appreciation of the linkages between the memory boom and the global ascension of neoliberalism. It acknowledges the contemporaneity of the two phenomena, which have been fundamentally informing our present age, roughly since the end of the 1970s, and calls for a critical engagement with their interwoven character. In doing this, it argues that scholarship should pay particular attention to the relationship between past, present, and future that the neoliberal turn in its various shapes and guises implies, as well as to the regimes of temporality that underlie various instantiations of the memory boom. It ends by taking heed of recent theorizations in memory studies and by asking to what extent can they be used in order to have a better grasp of the critical juncture we are currently lying at and to contribute to a radical change of the political status quo. Thus, the article makes some preliminary steps towards disentangling the interconnections between the memory boom and the neoliberal turn, and aims to provide a blueprint for a substantial future research project that should look in depth at these entanglements.

show abstract

“…To engage with the TJ theory through critical lens of the 4 th generation of scholars requires a rigorous attempt to uncover the underline reasons behind their efforts to understand field's power-relations inside Western's globalized neoliberal demands for security and peace 15 (Bowsher, 2018;Sharp, 2013).From Neil J. Kritz's edited volumes 16 on aspects of TJ in 1995 and Ruti G. Teitel's article 12 Since most of the available works to the author were published in that period. 13 Namely, his notions of 'knowledge power' , 'bio-power' and 'biopolitics' , 'securitization' and 'governmentalism' .…”

Section: Probing the Criticism Of The 4 Th Generation Of Tj Scholarsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deconstruction of ‘scientifically based injustices’: About post-war traumatized populations of ‘spoilers’ in Croatia

Cvikić

2019

Sociologija

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary Croatian social reality's determined by the epistemological and policy frameworks developed to understand and care for the post-war Yugoslav ?traumatized citizens.? Knowledge produced in that respect exerts powerful influence on citizen?s lives thus subjecting them to detrimental effects of scientifically designed conceptual frameworks and discursive practices of conducted research (Hass, 2001). So far, researched ?transitional life? in post-communist/postwar Croatia is rooted in ?knowledge power structures? meticulously developed inside transitional justice academic and policy works on former Yugoslav societies enabling continuous production of ?scientifically based injustices? (De Genova et al, 2016). Therefore, the main objective in this paper is to examine knowledge production about Croatian ?transitional society? and ?traumatized populations? and how its discursive construction of the new ?Other? - ?spoilers? (Fisher, 2011) is scientifically rooted in ?transitional justice? policy application (Leebaw, 2005).Thereby, a selection of transitional justice scholarly works on Croatia and the Western Balkans along with documents produced by the international organizations/institutions in the period 1997-2017 are studied. Foucauldian discourse analysis (Klos-Czerowinska, 2015) coupled with his (2003, 2007) and Agamben?s (1998, 2005) understanding of the postmodern European society are used to ?deconstruct? (Janks, 2005) ?scientifically based injustices? produced about post-war traumatized populations of ?spoilers? in Croatia.

show abstract

‘Omnus et Singulatim’: Establishing the Relationship Between Transitional Justice and Neoliberalism

Cited by 30 publications

References 22 publications

The performance and persistence of transitional justice and its ways of knowing atrocity

The performance and persistence of transitional justice and its ways of knowing atrocity

Towards a Disentanglement of the Links between the Memory Boom and the Neoliberal Turn

Deconstruction of ‘scientifically based injustices’: About post-war traumatized populations of ‘spoilers’ in Croatia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About