Revenge in International Politics

Löwenheim, Oded; Heimann, Gadi

doi:10.1080/09636410802508055

Cited by 133 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While microsociologists have typically privileged face-to-face interactions as emotionally 53. See Löwenheim and Heimann 2008;Mercer 2006;and Sasley 2011. 54.…”

Section: The Challenge Of Collective Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Affective Politics after 9/11

Hall¹,

Ross²

2015

Int Org

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Affect and emotion are key elements of our lived experience as human beings but currently play little role in how we theorize actorhood in international relations. We offer six amendments for integrating affective dynamics into existing conceptions of individual-level actorhood in IR. From these amendments emerge the theoretical micro-foundations upon which we build propositions concerning potential collectivelevel affective dynamics and political strategies. We illustrate the analytical payoff of our proposals by examining the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001. By amending existing understandings of actorhood to include human affective experience, we can integrate and make sense of a variety of psychological, social, and political consequences stemming from the attacks, both within the United States and internationally.A cataclysm occurs. The senses reel. In that moment of supreme definition we capture in our imagination an event's full significance. Over time, it is not that the memory of it fades, exactly … The emotional impact is replaced by a sentiment which, because it is more calm, seems more rational. But paradoxically it can be less rational, because the calm is not the product of a changed analysis, but the effluxion of time … So it was with 11

show abstract

“…While microsociologists have typically privileged face-to-face interactions as emotionally 53. See Löwenheim and Heimann 2008;Mercer 2006;and Sasley 2011. 54.…”

Section: The Challenge Of Collective Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Affective Politics after 9/11

Hall¹,

Ross²

2015

Int Org

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hutchison and Bleiker (2014: 496--7) find a distinction between macro and micro approaches to emotion, and suggest that this conceptualization offers a way forward in the key question surrounding the politics of emotion, which is how individual emotions become collective and social. While there are a number of insightful IR studies that focus on emotions at the state level (Hall, 2011;Löwenheim and Heimann, 2008), a handful of other studies aptly illustrate the role of emotions at more micro levels. Saurette (2006) illustrates how humiliation surrounding 9/11 likely influenced not only American elites but also pundit communities and the wider public.…”

Section: Micro--moves In Ir Theory Considered: Practices Emotions Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Micro-moves in International Relations theory

Solomon

Steele

2016

European Journal of International Relations

162

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article posits empirical and political reasons for recent 'micro--moves' in several contemporary debates, and seeks to further develop them in future International Relations studies. As evidenced by growing trends in studies of practices, emotions, and the everyday, there is continuing broad dissatisfaction with grand or structural theory's value without 'going down' to 'lower levels' of analysis where structures are enacted and contested. We suggest that empirics of the last fifteen years -including the war on terror and the Arab Spring -have pushed scholars into increasingly micropolitical positions and analytical frameworks. Drawing upon insights from Gilles Deleuze, William Connolly, and Henri Lefebvre, among others, we argue that attention to three issues -affect, space, and time -hold promise to further develop micropolitical perspectives on and in IR, particularly on issues of power, identity, and change. (Routledge, 2008). He is currently working on a project investigating restraint in global politics, an edited volume on methods and constructivism, and two journal symposia on the politics of constructivism. He is also the co--editor of three books and one handbook, and has published articles in a number of international studies journals. 2 Every macro--theory presupposes, whether implicitly or explicitly, a micro--theory to back up its explanations--Steven Lukes, Introduction to Emile Durkheim's The Rules of Sociological Method, (1982: 16) The balance one strikes between the macro and micro is a tension that has characterized social theory since at least Durkheim's time. Whether it is titled a level--of--analysis (Singer, 1961) or agent--structure (Wendt, 1987) 'problem', International Relations (IR) has faced its own related quandaries over which level(s) should be regarded theoretical, methodological, and even normative primacy. Since Kenneth Waltz's (1959) critique of the first and second images as inadequate to capture the most important dynamics of world politics, IR has at times focused within a grand theory mode that too--often eschews the myriad of sub--system and sub--state phenomena. Attention to anarchy and its inescapable pressures on nation--states were said to offer the most reliable insights into the 'small number of big and important things' of which IR should mostly concern itself (Waltz, 1986: 329). While a recent and persuasive 2013 special issue of European Journal of International Relations considered whether we were at the 'End of IR theory', there continues to be a default admonition to scholars, and students, to re--embrace grand theory (Snyder, 2013; Harrison and Mitchell, 2014). A 15 December 2011 post by Professor Brian Rathbun on the popular blog 'Duck of Minerva' provides ample illustration of this move --an exaltation to all IR scholars to find the 'big' theoretical argument that will make them famous. The post asks graduate students (especially) whether the empirical studies that 3 seem to have permeated IR as of late 'will make you the next Robert Keohane? Or Ale...

show abstract

“…74 As Oded Löwenheim and Gadi Heimann show, revenge played an important role in Israeli policy makers' considerations whether to retaliate against Hezbollah's provocations in the summer of 2006. 75 Leaders may be emotionally affected by terrorist attacks, too; this adds to their determination to retaliate.…”

Section: Deterrence and The Double-damning Dilemmamentioning

confidence: 99%

Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don't: Performative Power and the Strategy of Conventional and Nuclear Defusing

Adler

2010

Security Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article seeks to initiate a new round of strategic intellectual innovation in an era when threats posed by non-state terrorist organizations and their state supporters do not resemble Cold War threats. Based on an interpretative sociological reading of the concepts of power, security, and rationality, it argues that a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" dilemma is to the post-Cold War erawhat the danger of surprise attack or unintended nuclear war was to the Cold War: the defining structural threat of international politics. The dilemma leaves states confronting asymmetrical warfare with the choice of reacting with force to a terrorist act or practicing appeasement. Neither approach, however, can achieve the goal of

show abstract

Revenge in International Politics

Cited by 133 publications

References 0 publications

Affective Politics after 9/11

Affective Politics after 9/11

Micro-moves in International Relations theory

Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don't: Performative Power and the Strategy of Conventional and Nuclear Defusing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About