A Plural Theory on Responsibility in International Relations

This chapter offers an outline for a plural theory of responsibility. Responsibility is what someone does and who someone is. One is responsible. You are responsible. One acts responsibly. Responsibility is ontological and phenomenological, and the actual content of what it means to be or to act responsibility varies considerably based on context. Responsibility is a form of activity, and as such our understanding of what being responsible means changes according to the different conditions we find ourselves needing to act. I offer five accounts. The first is about causality and liability and treats responsibility as a combination of agency and accountability. The second is how we are responsible because of our membership in various but specific communities. The third is what I term the political responsibility of identity. The fourth is ontological and frames responsibility as an ethical consequence of our being as opposed to our not-being. The fifth is political responsibility as political ethics

The Continuing Failure of International Relations and the Challenges of Disciplinary Boundaries

This article is concerned with addressing the following hypothesis, originally presented in Millennium in 2001: International Relations theory does not influence other academic fields to the extent that it suggests that it should. This claim is re-examined in light of the growth of IR over the past decade. Using a variety of evidence, including a close examination of the Social Sciences Citation Index, I conclude that IR (still) does not have much influence outside of the IR academic community. I also argue that while it is not reasonable to expect scholars who write on global politics but belong in other academic fields or disciplines to turn to IR, the way that IR defines itself suggests that they should. Consequently, it follows that IR needs to be doing more in order to make our work of greater relevance to, at minimum, those fields of scholarship that IR borrows from. I suggest that the reason why IR has continued to have little influence in other fields is because of the way IR sets itself up as a subject concerned with an anarchical order made up of sovereign states

Disruptive technology and regulatory conundrums: The emerging governance of virtual currencies

Regulatory agencies care about their reputation, which helps sustain their authority. As innovation can introduce uncertainty in governance, delaying action or overlooking danger can negatively affect agencies' standing. Aware of these reputation risks, agencies rely on a set of methods to govern the unknown. These methods, we argue, are: (1) categorization, if the innovation is considered identical to known regulatory categories; (2) analogy, if the innovation is considered similar to known categories, and; (3) new categorization, when new classifications are deemed necessary to address the innovation. Each method shapes governance by triggering the application of existing regulations (categorization and analogy), calls for either technical and regulatory fixes (analogy), or calls for broader regulatory undertakings (new categorization). Agencies' choice of methods, we argue, is shaped by concerns over performative reputation (i.e., showing the ability to fulfill core tasks), which in turn is affected by agencies' ability to demonstrate technical rigor (i.e., technical reputation)

Diasporic Security and Jewish Identity

This paper explores the relationship between identity and security through an investigation into Jewish diasporic identity. The paper argues that the convention of treating identity as an objective referent of security is problematic, as the Jewish diaspora experience demonstrates. The paper presents a new way of conceptualizing identity and security by introducing the concept of diasporic security. Diasporic security reflects the geographical experience of being a member of a trans-state community, of having a fluid identity that is shaped by sometimes contradictory discourses emanating from a community that resides both at home and abroad. In introducing the concept of diasporic security, the paper makes use of literature in Diaspora Studies, Security Studies, recent works in contemporary political theory and sociology, and Woody Allen's film, Deconstructing Harry (1997)

How to Save Politics in a Post-Truth Era: Thinking Through Difficult Times

The rise of populism, Donald Trump's election and the result of the EU referendum in the UK have been widely interpreted as a rejection of the post-war liberal order – the manifestation of a desire to undermine the political system that people feel has let them down. Yet mainstream politicians and analysts have been slow to grasp the changing situation, instead relying on a rhetoric of ‘hard data’ and narrow economic arguments while failing to properly engage with the politics of identity. This book argues that the relationship between methodology and politics is now more important than ever – that politics, if it is anything, is about engaging with people’s interpretations and narratives of the world in which they find themselves. Politics in this new ‘post-truth’ era will require an appreciation of the fact we live in an uncertain world of endless diversity and potential for change. This thoughtful book addresses how we might think about and do politics in these strange new times

The contradictions of Diaspora: A reflexive critique of the Jewish Diaspora’s relationship with Israel

This article explores a question that is often assumed but rarely addressed: What does Israel provide ideationally for Diaspora Jews that serves as the basis for Diaspora/Israel relations and justifies the importance of Israel for Jewish identity? Whereas past literature on this topic has either assumed an answer to this question or debated survey results and demographics, this article takes a different approach by not assuming an answer to this question. The article argues that Diaspora Jews’ relationship with Israel is best understood phenomenologically. The significance of Israel for Diaspora Jews is found in a type of obligation that is political but is not based in sovereignty or law but instead in meaning that serves as a form of authority and functions as part of the phenomenological structure characterizing Jewish being-in-the-world in the age of Israel. Using a combination of personal reflection, empirical research, and theoretical investigation, the article concludes by suggesting that critique serves as an activity that reveals the normative character of Israel’s meaningful authority, but that Israel’s authority in this phenomenological sense needs to be undermined if it will be possible to move beyond the increasingly polarizing role that Israel is having in Jewish communities today