The Functional Actor in the Securitization Process (eBook, PDF)
What Social – Psychological Requirements of the Functional Actor Facilitate Securitization, According to the Social Identity Theory and the Social Balance Theory?
PAYBACK Punkte
0 °P sammeln!
Research Paper (postgraduate) from the year 2009 in the subject Politics - Topic: Public International Law and Human Rights, grade: 13 points, University of Marburg (Faculty of Social Science and Philosophy), course: Human Rigths in Conflict, language: English, abstract: This research paper ascertains, by means of the Social Identity Theory, the social psychological characteristics that facilitate the occurrence of the securitizing act on behalf of the actor of the Copenhagen School’s Securitization Theory, termed as functional actor, and more commonly known as ‚significant addressed audie...
Research Paper (postgraduate) from the year 2009 in the subject Politics - Topic: Public International Law and Human Rights, grade: 13 points, University of Marburg (Faculty of Social Science and Philosophy), course: Human Rigths in Conflict, language: English, abstract: This research paper ascertains, by means of the Social Identity Theory, the social psychological characteristics that facilitate the occurrence of the securitizing act on behalf of the actor of the Copenhagen School’s Securitization Theory, termed as functional actor, and more commonly known as ‚significant addressed audience’. By this,it aims at the understanding of the factors that determine the functional actor to consent to securitization, since this category of actor has been left untheorized, despite of its key role in the securitization process. The departure point is a question that the authors of the securitization theory, themselves address: “When does an argument […] achieve sufficient effect to make an audience tolerate violations of rules that would otherwise have to be obeyed? […] For individuals and groups to speak security does not guarantee success” as “securitization is not decided by the securitizer, but by the audience of the speech act.” (Buzan 1998:25,31) The only stipulation refers to the functional actor’s power to materialize securitization, being neither the referent object, nor the securitizing actor. The deficiency of theorization has impelled a social psychological elaboration of the functional actor’s distinguishing features that causes it to accept the securitizing act, since the absence of details in this respect leaves much space for interpretation, and leads to the investment of resources, when securitization analysis should not be centered upon the establishment of the actors, but upon the process and dynamics of securitization.
Andere Kunden interessierten sich für
