‘Memory must be defended’: Beyond the politics of mnemonical security

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

‘Memory must be defended’ : Beyond the politics of mnemonical security. / Mälksoo, M.

In: Security Dialogue, Vol. 46, No. 3, 2015, p. 221-237.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Mälksoo, M 2015, '‘Memory must be defended’: Beyond the politics of mnemonical security', Security Dialogue, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 221-237. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010614552549

APA

Mälksoo, M. (2015). ‘Memory must be defended’: Beyond the politics of mnemonical security. Security Dialogue, 46(3), 221-237. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010614552549

Vancouver

Mälksoo M. ‘Memory must be defended’: Beyond the politics of mnemonical security. Security Dialogue. 2015;46(3):221-237. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010614552549

Author

Mälksoo, M. / ‘Memory must be defended’ : Beyond the politics of mnemonical security. In: Security Dialogue. 2015 ; Vol. 46, No. 3. pp. 221-237.

Bibtex

@article{e47b392269824d31a43958bfd4356852,
title = "{\textquoteleft}Memory must be defended{\textquoteright}: Beyond the politics of mnemonical security",
abstract = "This article supplements and extends the ontological security theory in International Relations (IR) by conceptualizing the notion of mnemonical security. It engages critically the securitization of memory as a means of making certain historical remembrances secure by delegitimizing or outright criminalizing others. The securitization of historical memory by means of law tends to reproduce a sense of insecurity among the contesters of the {\textquoteleft}memory{\textquoteright} in question. To move beyond the politics of mnemonical security, two lines of action are outlined: (i) the {\textquoteleft}desecuritization{\textquoteright} of social remembrance in order to allow for its repoliticization, and (ii) the rethinking of the self–other relations in mnemonic conflicts. A radically democratic, agonistic politics of memory is called for that would avoid the knee-jerk reactive treatment of identity, memory and history as problems of security. Rather than trying to secure the unsecurable, a genuinely agonistic mnemonic pluralism would enable different interpretations of the past to be questioned, in place of pre-defining national or regional positions on legitimate remembrance in ontological security terms.",
keywords = "Faculty of Social Sciences, agonistic memory politics, Copenhagen School, desecuritization, identity, mnemonical security, ontological security",
author = "M. M{\"a}lksoo",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1177/0967010614552549",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "221--237",
journal = "Security Dialogue",
issn = "0967-0106",
publisher = "SAGE Publications",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - ‘Memory must be defended’

T2 - Beyond the politics of mnemonical security

AU - Mälksoo, M.

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - This article supplements and extends the ontological security theory in International Relations (IR) by conceptualizing the notion of mnemonical security. It engages critically the securitization of memory as a means of making certain historical remembrances secure by delegitimizing or outright criminalizing others. The securitization of historical memory by means of law tends to reproduce a sense of insecurity among the contesters of the ‘memory’ in question. To move beyond the politics of mnemonical security, two lines of action are outlined: (i) the ‘desecuritization’ of social remembrance in order to allow for its repoliticization, and (ii) the rethinking of the self–other relations in mnemonic conflicts. A radically democratic, agonistic politics of memory is called for that would avoid the knee-jerk reactive treatment of identity, memory and history as problems of security. Rather than trying to secure the unsecurable, a genuinely agonistic mnemonic pluralism would enable different interpretations of the past to be questioned, in place of pre-defining national or regional positions on legitimate remembrance in ontological security terms.

AB - This article supplements and extends the ontological security theory in International Relations (IR) by conceptualizing the notion of mnemonical security. It engages critically the securitization of memory as a means of making certain historical remembrances secure by delegitimizing or outright criminalizing others. The securitization of historical memory by means of law tends to reproduce a sense of insecurity among the contesters of the ‘memory’ in question. To move beyond the politics of mnemonical security, two lines of action are outlined: (i) the ‘desecuritization’ of social remembrance in order to allow for its repoliticization, and (ii) the rethinking of the self–other relations in mnemonic conflicts. A radically democratic, agonistic politics of memory is called for that would avoid the knee-jerk reactive treatment of identity, memory and history as problems of security. Rather than trying to secure the unsecurable, a genuinely agonistic mnemonic pluralism would enable different interpretations of the past to be questioned, in place of pre-defining national or regional positions on legitimate remembrance in ontological security terms.

KW - Faculty of Social Sciences

KW - agonistic memory politics

KW - Copenhagen School

KW - desecuritization

KW - identity

KW - mnemonical security

KW - ontological security

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-84930151007&partnerID=MN8TOARS

U2 - 10.1177/0967010614552549

DO - 10.1177/0967010614552549

M3 - Journal article

VL - 46

SP - 221

EP - 237

JO - Security Dialogue

JF - Security Dialogue

SN - 0967-0106

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 284506364