Abstract

This paper offers some lines of flight away from stagnant features of Terrorism Studies. I largely reiterate the critiques made by field leaders like Lee Jarvis, but I frame the field in a way that eases the tensions between different forms of critical scholarship which have frustrated other writers. Where others split the field into ‘traditional’ and ‘critical’ strands and admonish the ‘critical’ strand for its reticence to reflexively critique its referent objects, I suggest that Terrorism Studies can be read as a convergence of ‘Counterterrorism Studies’, ‘Critical Terrorism Studies’ and ‘The Beyond’. While the second category exists primarily to grapple with the first, relying heavily on the language and theoretical frameworks of the first, the third category troubles the very constitution of concepts like the state and the figure of the terrorist, which are the sine qua non of the first two categories.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.