An Exceptional Response? Security,Development and Civil Society in Spanish Policy after 11‐M

This article considers the ways in which Spanish state institutions responded to the Madrid bombings of 11 March 2004 in the context of the global ‘War on Terror’. It examines three inter‐related arenas of Spanish policy after 9/11 in which security and civil society are invoked in ways that impact upon the country's development agenda toward its southern Mediterranean partners. The first relates to Spain's external relations with its North African neighbours, and in particular the place of migration in shaping these relations over the last decade. The second concerns Spain's political relations with the representative organizations of its own Muslim populations. A third area of analysis pertains to the juridical‐institutional reactions of the state to the 11 March attacks: how have public authorities and civil society been affected and refashioned in the face of jihadist terrorism on the peninsula? The author argues that in each of these domains, the post‐9/11 context generally, and the 11 March attacks in particular, have elicited a securitization of civil society, which has in turn been associated with the country's international relations and domestic politics. Such securitization, however, has only been partially successful, thus vindicating the continuation of ‘politics as usual’ among Spain's state officials and its civil society.     

Topoiesis: Procesos de espacialización en la literatura (crítica y metodología)

ABSTRACT

Space in literary texts has been widely studied but poorly systematized. There is no valid method of analysis that gives space a critical meaning. For instance, critics have eluded the fact that time and space cannot be considered separately. On the other hand, they have used concepts or methods from disciplines aside literature such as anthropology, biology, psychology, or geography that do not help clarify the meaning or signification of a literary text. We begin this article by giving a review of the main theoretical and critical positions regarding space in literature from the second half of the twentieth century. We do this in order to evaluate the main results those studies have attained. Later on, we propose a methodology that may clarify the significance of space in a literary text. The concept topoiesis (as far as we know, it has not been used in the humanities) represents for us a key word. It helps us to distinguish one main process where space can turn from a signification practice to the production of meaning in a literary text.     

Topoiesis de la recepción literaria

ABSTRACT

This article proposes a particular notion about “topoiesis,” focusing on the text reception point of view. Initially, it establishes a theoretical framework using useful concepts from hermeneutics and post-structuralism, to later discuss the real existence of a dialogue or a “fusion of horizons” in which a “sense of space” of a text would be blended in the meeting point between textuality and the reader. Finally, through this space we propose a categorization of the different types of “topoiesis” of literary reception, establishing correspondences with the concept of “enunciative instances” in the text space, detailed in another article.     

Topoiesis de las instancias enunciativas

ABSTRACT

The literary text is a communicative situation that involves a sender, a message, and a receiver. Literary theorists and critics have extensively studied the different instances of enunciation, making it clear that the author of a literary text is not the enunciator of it. This article intends to show that each one of them belongs to a distinctive level: those of the communicative situation and the enunciative situation. This article intends to show the space-time axis related to the situations mentioned above. This would allow the researcher to find the mechanisms of power that lie behind the authorization or discredit of a speech. By doing so, we intend to extend the analysis of the literary work, including the context of creation of the literary text. We would like to focus our attention on three aspects related to the enunciator: topoiesis of the communicative situation, topoiesis of the enunciative frame, and topoiesis of the writing individual.     

From Contention to Co‐governance: The Case of the Right to Inhabit Movement in Rome (2000–2013)

Based on interviews with activists and local government officials and on secondary data, this paper analyzes the development and effects of the Roman Right to Inhabit Movement (RIM) from its origins till 2014. The first section describes the origins and characteristics of the new housing question in Rome. The second presents a brief genealogy of the RIM, paying special attention to how it has framed the housing question. The third describes the activities of the RIM by focusing on its interplay with the city politics and administration and the resulting changes in the housing policy of the city of Rome. The fourth section analyzes the modes of state regulation and of political articulation of the housing question that these transformations have brought about. The final section argues that these emerging arrangements are a significant example of how new forms of social protection are being created by urban movements after the neoliberal erosion of the welfare mechanisms.     

Un-Disciplining Archaeology

We can think of a kind of archaeological colonialism in terms of the exportation of metropolitan theories and/or methodologies to peripheral countries/regions, or in the way metropolitan academic institutions/archaeologists conduct archaeology in peripheral countries/regions. But even if we manage to stop those kinds of colonial bonds, archaeology would remain being an imperial weapon. And, moreover, it can be said that colonialism is not dependant on the overseas provenance of archaeologies and/or theories. Beyond theoretical and methodological variability, it is archaeology itself what happens to recapitulate colonialist relationships; and this seems to happen even when archaeology is openly and deliberately oriented towards indigenous peoples?? empowerment, social justice, and peace. It seems that theoretical and methodological paradigms and political intentions operate at a surface level, while colonialism is equipped with stronger streams operating below the floor where archaeologists stand. What is there below our feet, making us move in one direction even when we walk in the other? Neither being the theories, neither the methods, nor the political intentions and nationality, what is that hidden force that govern the sense of archaeology in the contemporary post-colonial world? My argument is that the hidden force it is not hidden at all, but remains unseen because it is too obvious. The disciplinary framework of archaeology itself -that is, its basic subject matter and method??beyond the theoretical and methodological paradigms and the political orientation in which we aim to proceed, or our nationality or whatever, recapitulates coloniality. Without implying that theoretical and methodological debate within archaeological discipline is in vain, I dedicate this piece to write not within, but about the discipline. In short, this will include talking about disciplining, its recapitulation in post-disciplinary contexts, and the implied proposal of un-disciplining archaeology.     

The three spheres. A theoretical model of mass nationalisation: the case of Spain

This article sets out a theoretical model of the processes of mass nationalisation. The paper is divided into three sections. The first part shows nationalisation as a process of identity transmission that includes messages (national narratives), channels (national agencies) and recipients (national individuals). The second section analyses the processes of identity transmission into three spheres of nationalisation: the official public sphere, the non‐official public sphere and the private sphere. The last part looks at the process of mass nationalisation from below and reflects on the mechanisms of individual acquisition and reproduction of national identities on a daily basis. The general model of nationalisation presented here is developed in a deductive way and is applicable to a number of countries all over the world. In this article, I illustrate the general model by giving examples of mass nationalisations in Spain over the last two centuries.