Pablo Pérez Ruiz | University of California, Berkeley (original) (raw)
Papers by Pablo Pérez Ruiz
Nations," wrote Ernest Renan in 1882, "are not eternal. They have a beginning and they will have ... more Nations," wrote Ernest Renan in 1882, "are not eternal. They have a beginning and they will have an end. A European confederation will probably replace them" (11).
We were slaves of the English, now we will be slaves of the educated Indians-or Pakistanis," says... more We were slaves of the English, now we will be slaves of the educated Indians-or Pakistanis," says a character in Train to Pakistan (48). Write a 4-5-page paper assessing the validity of the following claim according to Singh, Fanon, and Hobson: liberty is only possible in a nation-state. Do these three books (or characters in the case of Singh) have similar national agendas? What is their attitude toward empire? [Note: For the purpose of this paper, liberty and freedom are used interchangeably.] If empires deprive their subjects from liberty, in the metropole by draining the resources of the nation (Hobson), and in the colony through violence, compartmentalization, and dehumanization (Fanon), is liberty only possible in a nation-state? While Hobson and Fanon would respond positively based on their Herderian view of 'genuine' (popular) nationalism (versus artificial or imposed nationalism), Singh is critical of the plausibility of this 'genuinesses' based on his experience in India. Hobson and Fanon overlap in their criticisms of empire, while Singh is more concerned about historical continuities before and after independence and the importance of the rule of law in preventing violence. Their ideas are ultimately connected to their positionality: Hobson writes as an anti-imperialist nationalist in the metropole, and follows the tradition of political economy before it formally split into politics and economics. Fanon and Singh write from the perspective of the colonies: the former develops an all-encompassing analysis that resonates with Hobson in its Marxist undertones, while the latter creates a fictionalized version of the particular as a way of contesting universal theories and highlighting the problems faced by new postcolonial states. Writing from the colonies right after independence or during the fight for freedom, both Fanon and Singh are aware of the perils of neocolonialism after independence, but the former believes in the possibility of awakening the consciousness of the masses, while the latter sees the limitations and dangers of these awakenings. Ultimately, while Fanon sees the political struggle for independence informing national culture, Singh follows the more traditional understanding that already-existing culture (ie. religious affiliation) impacts politics, potentially with disastrous effects.
This essay intends to provide a political-economy grounded analysis of the ideas of soft power in... more This essay intends to provide a political-economy grounded analysis of the ideas of soft power in the context of US foreign policy. It argues that Nye's theory of soft power amounts to little more than the latest update of cultural imperialism, and uses a critical theory lense to examine the political and economic basis of cultural imperialism as expressed in soft power theories. After introducing Nye's notion of soft power and Adorno and Horkheimer's analysis of the culture industries, this essay examines how the latter can serve as a criticism for the former, while being aware of its limitations. Despite often being dismissed as obsolete, Adorno and Horkheimer's analysis productively serves to better understand the workings of soft power theories. If we add to this a nuanced understanding of empire such as that independently provided by Samir Amin and Victoria de Grazia, the concept of soft power is cast in a new critical light which does not dismiss soft power as mere imperial propaganda but reflects on what is lost through its imposition, looking at examples in places such as Nigeria and South Africa. Although arguing that the alternative to unidirectional soft power is cultural reciprocity and humility, this essay is also wary of the recent developments within the infotainment industries, which may signal the advent of a new global economic cycle.
Gillo Pontecorvo's 1966 The Battle of Algiers (BoA) represented, both in content and in filming s... more Gillo Pontecorvo's 1966 The Battle of Algiers (BoA) represented, both in content and in filming style, a new kind of warfare, what Colonel Mathieu in the film calls 'revolutionary warfare.' For late colonial powers, this modern warfare required a new counterinsurgency: one that blended traditional, coercive colonial sovereignty with less visible, more permeating power. This essay is a conversation between Foucault's theory of disciplinary power and the realities shown in The Battle of Algiers. While Foucault's theory helps illuminate how power worked in the colonial world depicted in the film, The Battle of Algiers complicates Foucault's division between pre-modern sovereign and modern disciplinary power, showing their interdependence in late colonial contexts. In the anti-colonial quest for independence, disciplinary power is about sovereignty above all else. The relational and fragile nature of power ends up favouring those who are best able to use it productively, not as master puppeteers but as cunning strategists. Although the film shows the French victory over sovereign power in Algiers-for a short while, at least-the FLN is successful in creating a new Algerian 'subject' that sees him/herself as incompatible with the colonial administration, and thus carries 'the forces of history' with him/herself. The second scene of BoA, in which an Algerian prisoner is guillotined in full view of other prisoners (figure 1), initially seems reminiscent of the old public executions, discussed by Foucault in the first pages of Discipline and Punish (1977:3-13). The beheading represents a clear and visible demonstration of the French power to withdraw the right to take life, the main characteristic of sovereign power (Foucault 1984a:258). And, in fact, the film extensively portrays French colonial sovereign power in the form of the always-visible policemen with the right to stop-and-search, regular raids, torture, and bombings in the Kasbah. However, the film seems to regard this blatant, extremely violent, sovereign power as old-fashioned and ethically repulsive. As Eisenman (2007:104) argues, the first scene, in which an
Western 'civilizing missions' and 'human rights', c.1885-1960: a study of difference, violence, a... more Western 'civilizing missions' and 'human rights', c.1885-1960: a study of difference, violence, and universalism " The task of the administrative officer is to clothe his principles in the garb of evolution, not of revolution " Frederick D. Lugard " Emptiness as a defence for oppression has never made a great subject for literature " Ngugi Wa Thiong'o In an era in which human rights have become the 'doxa of our time' or the 'last utopia,' historicizing human rights has become a necessary task to understand both their contingency and their multiple and often contradictory sources. To contribute towards this aim, the present essay examines the evolution of civilizing missions from the late nineteenth century to the 1960s as one of the many forces behind human rights. It argues that both have in common the search for moral legitimacy for a certain (Western) worldview through the use of difference, universalism and violence, a search ridden by unexpected 'boomerang effects.' The intention is not to create a presentist teleology of Western political hypocrisy or to concede ownership of human rights to Europe 'only to be subjected to ironic dismissal for their association with European imperialism,'1 but rather to explore the relationship of apparent 'competing universalisms' and to question the 'historical axiom' that the United Nations appeared from out of nowhere after the Second World War.2 Looking at the normative aspect of the European 'civilizing mission,' this essay will trace the evolution of the 'civilizing mission' from the 1885 Berlin Conference up to the setting up of the United Nations and its Declaration of Human Rights, passing through the League of Nations' mandate system as an attempt to internationalize colonial sovereignty. The aim is to show how aspects such as colonial conquest and control and the colonial legal system underlined the rights discourse, not as sole contributors but as often ignored ones.
If globalisation is seen as a process of neoliberal 'global restructuring' in which 'masculinity... more If globalisation is seen as a process of neoliberal 'global restructuring' in which 'masculinity'-fueled, growth-oriented market fundamentalism leads to privatisation and the 'feminisation' of labor and migration, it would be difficult not to acknowledge the harmful impacts that it has had on women, especially on those living in the 'Two-Thirds World.' Assessing the impact of neoliberal globalisation on women requires seeing gender as both an empirical category, meaning women in this particular case, and an analytical category 'that constitutes a governing code' (Peterson 2009:37). After defining neoliberal globalisation and questioning 'women' as a monolithic category, this essay takes a feminist GPE approach and draws on Mohanty's (2003) post-colonial and trans-national analysis to examine the gendered nature of global restructuring and its impact on gendered norms and bodies, the 'differences' and intersectional aspects of globalisation, and the 'micro-politics of subjectivity and struggle.' Recognising that the effects of globalisation are 'often contradictory and rife with tensions' (Beneria 2003:164), and that truly giving agency to women requires more complex roles than the victim/heroine dichotomy allows for, this essay is wary of simplistic narratives of globalisation such as 'some jobs are better than no jobs,' rather questioning the deeper structures of global neoliberalism and feminization. This essay thus sees the current phase of globalization and neoliberal capitalism as inextricably linked, although it does not deny the future existence of other, more equitable and feminist globalisations in light of the 'crisis of masculinity' posed by the 2008 financial crisis.
Despite having received general praise from IR scholars, Hudson and Boer's A Surplus of Men, a ... more Despite having received general praise from IR scholars, Hudson and Boer's A Surplus of Men, a Deficit of Peace approach to gender as a variable is a highly controversial strategy which falls within a questionable positivist epistemology that reinforces gender stereotypes. Although the 'gender as a variable' approach has the benefit of explaining actions in the 'real' world, Hudson and Boer's take on gender ignores socially learned behaviours and misses the constructed nature of gender.
Direct Action stands out for being the first ethnography that studies the global justice movem... more Direct Action stands out for being the first ethnography that studies the global justice movement. Being an activist and an academic at the same time, his ethnography summarises his experience with activism in different anarchist, direct action groups in the New York scene, such as YaBasta! or the Direct Action Network (DAN NYC).
The question of whether the purposes of feminism could devalue its credit as history not only ass... more The question of whether the purposes of feminism could devalue its credit as history not only assumes that feminism has a single, clearly defined set of 'purposes', but is also blind to the relationship between power and the production of all (academic) knowledge. The mere formulation of the question shows some of feminism's failures in changing the mainstream academic discourse. Moreover, the question distils an Anglo-centrism that emanates from the legacy of the Women's Liberation Movement, which for some time saw feminism as having a clear set of 'purposes' based on a bounded and restricted definition of 'woman' and a one-sided view of gender. Problematizing feminism's 'purposes' requires a consideration of recent debates in feminist history, such as the question of 'sameness' and 'difference' and the relationship between feminism and postmodernism, between women's history and gender history. These debates show how finding a common set of purposes has been one of the main challenges for feminism. If feminist history is seen as an international discourse with multiple feminist positions within theory, pinning down the 'purposes' of feminism becomes even more problematic, but comparative approaches such as Mohanty's can lead to valuable histories. As Scott eloquently stated, feminism is not just a 'set of prescriptions' but a 'critical stance'. 1 If feminism is seen as an exercise of critique as well as the writing of women's histories, its credit as history would be central rather than marginal. But can there be any centre when the notion of 'disciplinarity' has been one of the main criticisms stemming from women's studies? And if there is a centre, what are the risks of accommodating within the establishment, of looking for ways to legitimise the feminist discourse within mainstream academia? It is then that the possible clash between feminism and history becomes more nuanced: if feminism represents 'subversion' and history the 'establishment', can they ever be accommodated? Going beyond dichotomous definitions, to the extent that history can be separated from the institutions in which it is produced, there is space for feminism to have credit as history, regardless of its 'purposes'.
![Research paper thumbnail of Compare and contrast immigration policies in two or more countries. Which factors explain the variations? [UK & Germany]](https://attachments.academia-assets.com/39412303/thumbnails/1.jpg)
](Comparative Politics in a Globalized World 2015
International Cooperation in Europe and Beyond 2014-2015
Nations," wrote Ernest Renan in 1882, "are not eternal. They have a beginning and they will have ... more Nations," wrote Ernest Renan in 1882, "are not eternal. They have a beginning and they will have an end. A European confederation will probably replace them" (11).
We were slaves of the English, now we will be slaves of the educated Indians-or Pakistanis," says... more We were slaves of the English, now we will be slaves of the educated Indians-or Pakistanis," says a character in Train to Pakistan (48). Write a 4-5-page paper assessing the validity of the following claim according to Singh, Fanon, and Hobson: liberty is only possible in a nation-state. Do these three books (or characters in the case of Singh) have similar national agendas? What is their attitude toward empire? [Note: For the purpose of this paper, liberty and freedom are used interchangeably.] If empires deprive their subjects from liberty, in the metropole by draining the resources of the nation (Hobson), and in the colony through violence, compartmentalization, and dehumanization (Fanon), is liberty only possible in a nation-state? While Hobson and Fanon would respond positively based on their Herderian view of 'genuine' (popular) nationalism (versus artificial or imposed nationalism), Singh is critical of the plausibility of this 'genuinesses' based on his experience in India. Hobson and Fanon overlap in their criticisms of empire, while Singh is more concerned about historical continuities before and after independence and the importance of the rule of law in preventing violence. Their ideas are ultimately connected to their positionality: Hobson writes as an anti-imperialist nationalist in the metropole, and follows the tradition of political economy before it formally split into politics and economics. Fanon and Singh write from the perspective of the colonies: the former develops an all-encompassing analysis that resonates with Hobson in its Marxist undertones, while the latter creates a fictionalized version of the particular as a way of contesting universal theories and highlighting the problems faced by new postcolonial states. Writing from the colonies right after independence or during the fight for freedom, both Fanon and Singh are aware of the perils of neocolonialism after independence, but the former believes in the possibility of awakening the consciousness of the masses, while the latter sees the limitations and dangers of these awakenings. Ultimately, while Fanon sees the political struggle for independence informing national culture, Singh follows the more traditional understanding that already-existing culture (ie. religious affiliation) impacts politics, potentially with disastrous effects.
This essay intends to provide a political-economy grounded analysis of the ideas of soft power in... more This essay intends to provide a political-economy grounded analysis of the ideas of soft power in the context of US foreign policy. It argues that Nye's theory of soft power amounts to little more than the latest update of cultural imperialism, and uses a critical theory lense to examine the political and economic basis of cultural imperialism as expressed in soft power theories. After introducing Nye's notion of soft power and Adorno and Horkheimer's analysis of the culture industries, this essay examines how the latter can serve as a criticism for the former, while being aware of its limitations. Despite often being dismissed as obsolete, Adorno and Horkheimer's analysis productively serves to better understand the workings of soft power theories. If we add to this a nuanced understanding of empire such as that independently provided by Samir Amin and Victoria de Grazia, the concept of soft power is cast in a new critical light which does not dismiss soft power as mere imperial propaganda but reflects on what is lost through its imposition, looking at examples in places such as Nigeria and South Africa. Although arguing that the alternative to unidirectional soft power is cultural reciprocity and humility, this essay is also wary of the recent developments within the infotainment industries, which may signal the advent of a new global economic cycle.
Gillo Pontecorvo's 1966 The Battle of Algiers (BoA) represented, both in content and in filming s... more Gillo Pontecorvo's 1966 The Battle of Algiers (BoA) represented, both in content and in filming style, a new kind of warfare, what Colonel Mathieu in the film calls 'revolutionary warfare.' For late colonial powers, this modern warfare required a new counterinsurgency: one that blended traditional, coercive colonial sovereignty with less visible, more permeating power. This essay is a conversation between Foucault's theory of disciplinary power and the realities shown in The Battle of Algiers. While Foucault's theory helps illuminate how power worked in the colonial world depicted in the film, The Battle of Algiers complicates Foucault's division between pre-modern sovereign and modern disciplinary power, showing their interdependence in late colonial contexts. In the anti-colonial quest for independence, disciplinary power is about sovereignty above all else. The relational and fragile nature of power ends up favouring those who are best able to use it productively, not as master puppeteers but as cunning strategists. Although the film shows the French victory over sovereign power in Algiers-for a short while, at least-the FLN is successful in creating a new Algerian 'subject' that sees him/herself as incompatible with the colonial administration, and thus carries 'the forces of history' with him/herself. The second scene of BoA, in which an Algerian prisoner is guillotined in full view of other prisoners (figure 1), initially seems reminiscent of the old public executions, discussed by Foucault in the first pages of Discipline and Punish (1977:3-13). The beheading represents a clear and visible demonstration of the French power to withdraw the right to take life, the main characteristic of sovereign power (Foucault 1984a:258). And, in fact, the film extensively portrays French colonial sovereign power in the form of the always-visible policemen with the right to stop-and-search, regular raids, torture, and bombings in the Kasbah. However, the film seems to regard this blatant, extremely violent, sovereign power as old-fashioned and ethically repulsive. As Eisenman (2007:104) argues, the first scene, in which an
Western 'civilizing missions' and 'human rights', c.1885-1960: a study of difference, violence, a... more Western 'civilizing missions' and 'human rights', c.1885-1960: a study of difference, violence, and universalism " The task of the administrative officer is to clothe his principles in the garb of evolution, not of revolution " Frederick D. Lugard " Emptiness as a defence for oppression has never made a great subject for literature " Ngugi Wa Thiong'o In an era in which human rights have become the 'doxa of our time' or the 'last utopia,' historicizing human rights has become a necessary task to understand both their contingency and their multiple and often contradictory sources. To contribute towards this aim, the present essay examines the evolution of civilizing missions from the late nineteenth century to the 1960s as one of the many forces behind human rights. It argues that both have in common the search for moral legitimacy for a certain (Western) worldview through the use of difference, universalism and violence, a search ridden by unexpected 'boomerang effects.' The intention is not to create a presentist teleology of Western political hypocrisy or to concede ownership of human rights to Europe 'only to be subjected to ironic dismissal for their association with European imperialism,'1 but rather to explore the relationship of apparent 'competing universalisms' and to question the 'historical axiom' that the United Nations appeared from out of nowhere after the Second World War.2 Looking at the normative aspect of the European 'civilizing mission,' this essay will trace the evolution of the 'civilizing mission' from the 1885 Berlin Conference up to the setting up of the United Nations and its Declaration of Human Rights, passing through the League of Nations' mandate system as an attempt to internationalize colonial sovereignty. The aim is to show how aspects such as colonial conquest and control and the colonial legal system underlined the rights discourse, not as sole contributors but as often ignored ones.
If globalisation is seen as a process of neoliberal 'global restructuring' in which 'masculinity... more If globalisation is seen as a process of neoliberal 'global restructuring' in which 'masculinity'-fueled, growth-oriented market fundamentalism leads to privatisation and the 'feminisation' of labor and migration, it would be difficult not to acknowledge the harmful impacts that it has had on women, especially on those living in the 'Two-Thirds World.' Assessing the impact of neoliberal globalisation on women requires seeing gender as both an empirical category, meaning women in this particular case, and an analytical category 'that constitutes a governing code' (Peterson 2009:37). After defining neoliberal globalisation and questioning 'women' as a monolithic category, this essay takes a feminist GPE approach and draws on Mohanty's (2003) post-colonial and trans-national analysis to examine the gendered nature of global restructuring and its impact on gendered norms and bodies, the 'differences' and intersectional aspects of globalisation, and the 'micro-politics of subjectivity and struggle.' Recognising that the effects of globalisation are 'often contradictory and rife with tensions' (Beneria 2003:164), and that truly giving agency to women requires more complex roles than the victim/heroine dichotomy allows for, this essay is wary of simplistic narratives of globalisation such as 'some jobs are better than no jobs,' rather questioning the deeper structures of global neoliberalism and feminization. This essay thus sees the current phase of globalization and neoliberal capitalism as inextricably linked, although it does not deny the future existence of other, more equitable and feminist globalisations in light of the 'crisis of masculinity' posed by the 2008 financial crisis.
Despite having received general praise from IR scholars, Hudson and Boer's A Surplus of Men, a ... more Despite having received general praise from IR scholars, Hudson and Boer's A Surplus of Men, a Deficit of Peace approach to gender as a variable is a highly controversial strategy which falls within a questionable positivist epistemology that reinforces gender stereotypes. Although the 'gender as a variable' approach has the benefit of explaining actions in the 'real' world, Hudson and Boer's take on gender ignores socially learned behaviours and misses the constructed nature of gender.
Direct Action stands out for being the first ethnography that studies the global justice movem... more Direct Action stands out for being the first ethnography that studies the global justice movement. Being an activist and an academic at the same time, his ethnography summarises his experience with activism in different anarchist, direct action groups in the New York scene, such as YaBasta! or the Direct Action Network (DAN NYC).
The question of whether the purposes of feminism could devalue its credit as history not only ass... more The question of whether the purposes of feminism could devalue its credit as history not only assumes that feminism has a single, clearly defined set of 'purposes', but is also blind to the relationship between power and the production of all (academic) knowledge. The mere formulation of the question shows some of feminism's failures in changing the mainstream academic discourse. Moreover, the question distils an Anglo-centrism that emanates from the legacy of the Women's Liberation Movement, which for some time saw feminism as having a clear set of 'purposes' based on a bounded and restricted definition of 'woman' and a one-sided view of gender. Problematizing feminism's 'purposes' requires a consideration of recent debates in feminist history, such as the question of 'sameness' and 'difference' and the relationship between feminism and postmodernism, between women's history and gender history. These debates show how finding a common set of purposes has been one of the main challenges for feminism. If feminist history is seen as an international discourse with multiple feminist positions within theory, pinning down the 'purposes' of feminism becomes even more problematic, but comparative approaches such as Mohanty's can lead to valuable histories. As Scott eloquently stated, feminism is not just a 'set of prescriptions' but a 'critical stance'. 1 If feminism is seen as an exercise of critique as well as the writing of women's histories, its credit as history would be central rather than marginal. But can there be any centre when the notion of 'disciplinarity' has been one of the main criticisms stemming from women's studies? And if there is a centre, what are the risks of accommodating within the establishment, of looking for ways to legitimise the feminist discourse within mainstream academia? It is then that the possible clash between feminism and history becomes more nuanced: if feminism represents 'subversion' and history the 'establishment', can they ever be accommodated? Going beyond dichotomous definitions, to the extent that history can be separated from the institutions in which it is produced, there is space for feminism to have credit as history, regardless of its 'purposes'.
Comparative Politics in a Globalized World 2015
International Cooperation in Europe and Beyond 2014-2015