7/28/2019 1990 Introduction Speaking the Language of Exile Dissident Thought in International Studies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1990-introduction-speaking-the-language-of-exile-dissident-thought-in 1/11

Introduction: Speaking the Language of Exile: Dissident Thought in International StudiesAuthor(s): Richard K. Ashley and R. B. J. WalkerSource: International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 3, Special Issue: Speaking the Language ofExile: Dissidence in International Studies (Sep., 1990), pp. 259-268Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The International Studies AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2600569 .

Accessed: 19/01/2011 10:58

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black . .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of 

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

 Blackwell Publishing and The International Studies Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,

preserve and extend access to International Studies Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

7/28/2019 1990 Introduction Speaking the Language of Exile Dissident Thought in International Studies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1990-introduction-speaking-the-language-of-exile-dissident-thought-in 2/11

InternationaltudiesQuarterly1990) 34, 259-268

INTRODUCTIONSpeakingtheLanguage of Exile: Dissident

Thought in International tudies

RICHARD K. ASHLEY

Arizona StateUniversity

R. B. J.WALKER

Universityf Victoria

You will have understood that I am speaking the language of exile. Thislanguage ofthe exile muffles cry, t doesn'tever shout . . Our present ge isone of exile. How can we avoid sinking nto themireofcommonsense, fnotbybecominga stranger oone's owncountry,anguage, sex and identity?Writingsimpossiblewithout ome kind of exile.

Exile is already n itself form fdissidence,ince t nvolvesuprootingoneselffrom family, country r a language. More importantly,t s an irreligious ctthatcuts all ties, for religion is nothing more than membershipof a real or

symbolic ommunitywhichmayor may not be transcendental, utwhich lwaysconstitutes link, homology, n understanding. he exile cuts all links, nclud-ing those that bind him to the belief thatthe thingcalled life has A Meaningguaranteed by the dead father. For if meaning exists in a state of exile, itnevertheless indsno incarnation, nd is ceaselesslyproduced and destroyed ngeographical and discursive ormations. xile is a wayofsurvivingntheface ofthe deadfather, f gamblingwithdeath, which s the meaningof life,of stub-bornlyrefusing o give in to the law of death . . .

This ruthless and irreverentdismantling of the workings of discourse,thought, nd existence s . . . the work of a dissident. uch dissidencerequiresceaseless analysis, vigilance and will to subversion, nd thereforenecessarilyenters into complicitywithother dissidentpractices n the modern Western

world.For truedissidence today s perhaps simplywhat t has alwaysbeen: thought.

JuliaKristeva"A New Type of Intellectual:The Dissident"

It is no longer possibleto think n our dayother than n the void leftbyman'sdisappearance. For thisvoid does not create a deficiency;tdoes notconstitutelacuna thatmust be filled. t is nothingmore,and nothing ess,thanthe unfold-ingof a space in which t is once more possibleto think.

Michel FoucaultThe Order f Things

Guestditors' ote:We owe nenormous ebt othe killsnd abors fDeborah ohnston,howorked ithoutcompensations editorial ssociatentheproductionf this pecial ssue.Hertalents-especiallyer nsistent,theoreticallynformeduestioning-have rovennvaluablehroughoutllaspects f this ssue. n addition, emustxpressurgratitudeoHayward .Alker, r. ndCraigMurphy ho erved s refereesnd commentatorsupon he rticlesollected ere nd whose ainstaking,ritical,nd constructiveommentsave ent onsiderablyto theproject.

?) 1990 nternationaltudiesAssociation

7/28/2019 1990 Introduction Speaking the Language of Exile Dissident Thought in International Studies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1990-introduction-speaking-the-language-of-exile-dissident-thought-in 3/11

260 Speaking he anguageofExile

Think, fyou will,of all of those familiar imes nd places in modern ife wheregenres blur,narratives f knowing nd doing intersectn mutually estabilizingways, ontingencyhreatens o displace necessity,he very dentity f the subject sput in doubt, and human beings ive and toil as exiles,deprived of any absoluteterritoryfbeingto call home. Think, n particular,fthe marginal nstances f:

theworkingmotherwho mustdailypassback and forth cross hemutuallyntrud-ing,never tablefrontiersfcareer-lifend home-life-each with tsown distinc-tive,historicallylaboratednarratives f truth ndmeaning nd eachwith tsowngender-markedmplications orwhat the normalsubjectwillnaturally o andthereforeffortlesslye;

thedraft-age outhwhose dentitys simultaneouslylaimed nnationalnarrativesf"national ecurity" nd the universalizingarrativesfthe "rights fman";

thedisemployed aborerwhoseplacein life spotentiallyrossedbyboth the narra-tives f"classstruggle," hichmightnscribe orheran identitynopposition o

an internationalourgeoisie, nd the narrativesf"national ompetition," hichmight nscribe orheran identityn opposition othe workers fothernations;

the womanwhose verywomb s claimedby the rresolvablyontesting arrativesf"church," paternity,"economy," nd "liberalpolity";

the alien worker,whosemovementwithin national erritorys constrained yanationalnarrative f"law,"but who at the same time s deprived fmanyofthepowers nd protections ttending narrativef"citizenship";

thenewspaper ditorwhomustput himselfnthe placeof "thereader" norder todecidewhat hallcount s domestic ews, nternationalews, nvironmentalews,economics, ports, ashion, rnon-news,utwho,upon encounteringn ambigu-ous report, inds hat he cannot come to restwith singlecategory ecause heimaginesmultiple eaders ndmultiple arrativesnwhich hereport indsmean-ing;

the Chinese businessmann Malaysiawhomustbear witness oMalaynarrativesnwhichhe and other Chineseare described s "stingy"nd "materialistic"venashe must ncouragehis children o learn "BahasaMelayu" officially,Bahasa Ma-laysia"), he anguage nwhich hebusiness fthe tate s conducted ndthe nsultsare spoken;

thepeace activistorwhom fearsome arrativef a future niversal endoftime"calls nto uestion nationalistic"arrativesf tate urvival,utforwhom, lso,thelatternarratives ontinuepowerfullyodisplacea narrativef"universal eace";

theSantiagoor Los Angelesbarrio-dwellerho findshimself midst he narrativesofa "market"hatfails o includehim, he narratives f"honor"within culturenowdisplaced,the narratives f "education"thatpromiseto rectifynd uplifthim, nd thenarrativesf "law and order"that hreateno renderhima criminalobjectofpolicecudgelsshould educationfail;

the participantn the environmentalr culturalmovementwho subscribes o anarrativefthe nescapable interconnectedness"fdispersedocales butwho,atthe ametime,would resist narrativef "rationalization"hat nticipates neces-saryprogress oward universal nd uniform rder;and

thecontemporaryWestern tatesmanwho, upon witnessingll those eventscon-notedbythecollapse of theBerlinWall, greets his realization f his long ex-

pressed fondest reams"as a "nightmare"n which heWest'svery dentityndpurposeis suddenlyput in doubtand the Western tate s at a loss to find nystable, lreadydomesticated ource ofauthorityorepresent.

Thesemarginal ites renodoubtvery ifferent,utbeyondnoticing hat hey reproliferatingn modern global life today,we can say thattheyhave at least fourthingsn common.First, hese sitesare intrinsicallymbiguous. n none of these

7/28/2019 1990 Introduction Speaking the Language of Exile Dissident Thought in International Studies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1990-introduction-speaking-the-language-of-exile-dissident-thought-in 4/11

RICHARD K. ASHLEY AND R. B.J.WALKER 261

instances an one refer o a time nd placesharply ounded, a homogeneous erri-tory n which ategories re fixed, alues restable, nd common ense meanings resure. n none of these ites s there unique and ultimateovereign dentity-be tthe identity f the individualor the institutionaltructures f a socialwhole orcommunity-towhich ne can appeal infixingmeanings nd interpretingonduct.Here thewords I" and "we" have no certain eferent. ere, exiled from hecertaintruths f everymodernnarrative f ife, ne can never onfidentlynvoke n "every-bodywho knows"because one can neverbe sure ustwhothis everybody"s.As aresult, ne cannot peak as an economistmight f rational ndividualswhose denti-tiesare givenand who, n order to find heirwayand give meaning o their ives,need onlydeploytheir vailablemeans toservetheir elf-generatednterests nderexternal onstraints. ne cannot peakas a moralphilosophermight ftheresponsi-ble human beingwhohas a duty ogroundhisconduct n the transcendent rinci-ples of an ethical ommunity. nd one cannot peakas a sociologistmight fsocialactorswho habitually eplicate n eternalyesterday, easure heir ractices yrefer-ence to a recognizednorm, r project ocialvaluesalready nscribedn a coherentorder.

Second, tfollows hat hesemarginal imes nd placesare sites fstruggle, herepower s conspicuously twork.They are deterritorializediteswherepeople con-front nd mustknow how to resist diversityf representational ractices hatwouldtraverse hem, laim their ime, ontrol heir pace and their odies, mposelimitationsn whatcan be said and done,and decide their eing.This isnot tosaythat people here oppose some personifiedctorwho,as external enemynumberone," administers oweroverthem. ince thedifferencesetween nside ndoutsideare here uncertain, one can be clearly efined.This is also not to saythatpeople

here resist ower n the nameofthe ifeand freedom fsome sovereign dentity,some communityf truth, ome absoluteand identical ourceof meaningthat svictimizednd repressed by power. In thesesites, gain, identitys neversure,communitys alwaysuncertain,meaning s always n doubt.Instead, people hereconfrontrbitrary ulturalpractices hatworktodiscipline mbiguitynd imposeeffects f identitynd meaningby erecting xclusionaryoundariesthat eparatethe naturaland necessarydomicileof certainbeingfromthe contingenciesndchanceevents hatthe selfmustknow as problems, ifficulties,nd dangersto beexteriorized ndbrought ndercontrol.Here, notherwords, ower s notnegativeand repressive ut positive nd productive. ractices f powerdo not denytheautonomyfsubjects lreadypresent omuch s theywork o mpose ndfixways f

knowingnddoingthat hallbe recognized s natural ndnecessaryoautonomousbeing.Theywork oproduceeffectsfpresence, f dentity,f a territorialroundand origin fmeaning.And theyworkbydiscriminantlyeading nd representingambiguous ircumstanceso mposedifferencesetween hatwhichmaybe countedas thecertaintyfpresence nd thatwhichmustbe regarded s theabsencebeyondits bounds.

Third,thesemarginal ites husresistknowingnthe sense celebratednmodernculture,where to "know" s to construct coherentrepresentationhat excludescontestingnterpretationsnd controlsmeaning rom hestandpointf a sovereignsubjectwhoseword s theorigin f truth eyonddoubt. n modern ulture,t s themale-marked igure f"man"-reasoningmanwho s athome and at onewith he

publicdiscourse f "reasonablehumanity"-who s understood obe thesovereignsubject fknowledge. t isthefigure f "man"who sunderstood o be theorigin flanguage,thecondition f all knowledge, he makerofhistory,nd thesource oftruth nd meaning n the world.And althoughnmoderndiscourse hisfigure fsovereignman" s understood o existnoppositiono an ambiguous ndindetermi-nate history hat here and now limitshim, escapes his mastery,nd eludes the

7/28/2019 1990 Introduction Speaking the Language of Exile Dissident Thought in International Studies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1990-introduction-speaking-the-language-of-exile-dissident-thought-in 5/11

262 Speaking he anguage ofExile

penetrationf histhought,modern discoursenonetheless nvests n thisfigure f"man" the promiseof transcendence: hroughreason,man maysubdue history,quietalluncertainty,larifyll ambiguity,nd achieve otalknowledge, otal uton-omy, nd totalpower.This is the promise mplicitnevery laimofmodern knowl-edge"-a claim lways ttered s ifby "man" and inthename of "man."This, too, sthepromise hat he disciplinesf modern ocial ciencemake-a promise f knowl-edge and poweron behalfof a universal overeign igure f "man" whose voiceadisciplinewouldspeak.Andthis, s ithappens, s the samepromise hat egitimatestheviolence f themodern tate-the promise,nscribedn a compactwith man," osecure nddefendthe "domesticated"ime nd spaceofreasoningman" nopposi-tion o therecalcitrantnddangerousforces fhistoryhat esist he way f "man's"reason.

Yet it s characteristicf the marginal itesustconsidered hat hey esist nowingin this ense and, n doingso, putjustthispromisendoubt.Theyresist hismodern

form fknowing ecausehere, nthese ocal times nd places, hefigure f"man" sanything ut an indubitablepresencewhosevoice can be simply poken in therepresentationf people's circumstances,ntentions,nd conduct.Any figure f"man" whose sovereign ight o speaktruthmightherebe asserted s immediatelyrecognized s one among many rbitrarynterpretations;t s seen as a knowledge-able practiceof power, tself rbitrarilyonstructed,hat s put to work to tameambiguities,ontrolmeaning, nd imposelimitationsn whatpeople can do andsay.

Accordingly,rom hevarious central" tandpointsf modern ulture hatwouldspeakthesovereign oice of "man," the variousmarginal ones of life can be castonlynegatively,s a fearsomemoment fabjection. o theextent hat hey esist he

imposition f some coherent man-centered" arrative, hese sites can be under-stoodonlyto signalan entropicmoment, moment hatescapes "man's"rationalcontrol, moment hatspellsthe death of "man." They can be regarded only asmoments hat he modernpersonmust ndlessly eferorpromise o mastern thename of a life, truth,n identityn itself.Uncertainty,ndeterminancy,arkness,disorder, urbulance,rrationality,ngovernability,error, nd anarchy-thesearewords thatmoderndiscourseuses to mark offthesemarginalplaces and times.These words demarcatemarginalplacesand times s voids of truth nd meaningthatmustbe feared, xiled, nd, fthey ersist, isciplined ytheviolentmpositionofthe certain oicesoftruth hey ack.

Fourth,while hesevariousmarginal imes nd places defy hecontrol f modern

forms fknowledge-while theydefy tablerepresentationrom hestandpoint fone or anotherunique figurationfsovereignman" it mustnot be thought hatthey anbe known nly hus, s "voids"yet obe brought ndercontrol f"man's"reason. Whenone allows hat hesedeterritorializedones aremultiplyingo that tcan be saidthat ourpresent ge is one ofexile," t makes ense to isten o the exileswho ive and move nthesecontestedmarginal ones,respectinghe dissident rac-tices hey ndertake.Andwhenone listensnthisway, tbecomesplainthat hese reproliferatingimes nd placeswhereexciting hings f uncertain onsequencearehappening n global political ife. To be sure,the exiles might peak in waveringtimbre. fter ll,these resiteswhere hediscipliningmetaphysicalaiths fmodernculture re put ndoubt,constructsfsovereignman" cannotbe made practically

effective,nd putativelybjective oundaries f conduct uthorized rom overeignperspectives re seen not onlyto be arbitraryut also to produce a scarcity fresourcesbywhichpeople might truggle o make lifepossible. People here aredisposed to questionidentitys much as theyare inclinedto be dubious of alluniversalnarrativesnd transcendentalnds. If voices are here heard to flutter,hesitate,nd showdoubt,however, hewaveringannotbe equatedwith n anxious

7/28/2019 1990 Introduction Speaking the Language of Exile Dissident Thought in International Studies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1990-introduction-speaking-the-language-of-exile-dissident-thought-in 6/11

RICHARD K. ASHLEY AND R. B.J.WALKER 263

quavering. t cannot be equated with fearof death thatmustbe calmed by theimposition f a certain dentitynd a universal arrativen which n identitymightsecure an exclusionary erritoryo call home. For the questioningf "self"does nothere signal "deficiency," "lacuna thatmustbe filled."Ambiguitynd uncertaintyare nothere regarded as sourcesoffear n themselves.

Ambiguity, ncertainty,nd the ceaseless questioning f identity-these re re-sourcesof the exiles. They are the resources f those who would ive and move nthese paradoxical marginal paces and times and who, in order to do so, muststruggle o resist nowledgeable ractices fpowerthatwould mposeupon themcertain dentity, set of imitationsn what an be done, an order of "truth." heyare resources hatmake possiblewhatJulia Kristeva 1986) would call the workof"dissidence," the politicizingwork of thought. n Michel Foucault's phrasing(1973:386), they re indicative f theopeningof"a space inwhich t s once morepossibleto think."Here, where dentitys always n process nd territorialound-aries of modern ife re seen to be arbitrarilymposed, he imits uthored rom neor another overeign tandpoint an be questioned nd transgressed,ithertolosed-offcultural onnections an be explored, nd new cultural esources an be culti-vated thereby.Here it becomes possible to explore, generate, nd circulatenew,often istinctlyoyful, ut always issidentways fthinking,oing, ndbeingpoliti-cal.

Wedo not callattentionotheseproliferating arginal ites f modernpoliticsnorder to highlightapses in contemporary lobal political heory,omespecific o-mainsofconduct hat heorists aveyet otake eriously nough.We do so inorderto suggest hatthese deterritorializednd decentered itesof political ifealreadyhave theircounterpartst themargins f modern nternationaltudies. Kristeva

(1986:292) has suggested hat A spectrehauntsEurope: the dissident."We want osuggest hatfor omeyearsnow, "spectre" ashaunted he"Europeancontinent"of international tudies. t is the spectreof a widelyproliferatingnd distinctlydissidentheoretical ttitudepoken nuncertain oicebywomen nd menwho,forvarious easons,know hemselvess exilesfrom heterritoriesftheoryndtheoriz-ing solemnly ffirmed t the supposedly overeign enters f a discipline.t is thespectre f a workofglobal political heory, dissidentwork fthought,hathappilyfinds ts extraterritoriallace-its politicized nonplace"-at the uncertain nter-stices finternationalheory nd practice.

These proliferating orksof thought re not difficulto find. n thepublishedliterature,more so in the nformal ero-circuitsf thefield, nd stillmoreso in the

seminarpapers of graduate students, ne can detect an increasing olumeandvarietyf workwhoseprincipal usiness s to nterrogateimits,o explorehowtheyare imposed, odemonstrate heir rbitrariness,nd tothink ther-wise,hat s, n awaythatmakespossiblethetesting f limitationsnd theexploration fexcludedpossibilities.omeknow heir ctivitys reflectionn ontology,n epistemology,nmethodology-on whatmanycall the unspoken presuppositionsf a discipline.Some knowtheir ctivitys explorationntothepossibilityf a post-positivistnter-national elations iscourse, post-empiricistcience f nternationalelations,r acritical heory fglobal politics. thersknow heir ctivitys a kindofhistory,lbeitone thatdoes not aspire to remember n originary astbuttoexpose and undo thearbitraryractices ywhich counter-memories"reforgottenntheconstructionf

a "necessary" resent. till thersknow heir ctivitys attemptsosetup a series frelays etweennternationalelationsheory,n theonehand,and Europeansocialtheory, eministheory, nd/orcontemporaryiterary heory, n theother.Andmanymore imply o theirworks fthought, otpausing ogive heirworks namebutsimply roceeding traightawayoa "ruthlessnd irreverentismantlingf theworkingsfdiscourse, hought,nd existence"n modernglobal ife.However hey

7/28/2019 1990 Introduction Speaking the Language of Exile Dissident Thought in International Studies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1990-introduction-speaking-the-language-of-exile-dissident-thought-in 7/11

264 Speaking he anguageofExile

are known nd presented,moreover, heseworks fthought re tobe heard insis-tently uestioning he time-honoredualisms ponwhichmodern heory nd prac-tice have long pivoted. dentity/difference,an/history,resent/past,resent/fu-ture, nside/outside, omestic/international,overeignty/anarchy,,ommunity/war,male/female,ealism/idealism,peech/language,gent/structure,articular/univer-sal, cultural/material,heory/practice,enter/periphery,tate/society,olitics/eco-nomics, evolution/reform-thesend countless therdichotomies ave been exam-ined n their racticalworkings,urned, ethought,nd exposed as arbitraryulturalconstructs y which,n modernculture,modes ofsubjectivity,bjectivity,nd con-duct are imposed.

As seenfrom he tandpoints hatwouldclaim o occupy hecenter f a discipline,it s true, hese marginalworks f thought re knownprimarilys indications f anegativity: crisisof confidence, loss of faith, degeneration f reigning ara-digms, n organic risis n which, s Gramscianswouldsay, theold isdying nd the

newcannotyetbe born."So cast, hey re known o mark n interregnum,time fdelay betweenparadigms. o cast, lso, they re subject o the discipline mplicitnquestions hatmoderntheorists ho longfora center, secure sourceofmeaningguaranteedby a "dead father," o readily sk. Can theynotprovetheirmerits yconfiguringhemselves s a newparadigmwhoseknowledge laimswouldbear apromise fcontrol n the nameof "man?" f they spiretobe taken eriously,antheynotconfigurehemselves s a theoreticalounter-hegemonyhat ouldspeakasovereign oice,assumea name,take a position, ommand space,securea home,set down a law,and layclaimto the center fa discipline? he disciplinesready ohear affirmativenswersto thesequestions-answersthat would affirm hat thestudyof international olitics s indeed a businessof makingheroicpromises n

behalf fa universal overeign igure. o thoseworks fthoughthat nswerno,thediscipline urns deaf ear when tcan.Itischaracteristicfthese xile works fthought, hough, hat heywill nswerno.

For these dissidentworks re likethemarginal itesdiscussed arlier n thattheyresist ssimilation o modernmodesofknowingn the nterestfthe power of themodernfigures f sovereignman and sovereign tate.They sharethe threeotherfeatures f thesemarginal itesas well.These dissidentworksof global politicaltheorymove n ntrinsicallymbiguous ites,whererespect or heplayofdifferenceand theundecidabilityf history isplacesthe assertion f identity,ncluding heassertionfoneoranothernterpretationf a universaldentityfsovereignman."Theymove n politicized iteswherepower s conspicuously twork nd subject o

meticulous xamination.Andthey onstitutexcitingworks fexperimentationndexploration hatwouldtransgress rbitraryimits, pen up hitherto losedoff on-nections,nd enablethe constructionnd circulation f newwaysofknowing nddoing politics.Requiring ceaseless nalysis, igilance nd will o subversion,"hesemarginalworksof thought necessarilynter ntocomplicity ithotherdissidentpracticesn themodernWesternworld."

The purposeof this pecial ssue, then, s not to announcea newand powerfulperspectiven global politics or which disciplinemustmakeway.The contribu-tions o this ssuedo notspeaka sovereign oiceor proclaim credo.Theydo notfabricatend ritualize story forigins hatwouldsupplyunity o these dissidentworks fthought. hey stakeoutno territoryobe defended,no boundaries hat

might eparatecitizens f a newdiscipline from hosewho are alien to it. Theyneitherwritenor exemplify manual of warbywhich oldiers f a new mode ofglobal political heorymight e taught oseize, defend, nd extend domain.Theyissueno promises.Theybear no flag.

Our intentionn thesepages,on thecontrary,s toprovide n opportunityorapubliccelebration f what these dissidentworksof thought lreadycelebrate n

7/28/2019 1990 Introduction Speaking the Language of Exile Dissident Thought in International Studies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1990-introduction-speaking-the-language-of-exile-dissident-thought-in 8/11

RICHARD K. ASHLEY AND R. B. J.WALKER 265

countless catteredocales of research abor: difference, ot dentity;hequestioningand transgressionf imits, ottheassertion fboundaries nd frameworks; readi-ness to questionhow meaning nd order re imposed,not the earchfor sourceofmeaning nd order already n place; the unrelentingnd meticulous nalysis f the

workings f power n modernglobal ife, otthe onging or sovereign igure be itman,God, nation, tate, aradigm, r research rogram) hatpromises deliverancefrom ower; he truggle orfreedom, ot religious esire o produce ome territo-rial domicileof self-evident eing that men of innocent aith an call home. Ourintention,oo, s to enable the further irculation f the new strategies f question-ing, nalysis, nd resistance hat heseworks f thought ave found o be effectivenone or another ite nd thatmight rove provocative nd workablenother ites swell. n short,we do not wantto "shout," s if a voiceraised n nternational tudiesQuarterlymight espeak the arrival f a newmovement hatwouldstorm nd takethecapitolsof international tudies.We want nstead to make it possibleto listenattentivelyo the "muffled ries" of dissidence hat are alreadyeverywhere o beheard.

The first ontributiono this pecial ssue, Patterns fDissent ndtheCelebrationofDifference," yJimGeorgeand DavidCampbell, eflects patientabor of isten-ing to the exiled voices of dissident cholarship peaking n a variety f widelydispersed itesover the last decade. In spiritwith he voices to whichthey isten,GeorgeandCampbellresist hetemptationofindndissidentcholarshipheseedsofa new orthodoxy. ut theydo highlight varietyfemergent uestions hat rerepeatedly ngaged by dissident cholarship,whether tbe a dissidence hat onemight ssociatewithCriticalTheoryoftheFrankfurtchool and Habermasor thedissidence ne might e inclined o abel postmodernrpoststructuralist.hese are

questions earingupon theEnlightenmentonstructsfhistory,ationality,bjectiv-ity, ruth, umanagency, nd social structure; he relation etweenknowledge ndpower;the relation etween anguageand socialmeaning; he roleand functionfthe ocial ciencesnmodern ocial ndpolitical ife; ndtheprospects or mancipa-tory oliticsn the ate twentiethentury.Also in keepingwith he voicesto whichthey isten,George and Campbell resist he temptation o memorialize founda-tionalprehistoryfcontemporaryissident cholarship. etthey o brieflyeviewvariety f contributionso contemporaryocial theoretical ebatesbearingon thequestionsjustmentioned-a varietyhat pansfromWittgenstein, inch, nd Kuhnthrough heFrankfurtchool, Habermas, Ricoeur, nd Gadamer,to Derrida andFoucault.They do so not to gesture oward "coherent nd consensualposition,"

but to accentuate he ivelynd enliveningensionshatdeprive hediscipline fthepresupposition f an objectively iventerritorialround,on the one hand, andenable theopeningup ofspacesfor hought,n theother.AsGeorge ndCampbellshow nthe atter artoftheir ssay, hese ensions avebeenproductivelyxploitedin thevariety fdissidentworks n internationaltudies incetheearly1980s.

The papers byJamesDer Derian, BradleyKlein,MichaelShapiro,WilliamCha-loupka, ndCynthiaWeber take dvantage f theemergent hinkingpaceto whichGeorgeand Campbellallude. These papers rangeacross varietyftopics hat reno doubtfamiliaroreadersoftheQuarterly:urveillance,imulationndcomputer-assistedwar gaming, he acceleration f weapons delivery, lliancepolitics, rmstransfers,he ocalpolitics fecological nd anti-nuclearmovements,hepolitics f

internationalebt, nd theproductionnd transformationfpolitical nstitutions,onamea few.Yetany ttempto ntroduce hesepapersandsaywhat heymustmeanwould be to do violenceto them.For while thesepapers rangeacrosstopicswithfamiliar ames,theydo notapproachthemfrom hestandpointf somesovereignsubject, omecenter f nterpretationithwhich uthors nd readers re one. Theydo notpretend o project n originaryword of truth nd power beyonddoubt,a

7/28/2019 1990 Introduction Speaking the Language of Exile Dissident Thought in International Studies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1990-introduction-speaking-the-language-of-exile-dissident-thought-in 9/11

266 Speaking he anguage ofExile

voice of "man" thatpromises osettle he ambiguitiesf ife nce and for ll. Thesepapers nstead pproach these opics n a manner hat s respectfulftheuncertain-ties f ife t the margins,wheremeaning s ndoubt, heplay f power s visible, ndthefixing fmeaning s whatpractices f power visiblyabor to do. They therebysensitize s to thepoliticsnvolvedn asserting sovereign resence, ivingnames,supplying epresentations,nd sayingwhat hingsmean-even insayingwhat hesepapers mean. More thanthat, hey ensitize s to the paradoxes involved n anyattemptoassert sovereign oice na worldwhere he acceleration nd agitationfsocial ctivityives iseto a proliferationftransgressionsf nstitutionaloundariesandwhere, s a result,marginal ones of human aborexpandrelativeothe uppos-edly homogeneousterritories hat nstitutional oundaries would demarcate ndcontain. ngaging he politics fsucha world, hesepapersshowthat herefusal oembraceone or another overeign tandpointnd itspretenses fterritorialeingdoes not entail ither flight o a kindof dealism r a retreat opolitical assivity.t

instead enables a disciplined, ritical abor of thought hattakes seriously hoseunfinalized owerpolitical trugglesn which hequestion sno longerwhich over-eignshallwin nd which hall osebuthow, f t all,a sovereign-centerederritorial-izationofpolitical ifecan be made to prevail.

In offering his mallcollection fdissident nalysesnthepagesof"The OfficialJournal fthe International tudiesAssociation," e are ofcoursesensitive o twoproblems.One problemsthat his ollection, eing mall, nevitablyxcludes-or atleast fails o include-many,manyvoicesof dissidencen internationaltudies hatdeserve qually o be heard and celebrated. acingup to thisproblem,llwecansayis thatwe hope thatthe conductof scholarshipn thepages of this ssue renderssomewhat ess effectivenotherwidely eplicated nd far moreworrisome orm f

exclusion ased noton physical imitationsuton the upposed necessityfpreserv-ing nstitutionaloundaries n the territorializationfpolitical nd scholarlyife.The second problem s thatdissidentcholarship,s Donna U. Gregory1988:xiii)

has noted, s "more often attackedthan read." For example,one especiallywellknown ine of attack, ssued by RobertKeohane (1988:392), s that o-called reflec-tivists," hile killed n critical rguments,lack . . a clearreflectiveesearchpro-gramthat ould be employedbystudents f worldpolitics."As Keohanegoeson tosay,"Untilthe reflective cholarsor otherssympathetico theirargumentshavedelineatedsuch a researchprogramand shown n particular tudiesthat t canilluminatemportantssues n worldpolitics, heywillremain n themargins fthefield, argelynvisible o thepreponderance fempirical esearchers . ." This is a

fine dmonishment.t is as direct s it s succinct.t isdeliveredwithout heslightestconcealmentftheprivilege eingarbitrarilyccordedtoa certainnterpretationf"empirical esearch," f thepolicingfunction eing performed, r of thepunish-mentthatwillcome to thosewho failto heed the admonishmentelivered.But itcould notbe offered r plausibly ntertainedy anyonewhohas actually ead andtaken eriouslyheworks fthe "reflectivists"dmonished1,sGeorge ndCampbelland Der Derian make clear.

1 Or, for that matter, y anyone who has actuallyread and taken seriously mre Lakatos's (1970) most famousarticle on scientific esearch programmes.To read Lakatos's articlethroughtothe nd s to see that t actuallydevelops as an elaborate sequence ofdeconstructions hatproceedsfromnaive ustificationistositions hrough

variety f other positionsto finally rrive at a "position" that Popperiansfinddisconcerting ecause, as Lakatosallows, t s grounded in nothingother than thearbitrary layof aestheticpractices.This last"position,"for ll itspotentialto disconcertthe male-marked Popperian figureof the sovereign scientist, s one thatmanydissidentscholarswould happily take seriously s a "starting oint" for heir researchprogrammes."One might ay, n fact,that many already do and that to this extent they are far more faithful o Lakatos's own argument than areKeohane and many others who evoke the first ewpages of Lakatos's article nd are amnesiac regarding he rest.

7/28/2019 1990 Introduction Speaking the Language of Exile Dissident Thought in International Studies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1990-introduction-speaking-the-language-of-exile-dissident-thought-in 10/11

RICHARD K. ASHLEY AND R. B. J.WALKER 267

There are, though, ther ritical eadings f dissident cholarshiphatdo deservea painstaking eply. n theessay oncluding his ssue,we shall consider variety fsuchcritical eadings nd offer response o them.Our intention,s willbe seen, snot to preempt r stifle riticism f dissident cholarship. ince dissident cholars

laborto expand the space andresources f thought, heywouldbe the ast o gainsayany criticism f their work that would point out limitations o whichthey haveacquiesced or whichtheyhave covertlynscribed.As evidencedbythe essayscol-lected here, n fact,dissident cholars xhibit critical thos, n ethics f freedomdisciplining heirwork, hat encouragesand welcomes riticismuchas this.Ourpurpose, nstead, s to expose,analyze, nd display hepovertyf a widely eplicatedstrategy f readingdissident cholarshiphatfunctionso impose imitationsn theworkof thought n reply o the hazardsand opportunitiesncounteredn all theintrinsically aradoxical and ambiguous sitesof contemporary lobal life.Thisstrategy f reading is "diversionary"n Keohane's (1988:382) sense. It func-tions, n his words, o "takeus awayfrom he study f our subjectmatter,worldpolitics."

What s at stake s not ust a matter f academicprivilege.t is not a questionofwhether issident cholars hall be given theirdue or, alternatively, arginalizedand rendered invisible."What s at stake s nothing essthanthequestion f sover-eignty:whether r not thismost paradoxical question,alive in all the wideningmargins f a culture, an be taken seriously n internationaltudiestoday. Morepointedly, he issue is whether nd to what extent he discipline f internationalstudieswillbe able toexercise tscritical esources o engage and analyze he prob-lemofsovereigntynd resistance o sovereigntys it unfolds n all the multiplyingdeterritorializedonesofa culturencrisis-including hat xtraterritorialone that

eludessovereign epresentationalled internationalolitics.Itwouldbe a mistake, owever, oaccentuate urcriticalnalysis f a strategyfreadingdissident cholarship. s weargue ntheconcluding ssay, his trategys ncomplicity ith ll those practices hatworkon theworld cene to read ambiguouscircumstances,mposeboundaries, ndexcludeparadoxesofspaceand time, hus odomesticate erritoriesfsocialand politicalife hatmale-markedigures fsover-eign authorityan be claimed orepresent. swealsoargue, hough, his trategyfreading s fastapproachingexhaustion n international tudiestoday, ust as thecultural esources hat an be calledupontoeffect heterritorializationfsocial ndpolitical ife re growing hin,moreabstractlyphilosophical,"ess able to speakinreply o the unsettled ircumstancesn whichwomenand menactively ndertake

their aborsofself-making.n an important ense,thescholars ontributingothisspecial issue presumetheweakening f thisstrategyf readingand discipliningambiguous happenings,bothin internationaltudies nd in theworld of politicsstudied.They, likemarginalized eoples everywhere,xploittheopeningsmadepossibleby thisweakening.

Thus,while he contributorsothis ssuemight ccasionallyast sideways lanceat instances f this trategyfreading, hey efuse o be delayedor diverted y t.They refuseto be seduced by a strategyf readingthatwould draw them ntoabstractlyheoretical iscussions r self-enclosingimulationsf idealized realitiesthat function nlyto redeemsome notionof sovereign cholarly eing. Instead,these scholarsdo what,we suspect, cholars finternationaltudies n generalare

inclined o do. They geton with heirwork.They engagethe ntrinsicallyroblemat-icalrealitiesf a world hat ffords ewpeople today nythingesemblingdomestichaven ofself-evidenteingexemptfrom heplayofpower.Like all exiles from hesupposed sovereign erritoriesfmodern ulture,hese cholars ndertake criticaltask, taskofdissidence owhichFoucault 1984:50) has gestured. t is a taskof

7/28/2019 1990 Introduction Speaking the Language of Exile Dissident Thought in International Studies

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1990-introduction-speaking-the-language-of-exile-dissident-thought-in 11/11

268 Speaking he anguage ofExile

working on our limits, hat s, a patient abor givingform o our impatience orliberty."

ReferencesFOUCAULT, M. (1973) The Order f-Things:nArchaeologyftheHuman Sciences.New York: Random

House.FOUCAULT, M. (1984) What is Enlightenment? n The FoucaultReader, dited byP. Rabinow. New

York: Pantheon.GREGORY, D. U. (1988) Foreword. International/Intertextualelations: ostmodern eadingsofWorld

Politics, dited by J. Der Derian and M. Shapiro. Lexington,MA: LexingtonBooks.KEOHANE, R. 0. (1988) International nstitutions:Two Approaches. InternationaltudiesQuarterly

32(4):379-96.KRISTEVA, J. 1986) A New Type of Intellectual:The Dissident. n TheKristeva eader, ditedby T.

Moi. New York: Columbia University ress.LAKATOS, I.

(1970)Falsificationnd theMethodology f Scientific esearchProgrammes. n Criticism

and theGrowth f Knowledge, dited by I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity ress.