How does nationalist selfishness creep into cosmopolitan protection?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This article investigates how selfish justifications enter cosmopolitan rationales in the political plane of the discourse. It makes sense of the ways in which selfish ideas are allowed to meddle in and merge with morally-based cosmopolitan norms. The article commits to the ontological and epistemological premises of critical discourse analysis, and focuses on US presidential papers since 1989. It substantiates the claims it makes by using computer-assisted discursive process tracing method as a supporting tool for qualitative analysis of texts. The computerized analysis of discursive entanglements reveals that cosmopolitan protective operations are in fact mainly framed in nationalistic frame. The roots of such nationalistic selfish arguments for international protective military operations can be traced in the realist and hegemonic fallacies that emphasize the naturality of national selfishness and the need for global hegemony. Furthermore, the article shows how the entanglement of discourse strands on “protection” and “innocent victimhood” as well as the entanglement between “crime prevention” and “terrorism prevention” make selfish internationalist arguments legitimate in the US political debate.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)42-76
Number of pages35
JournalGlobal Responsibility to Protect
Volume11
Issue number1
Early online date14 Jan 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 31 Jan 2019

Fingerprint

crime prevention
discourse
hegemony
discourse analysis
terrorism
Military

Keywords

  • Cosmopolitanism
  • New Wars
  • Protection of civilians
  • battle deaths
  • discourse analysis

Cite this

How does nationalist selfishness creep into cosmopolitan protection? / Kivimäki, Timo.

In: Global Responsibility to Protect, Vol. 11, No. 1, 31.01.2019, p. 42-76.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{7eb389d12ea74a3dbcaeeaff119de829,
title = "How does nationalist selfishness creep into cosmopolitan protection?",
abstract = "This article investigates how selfish justifications enter cosmopolitan rationales in the political plane of the discourse. It makes sense of the ways in which selfish ideas are allowed to meddle in and merge with morally-based cosmopolitan norms. The article commits to the ontological and epistemological premises of critical discourse analysis, and focuses on US presidential papers since 1989. It substantiates the claims it makes by using computer-assisted discursive process tracing method as a supporting tool for qualitative analysis of texts. The computerized analysis of discursive entanglements reveals that cosmopolitan protective operations are in fact mainly framed in nationalistic frame. The roots of such nationalistic selfish arguments for international protective military operations can be traced in the realist and hegemonic fallacies that emphasize the naturality of national selfishness and the need for global hegemony. Furthermore, the article shows how the entanglement of discourse strands on “protection” and “innocent victimhood” as well as the entanglement between “crime prevention” and “terrorism prevention” make selfish internationalist arguments legitimate in the US political debate.",
keywords = "Cosmopolitanism, New Wars, Protection of civilians, battle deaths, discourse analysis",
author = "Timo Kivim{\"a}ki",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "31",
doi = "10.1163/1875984X-01101004",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "42--76",
journal = "Global Responsibility to Protect",
issn = "1875-9858",
publisher = "Brill",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How does nationalist selfishness creep into cosmopolitan protection?

AU - Kivimäki, Timo

PY - 2019/1/31

Y1 - 2019/1/31

N2 - This article investigates how selfish justifications enter cosmopolitan rationales in the political plane of the discourse. It makes sense of the ways in which selfish ideas are allowed to meddle in and merge with morally-based cosmopolitan norms. The article commits to the ontological and epistemological premises of critical discourse analysis, and focuses on US presidential papers since 1989. It substantiates the claims it makes by using computer-assisted discursive process tracing method as a supporting tool for qualitative analysis of texts. The computerized analysis of discursive entanglements reveals that cosmopolitan protective operations are in fact mainly framed in nationalistic frame. The roots of such nationalistic selfish arguments for international protective military operations can be traced in the realist and hegemonic fallacies that emphasize the naturality of national selfishness and the need for global hegemony. Furthermore, the article shows how the entanglement of discourse strands on “protection” and “innocent victimhood” as well as the entanglement between “crime prevention” and “terrorism prevention” make selfish internationalist arguments legitimate in the US political debate.

AB - This article investigates how selfish justifications enter cosmopolitan rationales in the political plane of the discourse. It makes sense of the ways in which selfish ideas are allowed to meddle in and merge with morally-based cosmopolitan norms. The article commits to the ontological and epistemological premises of critical discourse analysis, and focuses on US presidential papers since 1989. It substantiates the claims it makes by using computer-assisted discursive process tracing method as a supporting tool for qualitative analysis of texts. The computerized analysis of discursive entanglements reveals that cosmopolitan protective operations are in fact mainly framed in nationalistic frame. The roots of such nationalistic selfish arguments for international protective military operations can be traced in the realist and hegemonic fallacies that emphasize the naturality of national selfishness and the need for global hegemony. Furthermore, the article shows how the entanglement of discourse strands on “protection” and “innocent victimhood” as well as the entanglement between “crime prevention” and “terrorism prevention” make selfish internationalist arguments legitimate in the US political debate.

KW - Cosmopolitanism

KW - New Wars

KW - Protection of civilians

KW - battle deaths

KW - discourse analysis

U2 - 10.1163/1875984X-01101004

DO - 10.1163/1875984X-01101004

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 42

EP - 76

JO - Global Responsibility to Protect

JF - Global Responsibility to Protect

SN - 1875-9858

IS - 1

ER -