Options
Alexander Graef
Former Member
Last Name
Graef
First name
Alexander
Phone
+41 71 224 3982
Now showing
1 - 8 of 8
-
PublicationNorms between Facticity and Validity : On the use of the Theory of Communicative Action in Constructivist IREchoing the critique formulated by Tine Hanrieder, this paper revisits the way the Theory of Communicative Action (TCA) has been applied in the field of International Relations. Despite their heavy reliance upon Habermasian concepts, empirical studies based on the TCA have reified the ‘better argument', thereby transforming the theory's procedural yardstick for truth into a simple compliance-mechanism. Analytically, this leads to a structural bias in the conception of norms as social facts whose validity remains unaffected by human interaction. Normatively, the critical potential of the TCA is lost, because scholars are unable to assess the legitimacy of the reified discursive outcomes. In order to address both shortcomings, I will point to the dual quality of norms as it has been especially highlighted by Antje Wiener. In the conclusion, however, it will be argued that while Wiener is able to solve the analytical dilemma via the concept of ‘contestedness', there still remains a normative challenge. http://ireflect-journal.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Graef_Norms-between-Facticity-and-Validity_IRefelct_2014-1-1.pdfType: journal articleJournal: IReflect : Student Journal of International RelationsVolume: 1Issue: 1
-
PublicationThe Discourse on the Ukrainian Conflict in Russian Media : November 2013 - April 2014( 2015-07-24)The present brief report describes the main fault lines of Russian media discourse on the political crisis in Ukraine between late November 2013 and April 2014. It focuses on the characterisation of the Maidan movement, the Crimean Crisis and the development of separatist movements in the Donbass region as three distinct episodes of the conflict. The report is based on articles and transcripts from the archives of online versions of a number of newspapers and one TV channel, whose reporting ranges across the political spectrum. This is intended to provide a broad overview of perceptions and an evaluation of both the dominant state discourse and marginalised liberal discourse.
-
Publication“Authoritarian Russia: Analyzing Post-Soviet Regime Changes“Review of “Authoritarian Russia: Analyzing Post-Soviet Regime Changes“ by Vladimir Gel’manType: book reviewJournal: Political studies reviewVolume: 16Issue: 1
-
PublicationType: book reviewJournal: Political Studies ReviewVolume: 14Issue: 4
-
PublicationType: book reviewJournal: Politicheskaja nauka: "Starye i novye ideologii pered vyzovami politicheskogo razvitija"Issue: 4
-
PublicationForeign Policy Experts, Think Tanks and the Russian State : a Field Theoretical ApproachThis study examines the social relations between academic experts, think tanks and foreign policy professionals in contemporary Russia. Drawing and expanding on Pierre Bourdieu's notions of the social field and different forms of capital, as well as on Gil Eyals concept of spaces between fields, I argue that the interactions between these actors constitute an important field of practices that help to explain the ways state power operates in Russia. I capture individuals and organizations dynamic position within the field by measuring their political capital, defined as institutional proximity to state organs, and media capital, understood as visibility in the public sphere, in terms of expert council memberships, publications and citations. In addition to extensive secondary data (including memoirs and experts publications), I draw on (and add to) databases provided by the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC) and the UDB-COM database of Russian federal newspapers, as well as 56 interviews that I conducted with Moscow-based foreign and security policy experts. My key argument is that foreign and security policy expertise, in particular in Russia, permanently exists as a space between fields. This is due to the constant negotiation of the specific logics and distinct norms of established fields (e.g., media, politics, academia) in the thick boundary zones in which agents both encounter each other and position themselves. Here they are simultaneously influenced by and shaping the different forms of capital they command. The findings also show that, the clear-cut distinction between state and society is not a useful analytical tool when studying Russian foreign policy experts and expertise, given the fact that the Russian state is both a dominant and a non-unitary actor.Type: doctoral thesis
-
PublicationType: newspaper articleJournal: Die Welt : unabhängige Tageszeitung für DeutschlandIssue: online
-
PublicationType: newspaper articleJournal: Südkurier