This study considers the role of antiwar organisations in the construction of national identity and resultant foreign policy norms. It is broadly concerned with the way that support for international actions is developed and maintained in conjunction with particular national ideals and expectations. Most significantly, I suggest that such constructions are not created in isolation through mono-directional broadcasts by elite actors but develop instead in conflict and conjunction with oppositional discourses at multiple levels of society. Furthermore, I suggest that identity construction is innately performative, and I apply a Performance Studies framework of analysis using Mikhail Bakhtin to explore the dialogic components of identity processes. In doing so this work engages with the underlying hierarchies of encoded power that influence identity construction at the domestic level and beyond. This necessitates a greater recognition of the role of dissenting actors in mainstream national narratives, particularly those that embrace identities traditionally used to uphold dominant ideals, such as women and soldiers. To support this hypothesis I offer an analysis of two prominent antiwar groups at the centre ofthe domestic American War on Terror debate, and show how these organisations work both within and among the official regulated discourses, achieving a level of norm eo-construction through a variety of performative tactics. The findings that result imply a more active role for oppositional discourse than has previously been embraced in analyses of national identity constructions and subsequent foreign policy goals.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:551644 |
| Date | January 2010 |
| Creators | Rowe, Cami R. |
| Publisher | Lancaster University |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
Page generated in 0.0014 seconds