جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « پسامدرنیسم » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

The policies and behavior of different governments of the same country differs from each other in political, security-military, economic, social, cultural, etc. areas. This study intends to answer the question that "Why the US security policy in Trump and Biden’s administrations (and in principle all US administrations) is different? " This study used post-modernism and the concept of “state in process” for review and comprehension of differences between various US administrations, because from the perspective of postmodernism the identity of the state is never complete. The state is always in the process of being constituted, but never quite achieving that final moment of completion. This research is an analytical-descriptive study with a methodology based on Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse analysis method. This study attempted to gain an understanding on the differences between the US security-military strategies in Trump and Biden’s administrations through application of post-modernism and the concept of “state in process,” The results showed that "different, unfinished and incomplete identity of different US administrations (here Trump and Biden’s administrations) have caused them to have different discourses in the security-Military sector, Make it up and these different discourses have led to the use of different policies and practices in the security-military field."

To challenge the promises in the discourses, a critical group called postmodernism is mentioned. With an epistemological approach, this practice distanced itself from modernity and presented a new worldview for mankind. Therefore, dealing with this school is not because of the introduction of a new plan, but against any centralism, value hierarchy and dualistic logic of identity. This article seeks to review the theory of postmodernism, especially from the point of view of socialists, and evaluate its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, and the most important criticisms made on it through the review and review of studies. The method of conducting this research is descriptive-analytical, and the method of collecting information is in the form of a library, with special emphasis on books and first-hand written sources, articles published in reputable publications, and new researches. The results of this research show that the socialists are against some issues such as; Prioritizing society's issues, atomizing people, opposing relativism, and being subjective have fundamental disagreements with postmodernist ideas

Postmodernism, by deconstructing all the foundations and meta-narratives, has created a situation in which pluralism is the basis for policy-making. While some scholars have spoken of the refusal to form politics in the postmodern space, and have considered the lack of a basis for establishing political theory inappropriate, others have sought to establish a policy appropriate to this space, both theoretically and practically. Among them is "William Connolly", who, by inventing concepts such as multidimensional pluralism, onto-politics, politics of becoming, critical responsiveness, and agonistic respect, explained postmodern politics, and proportionate with multiplicity, pluralism, dispersion, and diversity of identities has proposed a practical solution. Agonistic democracy, which of course includes other founders and proponents such as Chantal Mouffe, David Owen, and James Tully, is a viable alternative to deliberative democracy and attends it as an inclusive, contingent, and accountable political life, by respectful contestation of wonderful, different and even contradictory new identities. Uncertainty, unpredictability, juxtaposition of divine and atheistic beliefs in the context of the multiplicity of gender, linguistic, racial and cultural identities are some of the components that Connolly has considered and explained in postmodern politics.

This essay is to discuss on the reason and the ways of shift from paradigm of modern development to some new theories in the realm of development with emphasis on paradigm approach. In line with formation of such a shift, two factors are effective: objective (economic, social and political shifts) and subjective (epistemological shifts). in the way that due to transition from positivism to post- positivism, political paradigm has moved from structuralism and government orientation to pluralism and opposition against government structure. Such a situation can be seen in the transformation from the paradigm of modernization as the dominant paradigm to the emerging paradigm of "postmodernism" and other theories such as "post-developmentalism" and "human development". The results indicate that west orientation, power-orientation, structure-orientation, rejection of human, poor ethical principles in modern development process and so on are among important issues that pave the way for shift in theories of development and emergence of new theories.

A complication in the face of the achievements of the founder of modernism, which has sometimes led to the recapture of radical groups by terrorist and Mujahdat methods for realizing the utopia of the era of righteous predecessor. Understanding radical groups, their tools and their implications require a multidisciplinary, networked, comprehensive, and a comprehensive set of studies. To this end, the answer to the question of what is the ratio of current religious radicalism to postmodern flows. Can these groups be placed in the postmodernist streams or, according to current views, belong to the modern age, or even derived from the traditional order? This research by a descriptive and analytical method, while studying documents inspired by Lacquer and Shental Mouffe, showed that, in explaining the current extremes, modern tight molds are inadequate and, more importantly, they are inspired by the imperatives of the modern world, Even the revival of the caliphate in religious radicalism from the perspective of the believers is a means to the ultimate goal of changing the modern world order, and since the current extreme phenomena are phenomena of identity, oppression, and oppression, which, with antagonism and with a different conception of Identity also seeks to define and prove itself in violent ways, so the analysis of radicalism the present is more comprehensible in the post-modern era of postmodernism.

Anarchism is a doctrine that aims at the liberation of peoples from political domination and economic exploitation by the encouragement of direct or non-governmental action. Followers of this theory are willing voluntary formation of human relations which are derived from the needs of people. They are pessimistic about the power of state and conceive Any institution that is based on coercion, as Degeneration propellant of social and moral life. This paper attempts to answer this question that, according to the requirements of globalization, what has changed in theory of anarchism? Our hypothesis is that in light of the phenomenon of globalization, anarchism reconsidered its modern Epistemological foundations and in new form of post-anarchism, with rejecting the reductionism, essentialism and redefining power, generalized its opposition to new forms of authority

Zionism is the product of a political interpretation of the Jewish religion in the nineteenth century, which could gradually and with the support of western countries make a unified discourse and focus Jews’ public opinion on Palestine territory, and with the establishment of a Jewish state in Middle East in addition to giving the promise of peace to the Jewish refugees in the specified land, proposed the para territorial idea of from Nile to Euphrates, but this fragmented society is faced with different challenges in political, sociological, population, strategic areas and intellectual, identity discourse issues, so that vast changes has happened in the dominating ideas underlying the foundation of a Jewish state. The changes in academic levels inside Israel, which has brought in new intellectual challenges to society and the governing board, by reviewing and revising the formation of Zionist discourse consideration and evaluation of the achievement of the aims and objectives. The process has many similarities with the flow of post modernism against modernism in west. Transition from this intellectual operational stalemate point is possible through alternative discourses and new resolutions which are in accordance with the internal and external realities of Israel and the region. Suppositions show public interest would be drawn to the new intellectual proposition which is more conforming with the reality & probability of arc-typical & station.

The category of citizenship depends on happening in difference social contexts، has been distanced various evolutions، that is in each terms، the relationships between structure and it`s elements (factors)، has been differed. The world citizen is a concept that is result of rethinking in structure elements of the modern citizenship that accepts for himself some parameters such as world identity، rights، duties، extent of action and social contexts. The basic and important question in this article is: “The idea of citizenship how much effects on the evolutions of globalization and postmodernism and finally what was the results of it? The hypothesis of writers in this paper is in the following sentence: “Attaining to «World Citizen» in postmodernism term and in the social context of globalization is the last stage of citizenship evolution.”

The article includes two discourses: first discourse, discusses about modernity and two of its main foundations; rationalism and humanism, and then explanes their impacts on the formation of the modern world, society and human being. Second discourse, considers the postmodern critical approach to modernity and its principles. Postmodernism, totally rejects the modern reason and deconstructs all aspects of intellectual and rational legacy of the Enlightenment tradition and modernity. Finally, the author of the article concludes: negation of modern rationality as an instrument of total domination over contemporary and late modern society by postmodernism, denies the dichotomous quality of modern reason and refuses the emancipatory feature of the cultural and communicative reason, and as a results, leads to conservatism and nihilism.

Why shall we be rethinking Socialist project today? As the answer to this question, Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe try to take an active, conscious, and not a passive, unconscious role in the contemporary history. They choose as their goal, a (relatively) clear separation from the conflicts they take part in; and understanding the changes that happen in front of their eyes. At the last analysis, they find out that it is necessary to use Derrida's deconstruction method to challenge the structure and the foundation of Orthodox Marxism.