2018Security DialogueOpen access

Rethinking militarism as ideology: The critique of violence after security

James Eastwood

Open full text 72 citations

Abstract

Abstract This article argues for a reformulation of the concept of ‘militarism’ as ideology. Although existing sociological approaches have been suspicious of an understanding of militarism as ideology, these criticisms have misrepresented the implications of adopting such a concept. By returning to Althusser’s classic study of ideology, and complementing it with more recent psychoanalytic approaches that emphasize the centrality of desire, the article shows that thinking of militarism as ideology can be complementary to existing sociological studies. Moreover, though, it argues that such a reformulation brings with it key advantages. This is because it foregrounds the task of anti-militarist critique in a way that has hitherto been lacking. To demonstrate this point, the article considers the contribution that a concept of militarism as ideology could make to existing debates in critical security studies. Recent debates in this subfield have examined the ethical ramifications of various understandings of security for the pursuit of violence. However, these arguments have frequently reached a deadlock because of an inadequate understanding of the nature of militarism, one that borrows implicitly from prevalent sociological definitions of the concept. Instead, the article presents an understanding of militarism as ideology as a way out of these difficulties, showing how a critique of violence based on this concept of militarism rather than security can be more effective.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract This article argues for a reformulation of the concept of ‘militarism’ as ideology. Although existing sociological approaches have been suspicious of an understanding of militarism as ideology, these criticisms have misrepresented the implications of adopting such a concept. By returning to Althusser’s classic study of ideology, and complementing it with more recent psychoanalytic approaches that emphasize the centrality of desire, the article shows that thinking of militarism as ideology can be complementary to existing sociological studies. Moreover, though, it argues that such a reformulation brings with it key advantages. This is because it foregrounds the task of anti-militarist critique in a way that has hitherto been lacking. To demonstrate this point, the article considers the contribution that a concept of militarism as ideology could make to existing debates in critical security studies. Recent debates in this subfield have examined the ethical ramifications of various understandings of security for the pursuit of violence. However, these arguments have frequently reached a deadlock because of an inadequate understanding of the nature of militarism, one that borrows implicitly from prevalent sociological definitions of the concept. Instead, the article presents an understanding of militarism as ideology as a way out of these difficulties, showing how a critique of violence based on this concept of militarism rather than security can be more effective.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 72 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract This article argues for a reformulation of the concept of ‘militarism’ as ideology. Although existing sociological approaches have been suspicious of an understanding of militarism as ideology, these criticisms have misrepresented the implications of adopting such a concept. By returning to Althusser’s classic study of ideology, and complementing it with more recent psychoanalytic approaches that emphasize the centrality of desire, the article shows that thinking of militarism as ideology can be complementary to existing sociological studies. Moreover, though, it argues that such a reformulation brings with it key advantages. This is because it foregrounds the task of anti-militarist critique in a way that has hitherto been lacking. To demonstrate this point, the article considers the contribution that a concept of militarism as ideology could make to existing debates in critical security studies. Recent debates in this subfield have examined the ethical ramifications of various understandings of security for the pursuit of violence. However, these arguments have frequently reached a deadlock because of an inadequate understanding of the nature of militarism, one that borrows implicitly from prevalent sociological definitions of the concept. Instead, the article presents an understanding of militarism as ideology as a way out of these difficulties, showing how a critique of violence based on this concept of militarism rather than security can be more effective.

Key concepts: Militarism, Ideology, Sociology, Epistemology, Law, Politics, Political science, Philosophy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Rethinking militarism as ideology: The critique of violence after security — Research Paper | ScholarLens