The Lacanian lens in critical security studies: The Four Discourses and the US subjects of insecurity in cyberspace

Jeppe Teglskov Jacobsen

The Lacanian lens in critical security studies: The Four Discourses and the US subjects of insecurity in cyberspace

Jeppe Teglskov Jacobsen

Institut for Statskundskab

Publikation: Afhandling › Ph.d.-afhandling

Abstract

Denne afhandling styrker den lacanianske vending i de kritiske sikkerhedsstudier ved at vise, hvordan den mest formaliserede del af Jacques Lacan’s teoretiske apparat, de Fire Diskurser, fungerer som en metodologi i studiet af (u)sikkerhed. Det metodologiske bidrag er inspireret af de poststrukturalistiske analysestrategier. De Fire Diskurser introduceres og anvendes derfor som en linse, der både former det rum, hvorfra der observeres og analyseres, og opfordrer til en konstant ”diagnostisk svingning” mellem teoretiske begreber og det empiriske felt. Den diagnostiske svingning muliggør kontekstspecifikke interventioner i studiet af, hvordan (u)sikkerhed reproduceres.

Empirisk trækker afhandlingen på amerikanske sikkerhedsaktørers artikulationer og praksisser vedrørende usikkerheder fra cyberspace. Mængden af subjekter og subjektrelationer, der er indgår i forhandlingsprocesserne omkring disse usikkerheders politiske betydning, skaber grobund for en bred demonstration af de Fire Diskursers anvendelighed som analytisk linse. Lacans Mesterdiskurs fungerer som en ”forsvindende mediator” i afhandlingens argument om, at hemmelige overskridelser spiller en konstitutiv rolle for NSAs og US cyberkommandos identifikationsprocesser og knytter sig til den vedvarende repræsentation af Kina som en usikkerhed i cyberspace. Lacans Universitetsdiskurs fungerer som den ideologiske baggrund, hvorigennem afhandlingen viser, hvordan bekymrede brugeres/borgeres vedvarende utilfredshed med Facebook mister sin kritiske evne til at udfordre det eksisterende offentlig-private sikkerhedsregime. Lacans Analytikerdiskurs fungerer som et værktøj til at forstå Microsofts fejlslagne forsøg på at udfordre militariseringen af cyberspace ved at afsløre selvmodsigelserne i den amerikanske regerings praksisser. Endelig fungerer Lacans Hysterikerdiskurs som udgangspunktet for at kunne følge de amerikanske policy-eksperters glidende begær, når de kritiserer og kræver nye cyberforsvarsinitiativer.

Hver af disse bidrag adresserer et hul i de eksisterende debatter i kritiske sikkerhedsstudier – henholdsvis om overvågning, offentlig-privat sikkerhedsstyring, emancipation og ekspertise. Dette fører til en bredere konklusion om den lacanianske linse i de kritiske sikkerhedsstudier: Lacaniansk psykoanalyse er særlig brugbar til at vise, hvordan spændinger ikke skal ses som destabiliserende afvigelser fra en sikkerhedsdiskurs, men snarere som konstituerende for et subjekts identifikationsproces og, i sidste ende, for opretholdelsen af en diskurs.

Originalsprog	Engelsk
Bevilgende institution	Syddansk Universitet
Vejledere/rådgivere	Ringsmose, Jens, Vejleder Tjalve, Vibeke Schou, Vejleder, Ekstern person Crone, Manni , Vejleder, Ekstern person
Udgiver	Syddansk Universitet. Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet
Status	Udgivet - feb. 2020

Note vedr. afhandling

Afhandlingen kan læses på SDUs bibliotek.

SDU link

Tjek adgangen til materialet i Syddansk Universitetsbiblioteks søgemaskine

Citationsformater

@misc{dc078b351eb94a149f44fc35851ff96e,

title = "The Lacanian lens in critical security studies: The Four Discourses and the US subjects of insecurity in cyberspace",

abstract = "The dissertation strengthens the Lacanian turn in critical security studies by demonstrating how the most formalised part of Jacques Lacan{\textquoteright}s teaching, the Four Discourses, work as a methodology for studying (in)security. In making this methodological contribution, the dissertation finds inspiration in poststructuralist analytical strategies, and introduces the Four Discourses as a lens that both forms the initial space from which to observe and analyse, and encourage a constant {\textquoteleft}diagnostic oscillation{\textquoteright} between concept and the empirical field. This is done to develop context-specific interventions on how insecurities are reproduced. Empirically, the dissertation turns to the articulations of and practices performed by security actors in the US particularly in relation to the insecurities that have emerged from cyberspace. The plethora of subjects and subject relations involved in the processes of negotiating these insecurities as politically significant enables a demonstration of the wide applicability of the Four Discourses as an analytical lens. Lacan{\textquoteright}s Master Discourse serves as a {\textquoteleft}vanishing mediator{\textquoteright} in the dissertation{\textquoteright}s argument that secret transgressions play a constitutive role for the identification processes of the NSA and US Cyber Command and tie to the continuing representation of China as an insecurity in cyberspace. Lacan{\textquoteright}s University Discourse serves as the ideological background upon which the dissertation shows how the insecurity complaints about Facebook by the concerned user-citizen is rendered insignificant for contesting the existing public-private security governance regime. Lacan{\textquoteright}s Analyst Discourse serves as a tool for understanding Microsoft failing attempts to challenge the militarisation of cyberspace by exposing contradictions in US government practices. And Lacan{\textquoteright}s Hysteric Discourse serves as a point of departure for tracing the drifting desire of the US policy experts outside government when they criticise and demand new cyber defence initiatives. Each of these contributions target a current limitation in the critical security debates – on surveillance, public-private security governance, emancipation, and expertise, respectively. This leads to broader conclusion about the Lacanian lens in critical security studies: Lacanian psychoanalysis is particularly apt for showing how apparent tensions within a broader insecurity discourse are not necessarily aberrations that destabilise the discourse; tensions are rather constitutive of the subject{\textquoteright}s identification process, ultimately sustaining the discours",

author = "\{Teglskov Jacobsen\}, Jeppe",

year = "2020",

month = feb,

language = "English",

publisher = "Syddansk Universitet. Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet",

school = "SDU",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - The Lacanian lens in critical security studies

T2 - The Four Discourses and the US subjects of insecurity in cyberspace

AU - Teglskov Jacobsen, Jeppe

PY - 2020/2

Y1 - 2020/2

N2 - The dissertation strengthens the Lacanian turn in critical security studies by demonstrating how the most formalised part of Jacques Lacan’s teaching, the Four Discourses, work as a methodology for studying (in)security. In making this methodological contribution, the dissertation finds inspiration in poststructuralist analytical strategies, and introduces the Four Discourses as a lens that both forms the initial space from which to observe and analyse, and encourage a constant ‘diagnostic oscillation’ between concept and the empirical field. This is done to develop context-specific interventions on how insecurities are reproduced. Empirically, the dissertation turns to the articulations of and practices performed by security actors in the US particularly in relation to the insecurities that have emerged from cyberspace. The plethora of subjects and subject relations involved in the processes of negotiating these insecurities as politically significant enables a demonstration of the wide applicability of the Four Discourses as an analytical lens. Lacan’s Master Discourse serves as a ‘vanishing mediator’ in the dissertation’s argument that secret transgressions play a constitutive role for the identification processes of the NSA and US Cyber Command and tie to the continuing representation of China as an insecurity in cyberspace. Lacan’s University Discourse serves as the ideological background upon which the dissertation shows how the insecurity complaints about Facebook by the concerned user-citizen is rendered insignificant for contesting the existing public-private security governance regime. Lacan’s Analyst Discourse serves as a tool for understanding Microsoft failing attempts to challenge the militarisation of cyberspace by exposing contradictions in US government practices. And Lacan’s Hysteric Discourse serves as a point of departure for tracing the drifting desire of the US policy experts outside government when they criticise and demand new cyber defence initiatives. Each of these contributions target a current limitation in the critical security debates – on surveillance, public-private security governance, emancipation, and expertise, respectively. This leads to broader conclusion about the Lacanian lens in critical security studies: Lacanian psychoanalysis is particularly apt for showing how apparent tensions within a broader insecurity discourse are not necessarily aberrations that destabilise the discourse; tensions are rather constitutive of the subject’s identification process, ultimately sustaining the discours

AB - The dissertation strengthens the Lacanian turn in critical security studies by demonstrating how the most formalised part of Jacques Lacan’s teaching, the Four Discourses, work as a methodology for studying (in)security. In making this methodological contribution, the dissertation finds inspiration in poststructuralist analytical strategies, and introduces the Four Discourses as a lens that both forms the initial space from which to observe and analyse, and encourage a constant ‘diagnostic oscillation’ between concept and the empirical field. This is done to develop context-specific interventions on how insecurities are reproduced. Empirically, the dissertation turns to the articulations of and practices performed by security actors in the US particularly in relation to the insecurities that have emerged from cyberspace. The plethora of subjects and subject relations involved in the processes of negotiating these insecurities as politically significant enables a demonstration of the wide applicability of the Four Discourses as an analytical lens. Lacan’s Master Discourse serves as a ‘vanishing mediator’ in the dissertation’s argument that secret transgressions play a constitutive role for the identification processes of the NSA and US Cyber Command and tie to the continuing representation of China as an insecurity in cyberspace. Lacan’s University Discourse serves as the ideological background upon which the dissertation shows how the insecurity complaints about Facebook by the concerned user-citizen is rendered insignificant for contesting the existing public-private security governance regime. Lacan’s Analyst Discourse serves as a tool for understanding Microsoft failing attempts to challenge the militarisation of cyberspace by exposing contradictions in US government practices. And Lacan’s Hysteric Discourse serves as a point of departure for tracing the drifting desire of the US policy experts outside government when they criticise and demand new cyber defence initiatives. Each of these contributions target a current limitation in the critical security debates – on surveillance, public-private security governance, emancipation, and expertise, respectively. This leads to broader conclusion about the Lacanian lens in critical security studies: Lacanian psychoanalysis is particularly apt for showing how apparent tensions within a broader insecurity discourse are not necessarily aberrations that destabilise the discourse; tensions are rather constitutive of the subject’s identification process, ultimately sustaining the discours

M3 - Ph.D. thesis

PB - Syddansk Universitet. Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet

ER -

The Lacanian lens in critical security studies: The Four Discourses and the US subjects of insecurity in cyberspace

Abstract

Note vedr. afhandling

SDU link

Fingeraftryk

Citationsformater