The Politics of Everyday Life

Course content

The traditional focus in international relations has primarily revolved around macro-level analysis and formal practices. This course aims to shift this paradigm by exploring the core concerns of international relations, including security, sovereignty, international political economy (IPE), diplomacy, and, to a lesser extent, nationalism, through the lens of everyday life. The initial focus involves an examination of theoretical debates surrounding the concept of everyday life before delving into key topics within international relations.

 

The overarching goal is to scrutinize how global power relations, inherently messy and complex, are interdependently shaped by elements of the everyday, such as objects, rules, routines, daily encounters, and various actors. Our exploration will extend to understanding how the term 'everyday' is theorized and comprehended within the realms of international relations and political sociology. By adopting this approach, we seek to uncover the intricate ways in which the fabric of daily life contributes to the construction and dynamics of global politics.

Education

Full-degree students enrolled at the Department of Political Science, UCPH

  • MSc in Political Science
  • MSc in Social Science
  • MSc in Security Risk Management
  • Bachelor in Political Science

 

Full-degree students enrolled at the Faculty of Social Science, UCPH 

  • Bachelor and MSc in Anthropology
  • MSc in Social Data Science

 

The course is open to:

  • Exchange and Guest students from abroad
  • Credit students from Danish Universities
  • Open University students
Learning outcome

Knowledge:

Introduce students to a range of contemporary themes, debates, and research through the perspectives of the everyday. Examine both macro-structural and micro-interactional dynamics that play pivotal roles in the construction of security, nationalism, sovereignty, etc. Explore empirical examples from international relations, sociological, and political research.

Skills:

Explicate and engage with key concepts and perspectives in international relations through the lens of the everyday. Develop students' research and writing abilities.

Competences:

Examine how core international relations topics are positioned and generated within everyday contexts. Demonstrate a nuanced understanding of some of the main international relations topics through explicit engagements with everyday life. Consider the advantages and disadvantages of different theoretical and methodological approaches by analyzing empirical research.

This course will make use of Power Point slides to deliver key learning points and the provision of concrete examples to illustrate abstract concepts.

Various in-class learning methods, including group discussions, classroom exercises, will also be incorporated. Readings will be assigned prior to each lesson.

This list is subject to modifications. I will compile a comprehensive list of essential readings, totaling approximately 2000 pages, prior to the start of the course.

 

The ‘Everyday’:

  • Saunders, R. A., & Holland, J. (2018). The Ritual of Beer Consumption as Discursive Intervention: Effigy, Sensory Politics, and Resistance in Everyday IR. Millennium, 46(2), 119-141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305829817738949
  • Stanley, L., & Jackson, R. (2016). Introduction: Everyday narratives in world politics. Politics, 36(3), 223-235. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263395716653423
  • Huysmans, J., & Nogueira, J.P. (2016). Ten Years of IPS: Fracturing IR, International Political Sociology, 10(4), 299–319. https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olw025
  • Colebrook, C. (2002). The Politics and Potential of Everyday Life. New Literary History, 33(4), 687–706. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20057751
  • Björkdahl, A., Hall, M., & Svensson, T. (2019). Everyday international relations: Editors’ introduction. Cooperation and Conflict, 54(2), 123-130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836719845834
  • Guillaume, X., & Huysmans, J. (2019). The concept of ‘the everyday’: Ephemeral politics and the abundance of life. Cooperation and Conflict, 54(2), 278-296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836718815520
  • Montsion J.M. (2012). A critique of everyday international relations: The case of cultural plural- ism in Singapore and Vancouver. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 30(5), 930–946.
  • Solomon T., & Steele B.J. (2017). Micro-moves in International Relations theory. European Journal of International Relations, 23(2), 267–291.
  • Highmore, B. (2002). Everyday Life and Cultural Theory: An Introduction. London: Routledge
  • Highmore, B. (2002). ‘Introduction’, in Ben Highmore (ed.), The Everyday Life Reader, pp. 1–36. London: Routledge
  • Kalekin-Fishman, D. (2013). Sociology of everyday life. Current Sociology, 61(5-6), 714-732. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392113482112
  • Scott, S. (2009) Making Sense of Everyday Life. Cambridge: Polity Press
  • Loh, D. M., & Heiskanen, J. (2020). Liminal sovereignty practices: Rethinking the inside/outside dichotomy. Cooperation and Conflict, 55(3), 284-304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836720911391

 

Diplomacy

  • Marsden, M., Ibañez-Tirado, D., & Henig, D. (2016). Everyday Diplomacy: Introduction to special issue. The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology, 34(2), pp.2-22.
  • Constantinou, C.M. (2015). Everyday Diplomacy: Mission, spectacle and the remaking of diplomatic culture. In Diplomatic Cultures and International Politics (pp. 35-52). London: Routledge.
  • Adler-Nissen, R., & Eggeling, K.A. (2022). Blended Diplomacy: The entanglement and contestation of digital technologies in everyday diplomatic practice. European Journal of International Relations, 28(3), pp.640-666.
  • Neumann, I.B. (2015). Sited diplomacy. In Diplomatic Cultures and International Politics (pp. 91-104). London: Routledge.
  • Standfield, C. (2020). Gendering the practice turn in diplomacy. European Journal of International Relations, 26(1), 140-165. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066120940351

 

Security

 

  • Åhäll, L., 2019. Feeling everyday IR: Embodied, affective, militarising movement as choreography of war. Cooperation and Conflict, 54(2), pp.149-166.
  • Crawford, A., & Hutchinson, S. (2016). Mapping the Contours of ‘Everyday Security’: Time, space and emotion. British Journal of Criminology, 56(6), pp.1184-1202.
  • Nyman, J., 2021. The everyday life of security: Capturing space, practice, and affect. International Political Sociology, 15(3), pp.313-337.
  • Wibben, A.T., 2020. Everyday security, feminism, and the continuum of violence. Journal of Global Security Studies, 5(1), pp.115-121.
  • Eschle, C., 2018. Nuclear (in) security in the everyday: Peace campers as everyday security practitioners. Security Dialogue, 49(4), pp.289-305.
  • Higate, P. and Henry, M., 2010. Space, performance and everyday security in the peacekeeping context. International Peacekeeping, 17(1), pp.32-48.
  • Autesserre, Séverine (2014) Peaceland: conflict resolution and the everyday politics of international intervention. Cambridge University Press, 2014. Chapter 1
  • Krause, Jana. (2019). Gender Dimensions of (Non)Violence in Communal Conflict: The Case of Jos, Nigeria. Comparative Political Studies.
  • Randazzo, E. (2016) The paradoxes of the ‘everyday’: scrutinising the local turn in peace building, Third World Quarterly, 37(8), 1351-1370, DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2015.1120154
  •  

    IPE

  • Hobson, J.M. and Seabrooke, L., 2009. Everyday international political economy. In Routledge Handbook of International Political Economy (IPE) (pp. 290-306). Routledge.
  • Elias, J., 2010. Locating the “everyday” in international political economy: that roar which lies on the other side of silence.
  • Davies, M., 2016. Everyday life as critique: Revisiting the everyday in IPE with Henri Lefebvre and postcolonialism. International Political Sociology, 10(1), pp.22-38.
  •  

    Nationalism:

  • Ichijo, A. (2009). Sovereignty and Nationalism in the Twenty-first Century: The Scottish Case, Ethnopolitics, 8(2), 155-172, DOI: 10.1080/17449050902761624
  • Fox, J. E., & Miller-Idriss, C. (2008). Everyday nationhood. Ethnicities, 8(4), 536-563. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468796808088925
  • Edensor, T. (2006). Reconsidering National Temporalities: Institutional Times, Everyday Routines, Serial Spaces and Synchronicities. European Journal of Social Theory, 9(4), 525-545. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431006071996
  • Bonikowski, B. (2016). Nationalism in Settled Times. Annual Review of Sociology, 42(1), 427–449. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-081715-074412.
  • Antonsich, M. (2016). The “Everyday” of Banal Nationalism – Ordinary people’s views on Italy and Italian. Political Geography, 54, 32–42.
  • Antonsich, M. (2020). Everyday Nation in Times of Rising Nationalism. Sociology, 54(6), 1230–1237.
  • Billig, M. (1995). Banal Nationalism. London: Sage Publications.
  • Fox, J. E.  (2006). Consuming the nation: Holidays, sports, and the production of collective belonging. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 29(2), 217-236, DOI: 10.1080/01419870500465207
  • Skey, M. (2013). Why Do Nations Matter? The British Journal of Sociology, 64, 81-98. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12007
  • Hearn, J. (2007). National Identity: Banal, personal and embedded. Nations and Nationalism, 13, 657-674. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8129.2007.00303.x
  • Ranta, R., & Ichijo, A. (2022). Food, National Identity and Nationalism
  • From Everyday to Global Politics. London: Palgrave Macmillian.

  • Thompson, A. (2001). Nations, National Identities and Human Agency: Putting people back into nations. Sociological Review, 49(1), pp. 18-32.
  • Zhao, S. (2004). A Nation-state by Construction: Dynamics of modern Chinese nationalism.  Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  • Balthazar, A. C. (2021). Ethics and Nationalist Populism at the British Seaside Negotiating Character. London: Routledge.
  •  

    Sovereignty:

  • Doty, R. L. (1996). “Sovereignty and the Nation: Constructing the Boundaries of National Identity.” In State Sovereignty as Social Construct, edited by Thomas J. Biersteker and Cynthia Weber, 121–47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • de Carvalho, B., Schia, N. N., & Guillaume, X. (2019). Everyday sovereignty: International experts, brokers and local ownership in peacebuilding Liberia. European Journal of International Relations, 25(1), 179-202. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066118759178
  • Doty, R. L. (2003). Anti-Immigration in Western Democracies: Statecraft, desire, and the politics of exclusion. London: Routledge.
  • Doty, R. L. (2009). The Law into Their Own Hands: Immigration and the politics of exceptionalism. Tuscon: The University of Arizona Press.
  • Biersteker, T.J., & Weber, C. (1996). State Sovereignty as Social Construct. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Ashley, K. (1988). Untying the Sovereign State: A double reading of the anarchy problematique. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 17(2), pp. 227–62.
  • Malmvig, H. (2006). State Sovereignty and Intervention: A discourse analysis of interventionary and non-interventionary practices in Kosovo and Algeria. London: Routledge.
  • Mitchell, T. (1991). The limits of the State: Beyond statist approaches and their critics. American Political Science Review, 85(1), pp. 77–96.
  • Mitchell, T. (2002). Rule of Experts: Egypt, techno-politics, modernity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Visoka, G. (2019). Metis diplomacy: The everyday politics of becoming a sovereign state. Cooperation and Conflict, 54(2), pp. 167–190.
  • Weber, C. (1998). Performative States. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 27(1), pp. 77–95.
  • McConnell, F. (2009). De Facto, Displaced, Tacit: The sovereign articulations of the Tibetan Government-in-Exile. Political Geography, 28(6), pp. 343–352. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2009.04.001.
  • Mathieu, X. (2020). Sovereign Myths in International Relations: Sovereignty as equality and the reproduction of Eurocentric blindness. Journal of International Political Theory, 16(3), 339-360. https://doi.org/10.1177/1755088218814072
  • Heiskanen, J. (2019). Spectra of Sovereignty: Nationalism and International Relations. International Political Sociology, 13(3), pp. 315–332. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olz007.
  • Bryant, R., & Reeves, M. (Eds.). (2021). The Everyday Lives of Sovereignty: Political Imagination beyond the State. Cornell University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctv16kkww

The target group for this course includes master’s students in International Relations and related social science disciplines who are interested in reexamining the politics of nationalism and sovereignty as lived experiences. The course explores perspectives from sites and positions often overlooked in mainstream debates. No prior qualifications are required for participation.

Oral
Collective
Continuous feedback during the course of the semester
Feedback by final exam (In addition to the grade)
Peer feedback (Students give each other feedback)

I intend to combine several feedback forms. I hope to provide general, group-based feedback during class discussions based on what I observe as the general needs that the students as a whole may need help with. 

Feedback will also be tied to the learning goals of this course. This will help students understand the purpose of the feedback and how it should relate back to their overall learning outcomes. I will do this in an ongoing manner as the course proceeds.

ECTS
7,5 ECTS
Type of assessment
Portfolio
Type of assessment details
Portfolio exam
Marking scale
7-point grading scale
Censorship form
No external censorship
Re-exam

- In the semester where the course takes place: Free written assignment

- In subsequent semesters: Free written assignment

Criteria for exam assessment
  • Grade 12 is given for an outstanding performance: the student lives up to the course's goal description in an independent and convincing manner with no or few and minor shortcomings
  • Grade 7 is given for a good performance: the student is confidently able to live up to the goal description, albeit with several shortcomings
  • Grade 02 is given for an adequate performance: the minimum acceptable performance in which the student is only able to live up to the goal description in an insecure and incomplete manner

Single subject courses (day)

  • Category
  • Hours
  • Class Instruction
  • 28
  • English
  • 28

Kursusinformation

Language
English
Course number
ASTK18458U
ECTS
7,5 ECTS
Programme level
Full Degree Master
Bachelor
Duration

1 semester

Placement
Spring
Price

http://polsci.ku.dk/uddannelser/eftervidereuddannelse/aabent_universitet/

Schedulegroup
.
Studyboard
Department of Political Science, Study Council
Contracting department
  • Department of Political Science
  • Department of Anthropology
  • Social Data Science
Contracting faculty
  • Faculty of Social Sciences
Course Coordinator
  • Yi-Hui Lin   (3-6f6c71436c6976316e7831676e)
Saved on the 11-10-2024

Are you BA- or KA-student?

Are you bachelor- or kandidat-student, then find the course in the course catalog for students:

Courseinformation of students