A Securitization Theory Post-Copenhagen School

Abstract

The conclusion reached in the previous chapter was that the reflections by the Copenhagen School, and Wœver in particular, are insufficiently articulated to provide a solid basis for a (comprehensive) securitization theory. Against this background, the purpose of this chapter is to suggest an alternative reading of processes of securitization by theorizing securitization as a specific conceptualization of discourse dynamics.1 The chapter argues that securitization theory can thereby best be grounded in a neo- or post-Marxist reading of discourse theory which is marked by a much stronger acknowledgement and consistent incorporation of a distinctly social space of discursive productions than conventional poststructuralism in IR (including the works of Derrida and Butler, which Wœver only cursorily and selectively draws upon). Such a more comprehensive conceptualization of processes of securitization will ultimately lead to a two-fold theorization of structuration dynamics in relation to discourse that can be specified differently depending on empirical needs: yet, sociopolitically, it will lead to a the- orization of processes of authorization/authority in discourse, whereas sociolinguistically it can be based on a theory of discursive articulations.