Textualising British Politics: Deconstructing the subject of British foreign policy

British politics has been described as a sub-discipline crying out for methodological and ideational cross-fertilisation. Where other areas of political science have benefited from new ideas, British politics has remained largely atheoretical and underdeveloped. This has changed recently with the rise of interpretivism but the study of British politics would also benefit from more serious engagement with poststructuralism. With this in mind, I examine how the thought of Jacques Derrida and deconstruction could be useful for thinking through the foundations of British politics, re-examining what appears natural or given and revealing the problematic and contradictory status of these foundations. After suggesting the need to 'textualise' British politics', I illustrate how deconstruction operates in a specific context, that of British foreign policy since 1997. This exploration reveals how certain decisions (such as the invasion of Iraq in 2003) became possible in the first place, and how their basis in an idea of an 'us' and a 'them', a coherent, autonomous subject separate from its object, is deeply problematic. Such a critical reading of British politics is impossible within the dominant interpretivist framework, and opens up new possibilities for thought which form an important supplement to existing ways of studying the field.

Further reflections on Habermas's contribution to discourse in child protection: An examination of power in social life

Hayes and Houston's positive review of Habermas's contribution to discourse in family group conferences (in this journal) has been challenged by Garrett. In this paper, one of the authors replies to Garrett but extends the analysis through a more considered, developed and detailed examination of Habermas's thoughts on power in social life. This leads to a conceptual framework that enables the participants in the conference to exercise power in a positive manner. In developing this earlier analysis, the paper also acknowledges Garrett's argument that Bourdieu helps us to understand the nature of constraining social structures in child protection. However, Bourdieu's ideas are subsequently challenged on the grounds that they lack a competent formulation on human agency - a faculty that Habermas cogently elucidates. This enlarged understanding of agency, it is argued, offers a theoretical resource that fits better with the ethos of emancipatory social work.