Feminism and IR and the Conditions for Critical Dialogue

My objective in this paper is to problematize the call for dialogue and engagement between feminists and non-feminist International Relations (IR) scholars. I will concentrate on two pieces of scholarship to discuss the issue of dialogue: first, Robert Keohane’s “Beyond Dychotomies: Conversations between International Relations and Feminist Theory’s” (Keohane, 1998); and second, Anne Tickner’s (1997) “You Just don’t Understand: Troubled Engagements between Feminists and IR Theorists.” In both pieces the question of dialogue is of most importance.

La renuncia a la equidad y la domesticación de la salud pública

Under present historical conditions of extreme social inequity, sustained by structural impoverishment, the destruction of living conditions and deterioration of environmental integrity, under the logic of big business, and precisely when the people’s organizations are working intensely in defending creatively human rights and health, academic public health evidences an exasperating passiveness; university departments, local and federal government agencies and even non-governmental organizations, keep implementing ineffective and innocuous health programs -some of them sustained by an expensive propaganda apparatus- that reproduce the same conventional plans, most of which end up reinforcing the rules of the neoliberal game. The present paper seeks to explain this historical surrender of public health; the institutional incapacity to foresee the structural roots of that flourishing pathology of inequity; and its divorce from the struggle of the most progressive social organizations. To accomplish this critique of hegemonic public health, the author analyzes the historical and epistemological roots of that “blindness” and the ideological fundaments of that political passiveness.