Toronto—The Zoryan Institute and its division, the International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies, are introducing Genocide Studies International, the continuation of publishing efforts by the International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies (A Division of the Zoryan Institute) (“IIGHRS”) and the University of Toronto Press since 2006.
***
International Institute for Genocide and
Human Rights Studies
A Division of the Zoryan Institute
Announcing New Journal: Genocide Studies
International
Toronto—The Zoryan Institute and its
division, the International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies,
are introducing Genocide Studies International, the continuation of publishing
efforts by the International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies (A
Division of the Zoryan Institute) (“IIGHRS”) and the University of Toronto
Press since 2006.
Click Here to Order GSI Today!
This peer-reviewed journal, edited by
the team of Maureen Hiebert, Herbert Hirsch, Roger W. Smith, and Henry Theriault,
is interdisciplinary and comparative in nature. It welcomes submissions on
individual case studies, thematic approaches, and policy analyses that relate
to the history, causes, impact, aftermath, and all other aspects of genocide.
Armenians around the world recognize the
first-hand impacts of genocide, and from that vantage point understand better
than most the incredible need for genocide prevention to be encouraged,
developed, and legislated.
The first issue of GSI will be concerned
with "The Failure of Prevention," focusing on Sudan—Darfur, the Nuba
Mountains crisis —and on the politics of prevention or the lack thereof. The
March 2015 issue will focus on the 100th anniversary of the Ottoman Genocide of
Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks.
In an interview with editor Henry
Theriault, we take a closer look at what GSI represents and how the editors
chose the topic of their first issue.
Q. What do you hope to achieve with this
new journal?
“I hope that we can accomplish two
things that go beyond the typical academic fare. First, I hope that the work published will
have a policy dimension that can have an effect on actual genocide
prevention. Second, I hope that we can
identify and publish truly innovative work that is not just mere academic
filler, but that presents genuinely new ideas about genocide and provides new
frameworks that will change, in a positive way, how we approach the problem.”
Q. Why does a journal like this
emphasize comparison in Genocide Studies?
“It is not just comparison, which is
more of a 1990s concept in Genocide Studies – looking at how cases of genocide
are alike and different: we have moved
to a more sophisticated level, where the attempt to theorize genocide as human
social practice, history, and political process requires engaging many
different cases of genocide. Earlier
theorizing of genocide sometimes was quite limited by focus on just the
Holocaust or at most the Holocaust and Armenian Genocide. As important as these cases are, one simply
cannot understand genocide through examination of them alone. Case studies are very important not just to
historians, political scientists and sociologists, etc., but also to
philosophers, anthropologists, etc., who attempt to theorize the issue more
generally. Too often in fields such as
philosophy it is possible to go through a whole article on “genocide” that does
not discuss a single actual genocide, even for illustration purposes, and thus
engages abstractions without any real meaning or value.”
Q. Why did the editors decide on
genocide prevention as the subject matter for the first issue?
“Ultimately, this is the goal. While it is important to understand what has
happened in the past in the fullest way possible and to engage issues of
justice and rehabilitation for past cases, the editorial team and IIGHRS are
very concerned about doing something meaningful to try to stop or mitigate
genocide. What is more, we have all long
been frustrated at the lack of success in this regard, a failure that runs
across academia, journalism, public policy, and beyond. We wanted to start by getting attention to
just how little we’ve done in that regard, despite an incredible, even
exponential growth in the field of Genocide Studies. It might even be that the growth of the field
as an academic area has been inversely proportional to the impact of work in
the field on the problem of genocide.”
Q. How do you think policy makers will
be affected by the content of GSI?
“This is very difficult to predict, but
first and foremost I hope that they will pay attention to its content when
trying to engage an issue that is either related to something in GSI or that we
have an article directly on. The field
has a good deal to offer policy makers if they are (1) simply willing
Henry Theriault, editing team of
GSI to do some reading that goes
beyond policy briefs (usually the same old stuff that analysts have been
turning out for years) and press releases, and (2) interested in genuinely
addressing the problem of genocide, rather than just appearing for public
relations purposes to do so. Too often
policy decisions are based on simplistic or inaccurate understandings of the
forces in play, the histories of violence, etc.
GSI can help policy makers get accurate information and, even more
importantly, reliable interpretations for the tough challenges they face.”
Q. How do you foresee this journal
affecting the field of Genocide Studies?
“The field is at a crucial point. It is expanding in a way similar to other
fields developed in the past 50 years initially through political and ethical
concerns and challenges to academia and to the socio-political order. It is now beginning to follow such fields
down the road of institutionalization.
Now graduate students are typically choosing topics of research not out
of a genuine intellectual and ethical concern, but in order to catch the next
trend so that they can get good academic jobs.
Factions in the field have developed that are focused on territorial
power and protection in academia, not dealing with genocide. Genocide Studies is often now much more about
the individual scholars than the object of study, just as traditional
disciplines long ago became. By
publishing a different kind of scholarship that puts the object back at the
focus and looking for new, innovative work that is typically on the margins of
a field and not in its establishment, institutionalized center, GSI might help
reverse this trend somewhat – or at least carve out enough space for those
special junior (and not so junior) scholars who work at the margins to produce
really innovative work, despite the institutionalization of the field.”
“In conclusion, one of the things that
makes GSI so special and unique is the leadership role the Zoryan Institute,
and its division, the International Institute for Genocide and Human Rights
Studies has played in the creation of the journal and will play in establishing
it as one of the premiere journals in human rights studies. Zoryan’s work has long been at the
cutting-edge of important developments in both the study of and, importantly,
prevention of genocide and other mass human rights abuses. With its special tie to Armenians in North
America and around the world, it provides globally-minded Armenians an
opportunity to support innovative scholarship and policy initiatives on the
Armenian Genocide and other human rights issues affecting groups across the
world. GSI offers the next step in
translating the heartfelt support from Armenians into important scholarship and
real, positive change, toward the ultimate goal of finally making good on the
pledge of 'Never again.'”
GSI is now available online at
www.utpjournals.com/Genocide-Studies-International.html and will be available
in print in April 2014.
For more information please contact the
IIGHRS at admin@genocidestudies.org or call 416-250-9807.
http://us6.campaign-archive2.com/?u=953bb838fd033f9888c55b269&id=b989c64888&e=ff79579a7b


Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder
Not: Yalnızca bu blogun üyesi yorum gönderebilir.