understand politics w/o understanding how these categories came about. We don’t have to deny the reality of material violence to accept that. Yes, some PSists take it too far & see it as more than just a tool for analysis, but on that charge they are no more guilty than realists or anyone else.

You don’t have to like poststructuralism, but we shouldn’t caricature it. There is some bad PSism, but at its core it’s really just about the idea that language (“discourse”) creates the categories that make politics possible. State, combatant, civilian, etc are all discursive, and we can’t…

Speaking of fever dream inventions, I find it fascinating that the list includes “gender ideology,” as if that is a phrase that anyone who teaches/researches anything about gender would ever use. Do they expect to find courses titled “Gender Ideology” ?