Childhood, Playing War, and Militarism: Beyond Discourses of Domination/Resistance and Towards an Ethics of Encounter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The military-industrial-entertainment complex is immensely powerful. War and peace are no longer highly differentiated zones in British and American societies. War has entered, uninvited, into our homes and taken up residence. Bourke, 2014: 12 Introduction Until relatively recently, the notion that children could be considered meaningful political actors was rarely considered within either academic studies or more generally in public discourse (see Beier, 2015). This chapter seeks to argue that, in part, this has been because of the ways in which political acts, (in this case, specifically resistance), have come to be defined and understood. Hughes (2020) has recently argued for a re-thinking of what counts as resistance, not least in relation to the ‘logic of intention’ that has, to date, formed a central part in its definition. When conceived only as an intentional act, with pre-determined outcomes and goals, it is difficult to recognize the potential capacity of children enacting such political agency. Here we use the example of children playing with war toys as one means of thinking differently about their political agency in general and their ability to enact resistance in particular. The study of popular culture and global politics has also suffered at times from an unwillingness to ascribe political agency to the consumers of various forms of popular culture, and studies have frequently taken as their starting point that the power-laden ideological meanings of any given cultural text or artefact are capable of overwhelming audiences and consumers (for critiques of these positions, see Sharp, 2000; Dittmer and Gray, 2010). With regard to both the political lives of children and the politics of popular culture, there is a sense that the task of the critical academic is to uncover or decode the ways in which the lives of children, on the one hand, or the political lives of audiences and consumers, on the other, are overwhelmed or dominated by powerful external others. Resistance is sometimes offered as a possibility for critical or knowing audiences with regard to forms of popular culture, but it rarely features in accounts of the ways in which childhood and the political intersect. We briefly return to this theme in the conclusion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.067 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".