Cruel memes spread messages of hate via social media. The Internet itself extends the memes’ geographical reach, and many such cruel memes circulate across borders. This article examines the activities of cruel memeing—practices of creating, commenting on, reinforcing (“liking”), sharing, remixing, and otherwise endorsing cruel memes—as microscale hostile engagements in global politics. This is a politics of the everyday that is accessible to people in their ordinary lives and that is designed to be entertaining as well as cruel. The research draws on a large dataset of memes, comment threads, and related information from two opposed Reddit communities, r/TheLeftCantMeme and r/TheRightCantMeme. The power-flow theoretical framework structures an interpretive analysis of how cruel memes circulate within the social media space. We examine content (including narrative, degree of cruelty, and other components), and velocity of information flow, as well as access to the flow. Focusing on racism, antisemitism, and disdain for political opponents, we draw on interpretive methods to analyze the flow of information that spreads hate. We find: (1) normalization of divisiveness, derisiveness, and bigotry; (2) justifications of violence; and (3) emergence of agents despite pseudonymity. Cruel memeing activities combine with the structure of the online communities to spread hatred far beyond social media platforms.

Les mèmes cruels répandent des messages de haine sur les réseaux sociaux. Internet en lui-même étend la portée géographique des mèmes et nombre de ces mèmes cruels circulent au-delà des frontières. Cet article examine les activités liées aux mèmes cruels—pratiques de création, de commentaire, de renforcement (par des « J'aime), de partage, de recyclage et autrement d'adoption des mèmes cruels—en tant qu'engagements au niveau micro dans la politique mondiale. Il s'agit d'une politique du quotidien qui est accessible aux gens dans leurs vies ordinaires et qui est conçue pour être divertissante tout en étant cruelle. Cette recherche s'appuie sur un vaste jeu de données comprenant des mèmes, des fils de commentaires et des informations associées issus de deux communautés Reddit opposées, r/TheLeftCantMeme et r/TheRightCantMeme. Le cadre théorique du flux de pouvoir structure une analyse interprétative de la manière dont les mèmes cruels circulent dans l'espace des réseaux sociaux. Nous avons examiné le contenu (notamment le discours, le degré de cruauté et d'autres composantes), la vitesse du flux d'informations et l'accès à ce flux. En nous concentrant sur le racisme, l'antisémitisme et le mépris des opposants politiques, nous nous sommes appuyés sur des méthodes d'interprétation visant à analyser le flux d'informations qui répand la haine. Nous avons constanté: (1) une normalisation de la division, de la dérision et du sectarisme, (2) des justifications de la violence, et (3) l’émergence d'agents malgré le pseudonymat. Les activités liées aux mèmes cruels s'associent à la structure des communautés en ligne pour répandre la haine bien au-delà des plateformes de réseaux sociaux.

Los memes crueles difunden mensajes de odio mediante las redes sociales. La internet misma amplía su alcance geográfico, y muchos de estos memes crueles atraviesan las fronteras. En este artículo, analizamos las actividades relacionadas con la publicación de memes crueles, es decir, las prácticas de crear, comentar, reafirmar (dar “me gusta”), compartir, combinar y avalar memes crueles, como interacciones hostiles a microescala en el ámbito de la política internacional. Se trata de una política de lo cotidiano a la que las personas pueden acceder en sus vidas diarias y que está diseñada para entretener y, también, para lastimar. Esta investigación se basa en un gran conjunto de datos sobre memes, secciones de comentarios e información relacionada de dos comunidades opuestas de Reddit: r/TheLeftCantMeme y r/TheRightCantMeme. El marco teórico del flujo del poder estructura un análisis interpretativo de la forma en la que los memes crueles circulan en el ámbito de las redes sociales. Analizamos el contenido (por ejemplo, la técnica narrativa, el grado de crueldad y otros componentes), la velocidad del flujo de la información y la capacidad de acceso al flujo. Nos centramos en el racismo, el antisemitismo y el desprecio por los adversarios políticos, y nos basamos en métodos interpretativos para analizar el flujo de información que propaga odio. Encontramos: (1) la normalización del divisionismo, la burla y la intolerancia; (2) justificaciones de los actos de violencia; y (3) el surgimiento de agentes a pesar de la seudonimia. Las actividades relacionadas con la publicación de memes crueles se combinan con la estructura de las comunidades en línea para propagar el odio mucho más allá de las plataformas de las redes sociales.

Scholars of international relations frequently explore how states normalize the use of military force through processes of militarization, yet few have analyzed how new information and communication technologies impact on these processes. The essays in this forum address this gap, and consider the political significance of new technologies, new actors, and new practices that shape Militarization 2.0 and normalize political violence in the digital age. The authors in this forum rely, to varying degrees, on common militarized tropes and dichotomies (such as authenticity, belonging, and (de)humanizing framings) that are key to militarization, including those devices that rest on gender, race/ethnicity, and heteronormativity. Moving beyond a military-centered approach to militarization, the authors' questions cover ministries of foreign affairs; the embodied performances of celebrity leaders and insurgency groups; arms producers, the military video game industry, and private military and security companies; and violence entrepreneurs. The forum closes with reflections from Cynthia Enloe.

This exploratory study aims to understand why, and propose remedies for, the treatment of political risk and sustainability as siloed risk areas in risk analyses. I employ an interdisciplinary theoretical approach that focuses on the roles of values and worldviews, stages of sustainability and hybrid knowledge to understand this siloing. The large-N interpretive method used here combines content frequency counts with discourse analysis to examine over 400 corporate communication documents from 37 companies. The study also explores how, through corporate communication, companies that provide political risk analysis convey what is at risk and what counts as sustainability. I argue that the broad shared ‘cultural’ tones of what it means to be in the political risk field pose challenges for integrating political risk and sustainability. The study concludes with several recommendations on how to overcome the current barriers in order to integrate political risk and sustainability in risk analyses.

Each year the prevalence of digitized information becomes more entrenched, not least with the amount of activity on social media. Yet, new media studies pose a number of challenges to international relations scholarship, which are only beginning to be addressed. With some exceptions IR scholars who conduct this research tend to rely on traditional qualitative methods and have been hesitant to embrace interdisciplinary collaboration-especially with those disciplines outside of the social sciences-as well as methodological pluralism across interpretive and quantitative approaches within the social sciences. This tendency shows a general lack of understanding of what new/social media might mean, not only as a source of and tool for generating information but also as a structural factor in how we conduct IR research and practice international relations. In this way, social media can provoke IR scholars to ask questions about their own discipline. This article aims to address these challenges and to provide suggestions on how to bring structural aspects of new media into IR research. In particular, it incorporates ideas centered on the shifting media ecology as fundamental to examining these structural challenges in terms of practicing international relations and in the visual turn in IR.

Producers of large conventional weapons systems are significant actors in politics and their presence in everyday life is a potential site of militarization, yet they remain remarkably understudied in International Relations (IR) research. Though the public cannot purchase their products, 88 of the top 100 arms producers use official corporate YouTube channels to reach the public. Their YouTube videos are political artefacts that these companies use to ‘sell’ national security as military security, framing the military as a ‘good, natural, and necessary’ part of society. Examining these videos reveals how this messaging can be conceptualized as a type of militarization because of the relation ‘good, natural, and necessary’ has to national security constructions. I use an intersectional lens and a multi-modal audio-visual approach to understand how images, sounds, and texts work together to tell a version of Sweden’s national security story as constructed in Saab’s official corporate YouTube videos. These videos illuminate a view that Sweden does (and should) have militarized national security that seems counter to images of a peacekeeping nation. This national security is centred on a citizen identity that consists of masculinized, heteronormative, and nationally hierarchical constructions of militarized national security.

Since the end of the Cold War, the study of militarism and militarization has been eclipsed by other, newer, concepts especially in the fields of history, international relations, and media studies. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, militarization has taken a back seat in discussions and questions concerning new types of conflicts, security, and actors that began to emerge in the 1990s. In this article, we document the work that has continued on the subject of militarism in various fields, explore the relevance of militarism as a concept in post-Cold War literature, and address what questions the field of militarism is equipped to answer.