Baldwinson Raquel
English, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
History of Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Med Humanit. 2022 May 24. doi: 10.1136/medhum-2021-012271.
The critique of global health is a longstanding tradition in the global health humanities (GHH). Typically, this critique takes an expected tack: critics take a slice of global health, identify its rhetoric, expose its power, and elucidate its unanticipated consequences. Here, I subject global health critique to its own approach-conducting a 'rhetorical review' of global health critique in order to ascertain whether it has rhetoric, power and unanticipated consequences of its own. Following this review, I find that global health critique has a rhetoric, and that this rhetoric can be organised into three types: (1) 'global health as mere rhetoric', (2) 'splitting global health', and (3) 'figuring global health war.' Ultimately, I argue that the rhetoric of GHH critique, like the rhetoric of global health, is a rhetoric of consequence-and a rhetoric worth revisiting.
对全球健康的批判是全球健康人文学科（GHH）中的一个长期传统。通常，这种批判采取一种预期的方式：批评者选取全球健康的一部分，识别其言辞，揭示其力量，并阐明其意外后果。在此，我将全球健康批判应用于其自身的方法——对全球健康批判进行一次“修辞学审视”，以确定它自身是否存在言辞、力量和意外后果。经过这次审视，我发现全球健康批判有一种言辞，并且这种言辞可以分为三种类型：（1）“全球健康只是言辞”，（2）“分割全球健康”，以及（3）“描绘全球健康战争”。最终，我认为全球健康人文学科批判的言辞，如同全球健康的言辞一样，是一种关于后果的言辞——一种值得重新审视的言辞。
