diplomaticity

From diplomatic +‎ -ity.

diplomaticity (uncountable)

1. (rare) The quality of being diplomatic.

   Synonyms: diplomacy, diplomaticness (rare)

   • 1969, Pedoman tertib diplomatik dan tertib protokol, Jakarta: Departemen Luar Negeri, →OCLC, page 176:

     „Thus, the composed conditions of world affairs and the development of the national revolutions of AA nations made the new School of Thinking grow into a stature and basis of foreign policy designing the „perfect dream of every deiplomat”^[sic] by integrating Morality, Interest and Reason. Not self-interest formulated into a morality which becomes identical to interest ......... Not the kind of Reason of the „angle shooter” of Spitzfindigkeit”, the sly and cunning diplomaticity, but the Reason of mutual benefit based on the complementary aspects of political, economic and cultural relations of Africa, Asia and both Europe.

   • 2004 January 7, Rich, “rape fantasies?”, in talk.rape‎^[1] (Usenet), archived from the original on 23 April 2025:

     I don't think she belongs on a scale with the word "diplomatic" at all, there is a total and complete lack of diplomaticity (??).

   • 2018, Gilles Deleuze, translated by Mary Beth Mader, “Foucault: Lecture 2, 29 October 1985”, in The Deleuze Seminars‎^[2], West Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue University Research Repository, →DOI, archived from the original on 23 September 2023, part 3:

     And I appealed to the text—I refer you to it, for those of you who love Proust—when, in In Search of Lost Time, Proust stages an ambassador by the name of Monsieur de Norpois, Monsieur de Norpois is given two pages in In Search of Lost Time, splendid pages in which Monsieur de Norpois explains that diplomatic language has specific rules — Foucault would say: there is a threshold for the diplomaticity of statements — And that given the rules of the diplomatic statement, the meeting reports, for example, between ministers from different countries, say exactly all that is true, there is never anything hidden.

   • 2020, Alexander Stagnell, “Diplomacy and terrorism in the digital age”, in Diplomacy and Ideology: From the French Revolution to the Digital Age (Routledge New Diplomacy Studies), Abingdon, Oxfordshire; New York, N.Y.: Routledge, →ISBN, part IV (Diplomacy as Post-Politics), page 190:

     This meant that diplomacy could be imagined as the primary practice for ensuring that all these actors could “live together in difference,” something which merged well with the growing belief that diplomacy borders on something of an ontological and existential constant for us humans. In making these existential-ontological overtures, it was clear that a certain distance was being established from the classical idea that diplomacy was simply an answer to the anarchic field of nation-states. Instead, what we might call diplomaticity was now understood as a fundamentally human trait.