Imperial Mission, ‘Scientific’ Method: an Alternative Account of the Origins of IR

Thakur, Vineet; Davis, Alexander E.; Vale, Peter

doi:10.1177/0305829817711911

Cited by 32 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…iv The 're-turn to empire in IR' is now well underway, with a rich, growing literature on the various forms of connection between empire, world politics, international order, and the discipline of IR itself (Bayly, 2014;e.g. Keene, 2002;Inayattullah and Blaney, 2004;Shilliam, 2010;Vitalis, 2015;Thakur, et. al., 2017).…”

Section: The Imperial Division Of the Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 The ‘re-turn to empire in IR’ is now well underway, with a rich, growing literature on the various forms of connection between empire, world politics, international order and the discipline of IR itself (Bayly, 2014; e.g. Inayatullah and Blaney, 2004; Keene, 2002; Shilliam, 2010; Thakur et al, 2017; Vitalis, 2015). Yet, there remain limits to the extent to which the imperial frame of analysis can so far be construed as ‘reconstructive’ rather than simply ‘additive’ (see Pasha, 2010: 218).…”

Section: The Imperial Division Of the Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Imperial dialectics and epistemic mapping: From decolonisation to anti-Eurocentric IR

Murray

2019

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What would it mean to construct a post-imperial discipline rather than a ‘post-Western’ one? ‘Post-imperial’ means addressing the ways in which colonial empires divided the world into separate realms of human capability and thought. The binary categories of Western and Eastern, or Western and non-Western, represent one such way of dividing the world according to an imperial imaginary. Rather than merely excluding, these divisions created justifications for local universalisms and power structures. Yet, many anti-Eurocentric scholars now make use of these categories in order to argue for fixed epistemic differences between Western and non-Western populations. Accordingly, I critique the imperial division of the world by drawing on the intellectual trajectories of two thinkers who struggled against empire in the 20th century: WEB Du Bois and Frantz Fanon. Du Bois and Fanon were both aware of how ethnic and cultural foundations for politics could reproduce imperial order, and, therefore, offer potential alternatives to Western/non-Western ontologies. This includes recognising that representations of difference are processual, determined by strategic necessity, and subject to incentives to represent difference within hierarchical institutions. This article builds on recent studies in International Relations and other disciplines to think through the legacies of empire in knowledge production, and to push towards more historical and relational approaches to world political and social inquiry.

show abstract

Section: The Imperial Division Of the Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Imperial Division Of the Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Imperial dialectics and epistemic mapping: From decolonisation to anti-Eurocentric IR

Murray

2019

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…131 Furthermore, the South Africans who did contribute to the founding of our discipline, advanced the argument that the violently imposed racialised difference could be used to retheorise the British Empire and the international system as a 'permanent organic union'. 132 Scholars such as Lionel Curtis, Robert Brand, and Philip Kerr travelled across the empire, actively participating in the British/Royal Institute of International Affairs, writing the…”

Section: From Critiquing Ir To Decolonising the Universitymentioning

confidence: 99%

IR, the Critic, and the World: From Reifying the Discipline to Decolonising the University

Kamola

2020

Millennium: Journal of International Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why does IR scholarship seem so resistant to travel into other disciplinary spaces? To answer this question, I look at the tendency for scholars within our discipline to talk to the discipline, about the discipline, and for the discipline. We obsess over ‘IR’ and, in doing so, reify IR as a thing. I turn towards Edward Said’s arguments about the worldliness of texts, and how reification shapes how ideas travel. I then provide two illustrations of how scholars have reified IR as a thing: Robert Cox’s approach to critical theory and Amitav Acharya’s call for a ‘Global IR’. In both cases, contrary to expectation, the authors reify IR as a thing, portraying the discipline as distinct from the world. IR is treated as something with agency, ignoring how disciplinary knowledge is produced within worldly institutions. I conclude by looking at three strategies for studying worldly relations in ways that refuse to reify the discipline: showing disloyalty to the discipline, engaging the political economy of higher education, and seeking to decolonise the university. Rather than reifying IR, these strategies help us to engage our scholarly work in a way that prioritises worldly critical engagements within our disciplinary community, and the world.

show abstract

“…Even more recently, the agenda to challenge (Western) foundational assumptions, decentralise knowledge production, and globalise ontologies from the South has also taken hold in the field of international relations (IR). Critical reflection on the racist and imperial lineage of the discipline has represented a first step in an aspirational transition towards a decolonised global IR that is founded on 'pluralistic universalism' and recognises difference, but 'eschews exceptionalism' (Acharya 2014, 649; see also Thakur, Davis, and Vale 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Caribbean perspective on China–Caribbean relations: global IR, dependency and the postcolonial condition

González-Vicente

Montoute

2020

Third World Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The field of global international relations remains to a great extent aspirational and focussed on the critique of Western-centric perspectives or the appraisal of non-Western theories within their specific geographical and historical contexts. In this essay, we go a step further and transpose a set of Caribbean-based theories that gained prominence in the 1960s and 1970s to apply it to the study of China's contemporary relations with the Caribbean Community, drawing broader implications for China's Belt and Road Initiative. The Caribbean's tradition of critical and radical thought raises important questions about continuing epistemic dependency, structural impediments to development in small and highly open states, and a number of unresolved issues relating to the postcolonial condition in former plantation societies. Drawing upon these insights, we contend that the expectations placed on the emerging 'South-South' link with China are easily overstated, given China's elitist business-centric approach to development, the eschewing of participatory approaches in Sino-Caribbean ventures and the passive incorporation of the Caribbean into China's global vision.

show abstract

Imperial Mission, ‘Scientific’ Method: an Alternative Account of the Origins of IR

Abstract: This article offers an alternative account of the origins of academic IR to the conventional Aberystwyth-centered one. Informed by a close reading of the archive, our narrative proposes we also provide an alternative to the nationally-limited revisionist accounts.

Cited by 32 publications

References 5 publications

Imperial dialectics and epistemic mapping: From decolonisation to anti-Eurocentric IR

Imperial dialectics and epistemic mapping: From decolonisation to anti-Eurocentric IR

IR, the Critic, and the World: From Reifying the Discipline to Decolonising the University

A Caribbean perspective on China–Caribbean relations: global IR, dependency and the postcolonial condition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About