International Relations in Uncommon Places

Beier, J. Marshall

doi:10.1057/9781403979506

Cited by 69 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Economics resiliently foregrounds methodological individualism and rational choice and privileges 'scientific' formalist, statistical and quantitative analyses predicated on ontologically discrete -countable and calculable -categories, hence, marginalizing issues of affect, embodiment, subjectivity and culture. 8 Orthodox IPE -especially in the United States -retains much of this problematic theory/practice, as revealed in IPE's failure to 'globalize,' its preoccupation with exclusively 'trans-Atlantic' debates, and the various ways in which it exhibits a common sense that 'the West knows what is best for the Rest' (Beier 2005;Gruffydd Jones 2006). Postcolonial critiques rarely appear in orthodox IPE.…”

Section: Modernismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Problematic premises: positivism, modernism and masculinism in IPE

Peterson¹

2018

Handbook on the International Political Economy of Gender

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Questions of conceptualization are questions of power. (Mies 1998, p. 36) PROBLEMATIC PREMISES How is feminist International Political Economy (IPE) affected by the conceptualizations and power relations pervading conventional approaches to IPE? This is the question I explore in this chapter, and do so with two entwined objectives: to survey how 'problematic premises'-of positivism, modernism and masculinism-underpin and constrain dominant modes of theorizing IPE; and to consider how these premises shape interpretations of, responses to, debates within, and the current theory/practice of feminist IPE. To further contextualize this exploration, I indicate key starting points framing the chapter. First, I assume a critical orientation toward (neoliberal) capitalism understood as inextricably socio-cultural, economic and political processes, operating worldwide across 'levels of analysis' and promoting a polarization of rich-poor (within and between states/nations) and attendant, systemic harms. Second, my critical orientation toward capitalism is part of a more encompassing critique being developed primarily by feminists engaged in critical analyses of intersectionality. 1 Zillah Eisenstein (1998) contends that key structural hierarchies-of class, national 'difference,' ethnicity/race and gender/sexuality-constitute 'capitalist racist patriarchy' on a global scale. The theory/practice of capitalist racist patriarchy (henceforth, CRP) is the target of this larger critique, which follows from additional starting points: that feminist theory/ practice seeks not only to 'empower women' but to advance critical analysis and transformation of multiple, intersecting structural hierarchies, and that this entails not only a critique of 'patriarchy' but also a critical interrogation of its interaction witharguably co-constitution of-capitalism and racism. 2 This larger critique requires attention to the problematic premises of positivism, modernism and masculinism (henceforth, PMM) as well as their interactive effects. The chapter first briefly clarifies some key terms and organizational framing, then surveys how PMM commitments variously appear in orthodox International Relations (IR) and Economics and in both orthodox and heterodox IPE. This survey reveals these premises operating as both impediments to transformative critiques of CRP and as resistances to feminist IPE. I argue that while these conceptualizations operate differently in different discourses, the interaction of them typically obstructs historical,

show abstract

Section: Modernismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Problematic premises: positivism, modernism and masculinism in IPE

Peterson¹

2018

Handbook on the International Political Economy of Gender

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…La GG institucionaliza y perpetúa la dominación y exclusión mediante un proceso violento cuya construcción y legitimación se ha dado por siglos, a través de lo que Escobar (2005, p. 12) llama globalidad imperial, John Estos términos hacen referencia a los efectos de larga duración y alcance de la conquista y colonización que se mantienen hasta el día de hoy con el predominio de la Modernidad occidental liberal, 4 que se critica por ser totalizante y por encubrir la violencia en procesos supuestamente beneficiosos como la aculturación, la igualdad y el progreso, que se reproducen prácticamente en todos los planos de la vida cotidiana (Rivera Cusicanqui, 2010). Se trata de violencias casi invisibles o imperceptibles que consisten en negar la posibilidad de imaginar, existir y ser; una "colonización del alma" 5 (Rivera Cusicanqui, 2010), en la que el sujeto colonial pierde la capacidad de verse en una posición soñada, como dueño de su propio destino.…”

Section: Las Violencias Encubiertas De La Gobernanza Globalunclassified

“…Son muchos los procesos violentos que se dan como consecuencia de esas dicotomías: la deshumanización (Beier, 2005, p. 150), la absorción total -aculturación, imitación-o la exclusión total (Estermann, 2012, p. 26), la deslegitimación, la construcción del enemigo, la asimilación, la ahistoricisación (Chakrabarty, 2000) o la simple ceguera que lleva a proyectar los propios valores en el otro (Inayatullah y Blaney, 2004a, p. 10). Esto es lo que conceptos liberales como tolerancia y multiculturalismo ocultan.…”

Section: Las Violencias Encubiertas De La Gobernanza Globalunclassified

Violencias encubiertas de la gobernanza global

Querejazu

2016

Estud Pol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumenEl artículo problematiza las premisas ontológicas con las que la gobernanza global -como concepto y como proyecto político-se concibe y cómo esto institucionaliza y perpetúa la exclusión a través de violencias encubiertas que habilitan ciertas formas de ser y estar en el mundo, entre ellas, procesos de construcción del otro, la aceptación de una manera de conocer la realidad, restringiendo la posibilidad de pensar lo político global por otras vías. A partir de un enfoque crítico que toma argumentos posestructuralistas y poscolonialistas de las Relaciones Internacionales, se propone que existen alternativas que provienen de cosmovisiones diferentes que no solo pueden utilizarse para abordar los problemas desde otras perspectivas, que dan luces sobre otra forma de pensar la gobernanza global. Palabras claveGobernanza Global; Perspectivas Críticas; Cosmovisión; Poscolonialismo; Posestructuralismo.

show abstract

“…For example, J. Marshall Beier suggests that had the Canadian government agreed to support US ballistic missile defense in 2005, it would have threatened the Canadian identity abroad and consequently had a negative impact on Canada's international influence. 88 Instead, Canada now derives prestige and a degree of international influence from that 2005 decision. Thus, Canada's old self-image as a trusted ally has evolved into that of a model international citizen.…”

Section: Prestige For Its Own Sakementioning

confidence: 99%

Valuing Reputation and Prestige: Canadian Foreign Policy and the International Criminal Court

Wylie¹

2009

American Review of Canadian Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International Relations in Uncommon Places

Cited by 69 publications

References 0 publications

Problematic premises: positivism, modernism and masculinism in IPE

Problematic premises: positivism, modernism and masculinism in IPE

Violencias encubiertas de la gobernanza global

Valuing Reputation and Prestige: Canadian Foreign Policy and the International Criminal Court

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About