International Relations
Week Five
Critical approaches to IR
Up until the 1980’s the dominant paradigm in IR thought was the realist paradigm, however now more credence is given to critical theory.
Critical theory and Gramscian IPE (Robert Cox is of particular note here)
Its origins come from the Frankfurt school of Critical theory and from Antonio Gramsci (Italian philosopher).
From Theories of
International Relations Burchill and Linklater
Its roots can be
traced back to the Enlightenment and Kant, Hegel and Marx. The imprint of
classical Greek thought as well as Nietzsche and Weber. Critical theory came to
mean a questioning of the prevailing order of social and political modernity
through a method of immanent critique. It is an attempt to ‘radicalise epistemology
by unearthing the roots of knowledge in life’ (McCarthy Theories of IR page
147) Critical theory draws upon various strands of Western social, political,
and philosophical thought in order to erect a theoretical framework capable of
reflecting on the nature and purposes of theory and revealing both obvious and
subtle forms of injustice and domination in society. As Thomas McCarthy
remarks, critical theory promises ‘both a reflection on the conditions of
knowledge and a critical-reflective dissolution of dogmatic forms of life’.
Critical theory not only challenges and dismantles traditional forms of theorizing;
it also problematizes and seeks to dismantle entrenched forms of social life
that constrain human freedom. Critical International theory is an extension of
this critique to the international domain.
Theory is socially and historically conditioned. Cox’s three forces: ideas, material capabilities and institutions, then the three historical structures: social forces, forms of states and world orders.
Hegemony: the hegemonic system based on consent, ideas used by hegemonic bloc in order to preserve their privileged position –from Machiavelli. The opposite of that would be a Hobbesian system based on Coercion, an example of that would be the former Soviet Union. Hegemony is more stable, most people don’t know that they are being dominated.
Post-modern IR
Origins in French post-structuralism, esp. Foucault (relation between truth and power), Derrida (language) and Baudrillard.
Social world as a text, dominant great ‘texts’ are merely alternative readings e.g. realism as a tradition become reality.
Campbell and Dalby see security issues as a constructed discourse. An example of which would be the ‘red’ scare, redness was defined as against americaness. Security discourses are a product of anxieties in the self or ‘other’ as a created threat.
Cynthia Webber using Baudrillards four orders to explain the discourses of sovereignty, link between sovereignty and monarchy and God traditionally. This has now been replaced by Wilsonian idea of sovereignty rooted in the people, and now we have a Reagan idea of Sovereignty just as sovereignty as an independent concept not tied to anything else.
Feminist Approach
Origin of Feminist theories are Liberal, socialist, standpoint/radical and post-modern.
Feminism looking at groups and institutions dominated by men. Cynthia Enloe and the ‘sexual politics of Cold War mentalities’ she says that when Thatcher was seen in line-ups of world leader people began to notice that she was the only woman, and then they began to question why this was so.
Other authors to note, Cynthia Webber, V Spike Peterson and post-modern feminist theory. M Zalewski and J Parpart et al on masculinity in IR practice and theory. They begin to talk about the concepts of masculinity and femininity as distinct from man and woman, male and female.