Week 11 - Postcolonial Theory Flashcards
(17 cards)
Colonialism
the policies and practices of states who imposed their rule over other peoples and terrirotires (through the establishment of settlement colonies)
- hiearchial relationships between states, sharp contrast to contemporary mainstream IR’s emphasis on anarchy
Eurocentrism
The assumtpion of european centrality in the human past and present, belief that Europeans were the main makers of history, a workview that European civilization is suprior to others
- knowledge production: European intellectual traditiona evolving out of the Enlightenment Era deemed primary source of what is worth studying + methods to study
Persaud and Sajed 2018 - eurocentrism and the development of capitalism ‘altered with indelible long-term consequences - the economic, social, sultural, and political dynamics
Postcolonialism
histories of colonialism from the perspectives of the colonised and contemporary legacies - period after the onset of colonization
institutions and structures of western dominance remain in place
- aims to critically exposue the misrepresentation/misunderstanding of non-european cultures, forms of knowledge, value systems, and experiences as insignificant - centre the perspectives of the colonized
Criticisms of Postcolonial theory
Realists: disagree with the postcolonial argument that th emodern state is a legacy of European colonialism in world politics by falling back on claims about power politics
Liberals: attempt to defend the liberal institutionalism order against post-colonial criticisms
Marxists: focus on identities (immaterial factors), point to the transnational capitalist class that operates in both the Global North and South
Barkawi and Laffey 2006
- highlight how security studies is Eurocentris and misrepresents the North to distort world politics
- small wars are studied in relation to great powers, categories and assumptions from European experiences
- International institutions like the LoN and NPT are a product of interstate diplomacy between dominant Western Powers
2 key difficulties in the analysis of security relations
1 - security studies provides only a few categories for those attempting ot make sense of historical experiences of the weak and powerless
2 - eurocentric security studies considers the weak/powerless as marginal
Historical Periodisaton
- how scholars divide the past into distinct time periods for analysis and understanding international events
Spatial assumptions
framework that organizes the world in spatial terms and locates these actors, processes and events
RLE - Cuba and the Cold War
Dominant historical understandings in history and IR about the Cold War overlooks the role which Cuba had, Cuban involvement is seen as Russia imposing on a puppet state, overlooking Cuban motivations and legacies
- failure to reconize the role of Europe reproduces the Euro-centric assumptions
EH Carr Quote
The study of IR in english speaking countries is simply a study of the best way tot run the world from positiosn of strength. the study of ir in asiana nd african universities, if it ever got going would be a study of the exploitation of the weaker by the stronger
Need for a non-eurocentric approach
- recognize the mutual constitution of core and periphery, acknowledge the agency and rationality of the weak
- analyze the strategic and security dilemmas confronting the weak and use of force
- support the rights of ‘natives’ to bear arms for liberating projects - challenge the legitmacy of western intervention - critiquing if the West had the right to intervene in other nations, questions that legal and ethical basis for all Northern interventions in the Global South
- alternative methods to understanding IR
RLE - Challenges the “war on terror” narrative - understanding the root causes of terrorism and the clash between islamic extremism and that status quo
Sabaratnam
Defined - Subject Positioning: roles and identities that groups can occupy, this defines how members of these groups should act, think, feel
- She highlights race as the key feature defining these groups in IR - specifically white/west groups and how they act in a manner that reinforces White Supremacy and ensure that Western States are able to their power
- Sabaratnam uses White and Western interchangeably - highlighting that Western States are racialized as white, the term “the west” is codified with a quest for the new world
She moves on to present a framework that she argues allows for Western States to dominate theory and define international politics
These are three epistemologies - immanence, ignorance, and innocence
In her text, she uses three key writings to IR theory to exemplify her findings
How is IR Theory white
- Whiteness of IR theory refers to:
- how the discipline is shaped by Eurocentric and racialized assumptions, often marginalizing or erasing the perspectives and contributions of non-Western actors
- Whiteness, Sabaratnam claims, “is not an identity”, rather “a standpoint rooted in structural power” (Sabaratnam, 2020, 5)
IR theory reproduces and sustains a global racial hierarchy rooted in the histories of colonialism, imperialism, and white supremacy
“Life experiences of scholars racialized as white tend to normalize and render invisible whiteness and supremacy” (Sabaratnam, 2020, 6)
For example - The Westphalian state system acts as a foundational framework for understanding modern state sovereignty
neglect of colonial histories and non-Western intellectual traditions
Some ways that this is evident in IR:
“Systematic absence of discussions about “race” in mainstream American IR journals” (Doty, 1993)
“Whiteness as an unmarked category of belonging, whiteness as “normal”, “human” (Frankenberg, 1993, 6)
“The grounding of theory in IR sources have white supremacist, dualist logics” (Henderson, 2013)
These theories:
Justify and enable violence particularly against those deemed “other” or outside the “civilized” Western world
Reinforce dualist logics - refers to the tendency in some IR theories to create stark divisions or binaries, such as civilized/uncivilized, rational/irrational, or order/anarchy, where whiteness is seen as the positive
Epistemologies of Immanence
IR theory tends to reduce the complexity of its knowledge,
obscuring the ways in which the systems of power shape and produce the global race hierarchy
Key Role:
justifying global inequalities
disconnecting the actions of the West from imperial conditions
In IR - it is assumed that understanding international politics should be done by theorizing the politics of Western/White states
Texts are overwhelming populated with Western States as the primary interest (Sabaratnam, 2020, 16)
Waltz’s - Theory of International Politics
Focuses on “Great Powers”
However, Great Powers are determined if their behaviour is what has an impact on the distribution of power in the system, and this system is the European- centred system from 1700 onwards
The only non-White-racialised Great Powers included in the list are Turkey and Japan
No engagement with other key powers: Imperial China, Persia, and Mughal India
In consequence:
Obscure how colonialism and imperialism produced the modern international system and continue to shape the Global South
Epistemologies of Ignorance
Systematic ways of maintaining ignorance within IR theory
This involves deliberate or unconscious practices that marginalize certain histories which highlight colonial and racialized power relations
Ignorance complements immanence - protecting and defending the subject-positioning
Social Theory of International Politics
Uses significant self/other language, the language of social roles which is problematic
Treatment of the material
Quote from the book: In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries many non-European politics were empirically sovereign, but because they did not organize their authority in this manner they were not considered civilized.
Historically problematic
Perpetuates a cycle - showcasing ignorance where certain practices are marginalized to create an Other
Implications:
presenting the West as superior and non-Western states as inherently problematic
Reinforce the idea that the problems of non-Western societies are internal and self-inflicted, rather than outcomes of global exploitation and historical violence.
Epistemologies of Innocence
Role in absolving the West from responsibility for its role in creating global injustices, particularly those rooted in colonialism and racial domination
This framework constructs Western narratives as benevolent, neutral, or driven by moral imperatives
Sabaratnam Racialized texts deal with a pressure to explain Western ‘greatness’ in a way which does not concede a potentially illegitimate basis for it in this ‘post-colonial’ era
After Hegemony:
Confront and avoid the critiques of Westernism
The military conditions for economic hegemony are met if the economically preponderant country has sufficient military capabilities to prevent incursions by others (page 39)
morally naturalises the right to possession and control over economic resources and domains by the hegemon and its allies.
Implications:
By portraying the West as morally innocent, this framework legitimizes Western dominance
prevent meaningful engagement with the historical and structural causes of global inequalities
Implications of the Epistemologies for IR
Sabaratnam’s findings allow us to acknowledge how the Whiteness of IR limits whose voices are heard and whose perspectives are considered valid in the study and practice of IR → hopefully allowing new theory to be more inclusive
Sabaratnam’s theories allow us to reflect and see how IR theory should evolve:
A more pluralistic approach to IR theory that integrates perspectives from the Global South
Emphasizes the importance of historical context in understanding global inequalities
integrate a historical lens that accounts for how colonial exploitation and dependency have shaped global hierarchies
IR scholars should adopt more reflexive methodologies, questioning their own positionality and the ethical implications of their research
Cycle - contributes to the harmful dynamics of the global racial hierarchy
Preserving western dominance
Biases in theory development
