Lecture 8

Question 1

How does Vitalis (2015) and Shiliam (2021) views the foundation of IR?

Answer 1

The foundation of IR as a subdiscipline intertwined with the exercise of white colonial rule

Question 2

How was race demarcated (afgebakend), where the imtenational was located in the early 20th Centurary?

Answer 2

o In practice and theory
o US: Focused on responsibility of great powers to provide stability mostly regarding to race wars.

Question 3

How does coonial logics underpin much of IR’s early scholarship?

Answer 3

o Focus: good governance of the colonies
o In the interest of the core
o Terms used: civilization
Invoked in: a civilizations that is less developed -> infantilization

• Civilized core tutors

Question 4

What is the main purpose of IR according to Oppenheim (1920)

Answer 4

The international realm is made up of civilised states in a ‘Family of Nations’ and non-civilised peoples with diminished rights, responsibilities and capabilities.

o Dependence for less civilized nation
Can be utilized for humanitarian intervention & colonialism
o Post-colonial perspective: philosophers (Hobbes, Locke etc.) were brought in

Question 5

How does Du Bois (1920) think of IR?

Answer 5

He is a notable exeption compared to the rest:

o An African American scholar
o Writes about IR in a way that involved race, but not in terms less and more
o Invention of a white community -> Capitalism -> community creates a desire to consume-> satisfy consume: colonialism

Question 6

What is the core principle of postcolonial thought?

Answer 6

• A way of thinking about the world and our understanding
  of it, rather than a single theory.
• That Neocolonialism as inheritor of colonialism’s total violence
• Critiquing Orientalism and Eurocentrism
• Modernity / Coloniality as an overarching historical /
  philosophical structure
• Decolonisation through ‘border thinking’ and overturning
  the legacies of colonialism in the scholarship and practice
  of international relations

Question 7

How is postcolonialism bounded?

Answer 7

Its is bounded by:

o Focus on the legacy of colonialism: neo-colonialism
o Emphasise the importance of subaltern
o Rejecting that knowlege is neutral, concepts come grom
hierarchy

Question 8

How is decolonism used?

Answer 8

o Using the indigenous knowledge
o Pushing back colonizers theories
* A way of thinking about the world and our understanding
of it, rather than a single theory

Question 9

What is modernity as a philosohical structure?

Answer 9

• Coloniality as an overarching historical & philosophical structure
• Push back against modernity: Decolonisation through ‘border thinking’ and overturning the legacies of colonialism in the scholarship and practice of international relations

Question 10

What is boarding thinking?

Answer 10

Thinking form the perspective of indigenous groups

Question 11

What is the problem of focusing on anarchy and sovereignty? (Grovogui, 2002)

Answer 11

Focus on anarchy and sovereignty obscures the hierarchical and imperial nature of the system
o Issues with anarchy
 This Leads to self-help and competition
 Sovereignty isn’t evenly distribute, lead to more
imperialism

Question 12

What is the role of liberalism in IR theory? (critiques)

Answer 12

o Liberalism is based on notions of equality, states aren’t equal
o Overlooks the role of race in economic exploitation between capital and workers
o Theories that address international cooperation ignore civilisationalist legacies

Question 13

What is the role of constructivism in IR theory?

Answer 13

Constructivism overlooks the role of power

Question 14

What is Norm localization?

Answer 14

o Meaning: a state would take a norm and transform it to a norm that benefits them
o VB: R2P
o Does not always address the colonial character of the construction of norms and ideas

Question 15

What is the role of feminism to IR theory?

Answer 15

o Highlights the intersection between gender, patriarchy, one one hand, and race and coloniality, on the other.
o Feminist doesn’t intersect gender with race (old critique)

Question 16

Why do Barkawi and Laffey (2006) argue that the conventional thiking in IR provides a bad understanding of the historical and contemporary security enviroment?

Answer 16

• History assumes eurocentrism
• IR analysis suffers from a lack of categories of non-great power states
• Crises examples:
   Standard accounts of Cuban Missile Crisis portray a superpower affair with little to no Cuban agency
• More than US vs USSR
• Ignores interest of Cubans
• Ignores Castro
• Ignores US driving Cuba to this
  escalation

 WW2 portrayed as the ‘good war’ between democracy and totalitarianism, rather than two imperial blocs
* West vs Nazi’s Ignores crucial role of
Russia
* Fight between imperials

 The Holocaust sets the standard for unacceptable behaviour in Western-led international society, but only if you ignore prior Western imperial genocides
* Ignores the fact that it happened in the west

Question 17

What is Westphalian commonsense?

Answer 17

That modern sovereignty has led to order of relatively autonomous and equal states

Question 18

Why does Westphalian commonsense do not apply to Africa?

Answer 18

Adopting Westphalian commonsense translates into perception of ‘normative lack’ in postcolonial Africa:
Issues in African countries / the failed state/ quasi state comes from the country-> all responsibility is from inside the state

-> This takes away responsibility of the international community

Question 19

What is Regimes of sovereignty?

Answer 19

Varied regimes of sovereignty practiced by hegemonic powers, though they combine to perpetuate the dominance of European entities over African ones
o Different standards, different norms

determine the place and role of each geopolitical region along with the range of sovereignty practices available to it.

ex: Congo, Belgium, Switzerland

Question 20

How invisions Shilliam the deconstruction of the intenational society?

Answer 20

• Commonwealth, originally conceived as a two-tiered family of nations, developed from imperial conferences
  o Started in conferences early 20th century: Jan Smuts
  o White colonies would govern them self, but the non-white’s notWould not work
  o Mark Wight (English school)reform: feared self determination
   Would create African Hitler
   ‘’They will hate us’’  anarchy: ending of colonial rule chaos
   Meaning Britain had to retain power “to see that nascent democracies are not turned into totalitarian systems”
   Commonwealth: Shilliam argues Wight shifted from Commonwealth to international society (and moral convention) as his mechanism of choice to mitigate the worst effects of anarchy
   Wight stops writing about Commonwealth
   Shilliam argues Wight shifted from Commonwealth to international society (and moral convention) as his mechanism of choice to mitigate the worst effects of anarchy
• Leaders would guide foreign countries through shared (European) values/morals
  o Ensure British interest