The policies of the Bush Administration and the conduct of the United States and its allies in counteracting the threat of terrorism have received a wealth of criticism, much of which has been aired publicly. This essay focuses on a critique that does not see much light beyond academic literature: the successful construction of a terrorist threat which has legitimised a war in its name.
Using theories of cognitive consistency and identity, this essay seeks to understand the impact of a conflict’s portrayal on the decision to intervene. To illustrate, the essay analyses the inaction of the United Nations in the face of the 1994 Rwandan genocide.
This essay argues that neoliberalism seeks to frame highly political and morally-charged operations within a bland discourse that insists on the neutrality of the market. Thus it is necessarily flawed in its contribution to the study of offshore, because it attempts to disguise the invariably political and pragmatic functions of offshore in the contemporary global political economy.
It is a trite but commonplace observation that we are witnessing a resurgence in religion and religious fundamentalism; that the secularist progression envisaged by linear models of social development has not come to fruition. This essay seeks both to contest the notion that secularisation can be seen as a universal or absolute process and, further, to problematise certain critical approaches which understand ‘religion’ as a site of autonomy and resistance against these totalising discourses.
This essay first considers the ideological and discursive background to China’s one-child policy, before employing the Foucauldian concepts of governmentality and biopower to outline how these techniques of control are effected – looking specifically at non-coercive examples, which tend to be overlooked in discussions and popular conceptions of the People’s Republic.
This essay argues that one central problem remains regarding this Marxist theorisation of the international: namely that the normative concern of historical materialism can engender hostility towards contemporary ‘postmodern’ themes, which may ultimately prove an intractable obstacle to further intellectual enquiry.
As thinkers such as Steve Smith have noted, whilst the positivist mainstream approaches continues to dominate the social sciences—and in particular Americanised disciplines such as International Relations—there have been gradual moves in Europe towards more reflectivist alternatives (2000). In light of this, it’s pertinent to ask whether approaches such as genealogy, dialectics and critical theory represent a useful diversion, or whether they are merely a distraction from what we should be doing.
The anarchical Hobbesian ‘state of nature’ is a commonly used paradigm in IR theory, yet this essay argues that alternative understandings of Hobbes’ work call into question the degree to which he himself could be accurately described as ‘Hobbesian’.
In the shift from a Fordist to a post-Fordist international economic system, neo-Schumpeterian theorists have come to anticipate a “hollowing out” of the state, in which sovereignty is displaced ‘upward, downward, and, to some extent, outward.’ In this transition, subnational entities are afforded an increasing prominence on the international stage; no longer simply an extension of the Keynesian welfare state, tasked with ‘offloading fiscal demands from national state treasuries’, but ‘important partners in promoting exports and attracting foreign direct investment.’
Attempts to define the strand of postmodern theory in the field of contemporary international relations are often overwhelmed by the challenge of having ‘to make intelligible some of the different problematique, focii, and theoretical strategies’. As opposed to the analyses of traditional theoretical strands, which attempt to represent their approach as a coherent and unified theory, any analysis of the postmodern must be prepared to navigate what Lapid describes as a ‘confusing array of only remotely related philosophical articulations,’ which shelter beneath the ‘rather loosely patched-up umbrella’ of postmodernity.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.
