REVIEW 4

0

..

,t Approaches

. . h d can be safe ly lef t as ide esuoa 11on ere, an .

: • of a rela11onal co nstruc- ·a1ional pnnctp 1es . h . . pra ctice 1h1s mean s l at1is said matter s. n .. 1 d

by lhe re leva nt offtc 1a s ma e respon ded to . d f th e day a relatt ona 1con-

id ity. ~ I th.ef_en . op\ ana tion rat her th an an ex- cia\-sc 1entt 1c ex '

lal l am tacitly accepting that the Jrabql.inva-

fl. mon a pu 1c au-n even t that was a con ,ct a . o . . . d interna tional orga niz at ions. This

ltan ces a~. t that could be co n stru cted, and th e co n ic . . gly prefe r but th e fact re-

al we unquesttonm ' . . d by the peop le soc ially re spons 1- co11srr11c1e b h If they acted . Ana- the actors on whose e a .

. t th e very \east, focusing , pass require s, a . . d

rod uced in prac 11ce, and ep. es produce d an r f n . ' \l egi tim ate and th ere ore es as nor m ative 1Y 1

n. . l ih an ideal-typ ica l. Different S rep rese nt a11ona h dh' as texts ca n be gal ere ffere nt topograp ,es, ' s and int erests of the

1ordi no to the va ue .ys ace o .. ant -observa tion eth n ography closer to parttc tp · (2006a) -tion of method, see P. Jackson . ~ ber 2002 (Bu sh 2002c). . ,, p1em d 'th " iso latio ni sm , a term that ,ay be eq uate wt d 'sc uss ions of US fore ign olarl y and popular i' f th oug ht in US policy

0 never been a sch oo l of world poli tics alto-

try Ouoht to stay ou . ,, ·ct oun "' d h "exemp lans t I ea ionally tended to~ar t .: a full -tim e job" and

s ~nd ~~:c~~~:::~ re ~:~ r~ate space to carr.Y out oltcy \ .. . .. ) but th is led nol to tsola­ lr ands 1998, v u-v tti ' !995) and efforts en1al expansio n (S tepha nson

:a (Sch ulte ord holl ~ 99~~·is in suffic ient to say ·onstructivisl per spec 11ve rvative advisers IO

. b Bush 's neoconse d 1g desire Y . rea ter Middle East an itegy of rem ak in g th e g ment th at ca n be found : Muslim worl.d-;~;;r Whi le thi s claim is cer­ W04) and Smtih ( . . for an invasion of NAC went ?n reco rd ca ll~~~at is needed instead ot translate rn10 ou1c.ome. acr on that desire. ,le for neoconservat~ve s 10 . Whether a sub·

es sa nl y a mo11ve. as 111, and not nee . ivi\iz ed cause w ; of th e Un ited States and its c d dvancing that .ar indi vidu al's word_s and ~:est: u~tivist point~f releva nt from a re \a11ona l c . ful goa1-1n

. c'ally mea nin g ,.. nible int en11on-a so i s can not but.,.,

. . t' on supporter fa ii td other admm1stra t • . ff rds and c - promulgation of that mt entton a o · ·1 (t990i).

attons . . UN Secu rit y Co unct ,te may be found Ill

6 Postmodern and

Critical Theory Approaches

Postmodernism and Critical Th~pry · Jennifer Sterling-Folker

Although postmod em is m and cr itica l theory w ill be di scusse d toge the r, it is import ant to und e rscore th at they a re different theoretica l p erspec tives. Postmode mi sm is derived from the s tudy of literatu re, and crit ica l theorists find its abandonm e nt of the En lig htenm en t proj ect o bject ionab le. Alte rn a­ tively, crit ica l theory is a fo rm of neo- or Wes tern Marxist a nalysis, and postmode rn sc ho lars c riti c ize it fo r co nt inu ing to participate in that same Enlighten ment project. Hence the two sc hool s of thought can be an tago­ nists. Yet as Pauline Rose na u has obse rved, "the re lat ions hip betwee n the two is _far from s imp le" ( 1990: 104). Each is a dedicated po stpositivi st ap­ proach, and the te rm "c ritical theo ry" is somet imes used to indica te all the­ oretical perspec tives that share this dedication.' Many scho lars who work in either tradi tion have so ught to bui Id analytica l bridges between them, be­ cause they share a se t of philo so phi cal precur so rs, incl uding Friedrich N iet­ zsche, Martin He idegger, Edmund Hu sserl, and Ludwig Wittgenstein. Thu s there are good reaso ns for disc uss ing them together , a lth ough thei r part icu ­ larorigins and goa ls of ana lys is are diffe rent.

Postmod erni sm de ri ves from the French s tudy o f literature and lan­ guage, and some of the more se m inal aut h ors to its developmen t include Jacques De rrida , Miche l Foucau lt, Em ma nu e l Levinas, J ea n -Fra nc;ois Ly­ otard, Roland Bar thes, and Jea n Baudr illa rd. Within the IR discip lin e -the tenn"post structurali s m" is frequent ly preferred, as it co ns titu tes "a theory ofknowledge and lang uage" that is seen as more releva nt to fR , rather than providing, as po s tm ode mi s m does, "a theo ry of socie ty, cul tur e, and his­ tory"(Agger 199 I : l 12). Yet the two terms are often used interc hangeably due lo their signi ficant theore tica l overla p, their shared a nal y tica l heritage, andtheir mutual "ave rs ion to c lea n posi tivis t de fini t io ns a nd catego ries"

169

abili stmod objec

ar ore

e .objec rests The

stud soc se,

t

chf

al 2

, , ,

170 Postmodern and Critical Theory Approaches

(Agge r 1991 : 112). 2 Both deve loped in the con tex t of Frenc h structuralism, whic h "is a theory of signs, post-struc turali sm a cr itiq ue of the sign; struc­ turalism investigates how soc ial phenomena ca n be explained by stable and pervasive meaning systems, post-structurali sm shows how all mean ing sys­ tem s are precariou s, self-defea ting and only strive for closu re without ever succeedi ng " (Wrever 1996: 171 ). Given the se s ignificant analytical over­ lap s, and that the term "postmoderni sm " was utili zed to describe thi s per­ spective when it was introduced into the di sc ipline, the term is used here to subsume IR work that label s itse lf poststructuralist instead .

As a postpo sitivi sl approach, postmod ern ism is not a theory in the pos­ itivi st sense of providing ca usal explanations for soc ial phenomena. Rather it is a critiqu e meant to reveal the disjuncture s of Enlightenment mod ernity, which , postmodern sc holars contend. impose s meaning on socia l activity and, in so doing , establishes hierarchie s of power tha t we then accept as natural. Postmoderni sm seeks to ups et what is taken for granted and reveal how discourse impo ses meaning and he nce a value st ructur e that is both so­ cially constructed and historically a rbitrar y.

Critical theor y is also po stpositivist , but its origins are d ifferent. It de­ veloped out of what is called the Frankfurt School , which was established prior to World War II by a group of German sc holar s who so ught to sa lvage Marxist thought from its ort hodo x, political manifestation s. Heavily influ­ enced by the work of Nietzsche , the first genera tion of critical theo rists in­ c luded Max Horkh ei mer, Theodor Adorno, He rbe rt Marcuse, and Walter Benjamin. Best known among the seco nd ge neration of scho lars is Jurgen Habe rmas. From a critical theory perspective , it is Marxi sm, not liberalism, that is the tru e heir of Enlightenment thou g ht. Critical theory shares with postmodernism a skeptici sm of the liberal claim to a un iversa l and morally acc urate value struc tur e . It see ks to recove r Marxi sm 's emancipatory ele­ ments by focusing on c ulture. philo sophy , and lang uage, rather than on po­ litical economy , as the potential sites for overco ming soc ial domination and oppre ss ion.

Neither theoretica l perspecti ve was developed in the US discipline of IR, nor were they particularly pertin ent to its ear ly development, and both have been more influential to the European study of IR. 3 When these per­ spec tives were introduced into the US di sc ipline in the 1980s, they gener­ ated what is often referred to as the ·'thi rd debate" (Lapid 1989), thus differ­ entiating it from two prior pe riod s of theor etica l disagreement that galvanized the discipline. 4 What di stingui shed the third debate was that it struck at "the very co re of what cons titut es the inte rnati onal relations field and requir e[d] its thorough and complete reconstruction" (P. Rosenau 1990: · 83). Proponent s of these perspective s soug ht not only a change in the:US discipline's preferred methodology or positivi st epi ste mology, but also_a change in the very ontology of the di sc ipline, grou nded as it is in a faith ID

our po an along give proach of IR

the that repre it will cussing proa describ "whene they 321-3 a text its par preted system signs. (Wrev, Speake compl

Yi topos fleets

ricea: thatc this a bythe refle< lbrou Value fonc1 CCrta arca spec

of"

e disc ipline , grou nded as it is in a faith 111 of "se lf and other " (Do ty l 996; ln ayatulla h and Bl aney 2004; Neumann

:al Theory Ap proache~

in the co nte x t of Fren ch structurali s m, .ctu rali s m a c ritiqu e of th e s ign ; stru c- 10mena can be ex pl ai ned by s table and icturali sm shows ho w a ll m ea nin g sys­ nd only stri ve for c los ur e w ith out eve r iven these s ignificant analytical over­ ism " was utiliz ed to de sc ribe thi s pe r­ the di sc iplin e, the term is used here to

osts tru c turali st ins tea d. stmod erni s m is no t a theo ry in th e pos­ lanati o ns for soc ial ph enom e na . R ather sjunctur es of Enli ght e nme nt _m ode~ni~y, .d, imp oses mean in g on soc ial activity ·chies of power tha t we then accept as set what is take n for granted and revea l

1hence a va lue s tructure that is both so-

rbitrary. .ivist , but its o rigi ns are different. It de­ rankfurt Schoo l, whi c h was established German scho lars who so ught to sa lvage political manife stations. H ea v il~ in~u-

e first ge nerat ion of c riti ca l th eo rists m­ Adorno, Her bert Marcuse , and Walter

seco nd ge nera tion of sc hol ars_ is Jti~gen erspec ti ve, it is M arxism , not hb erah s~ , en t thou ght. C riti ca l t heory share s with libera l c laim to a uni versa l and morally

:o recove r Marx ism 's ema ncip ato ry e le­ :,soph y, and lang uage, ra th er t_han_on po­ es for overco min g socia l domination and

e was developed in the US disc iplin e of tinent to it s ea rl y development, and both European stud y of IR .3 When th ese per­ ! US discipline in the I 980s, they g~ner­ ! "third debate " (Lap id 198 9), thu s d 1ffer­ riod s of th eo re ti ca l di s agre e m ent th~t dis tin gui shed the third debate ~as th~t 11

onst itutes the int e rnation al relauon s field ,mplete reco nstru cti on" (P. Ro se nau 1990~ tives soug ht not onl y a ch ange in the U gy or po s iti v is t epistemo logy, b ut a_Jso_ a

Postmodernism and Critical Theory 171

our ab ili ty to accurately k now a true socia l real ity with posi t ivism . As one postmodern IR sc holar ha s p ut it , "ra tionali s ts cling to the faith t ha t there is an object ive reality out th e re th at is wait in g for the r ight method to come a long and in the name of sc ie nti fic progress mak e use of, make sense of give o rd er to it " ( De r De ria n 1997 : 57). A lt e rn ative ly, post po sit iv is t ap~ proac~ es _s~ch as pos tm od erni s m and c riti ca l th eo ry cha lle nge thi s notion of obJec t1v1ty and he nce th e pr e mi ses up o n wh ich th e US discipline of IR rests.

The philosophical antecede nt s of bot h perspective s may be trace d to the st ud y of langua ge and ling ui stics , and from th ese both deri ve the idea that soc ial reality is crea ted through discours e. Th at is, how we discursively represent somet hin g a lso de termines how we ac t toward it and hence wha t it will be. While we first enco unt ered the " he rm e ne uti c circle" when dis­ cuss in g co ns tru cti vism, it ass um es g reate r s ignificance in postpo Sitiv ist ap­ proach es. Not only can we no t know the wo rld absen t th e words we use, to describe it , but we a re a lso co nfron te d wit h t he esse nti al di lemma tha t "whenever peop le try to es tabli sh a certa in rea ding of a tex t or ex pr ess ion, the y allege other rea ding s as the ground for th e ir reading" (Adler 1997: 321-322). Thi s mea ns tha t we can never a rri ve at the one "true " rea d ing of a text , on ly multiple , layered inter pr etations o f it , so that the text itse l f (a nd its particular auth or) becomes less importa n t than how it has be e n inter­ pr eted and meanin g assigned to it. To pu t this ano th er way, ·'all meaning systems are open- end ed sys tem s of signs referr ing to signs refe rr ing to signs. No co ncep t ca n th e refo re have an u lti m ate, unequi vocal meaning " (Wrever 1996 : 17 l ). Thi s m akes th e role or in tent io ns of th e autho r or speake r re latively unimp ort ant , and in literary post mode rni sm the au th or is complet ely e ffa ced from ana lysis.

Yet meaning-mak ing is no t an ind iv idual or random activity acco rdin g to po stpos iti vist approac hes. It proceed s from socie ty and c ultu re, and it re­ ~ects lin gui stic stru ctur es, " me ta-narratives," or systems of d isc ur sive prac­ tice and knowledg e produc ti on that indiv iduals are embed ded wit hin and that create and reprodu ce the wo rld through them. Bot h perspec ti ves see this as ai;1 ac t of s ubjuga ti on , in th a t mean in g is imposed on th e indi vidu al by these meta -narr atives rather tha n vice versa, and in fact, meaning -m aking reflec ts power at a ve ry fund amenta l level. Meaning is al ways assig ned throu gh an oppos iti o na l arrang e ment in whic h so me sy mbol s, ideas, and values are e leva ted and oth e rs are su bordi nat ed . Truth it self then becomes a function of this dis c urs ive o pp os iti ona l arra ngement. We ta ke for ora nted

. . b

certam ideas a nd act iviti es as na tur a lly goo d or bad , w he n such j ud gmen ts are act uall y products of spec ifi c knowl e dge -prod ucing systems and hence specif ic hi stor ica l c irc um sta nces.

One juxtapo s it ion th at has be en m os t re leva n t in the stud y of IR is tha t

eri er

1

l

's

s ,

l ii

c

172 Postm odern and Cri tical Theo ry App roaches

1999), which re fers 10 the idea that we ca nnot know who we a rc unless we co nside r who we are not. Thi s has o bviou s releva nce 10 a Westph alian wo rld , which is div ided into te rritor ia l, po litical unit s with spec ific popula ­ tions disti nct from one another. In making ~uc h d is1inc1io ns. say 10 speak of diffe rences betwee n Ameri ca ns and Mexican s, we a lso e ngage in va lue judgme nts a bout what is or is not proper and in so doin g produ ce and reify a wo rld in whic h exc lusion on the bas is o f those value j ud g me nt see ms natural. To refe r, for exa mpl e, 10 ... Lat in Ame rica · is 1101 ju st 10 refe r 10 [or re prese nt] an area on the g lobe; it is to he lp repr odu ce an ins tituti onalized form of dominan ce, o ne in whic h the minority. Hispa nic part of pop ulations in the regio n con trol the origi nal indi ge no us gro ups" (Shapiro 1989: 15). He nce the soc ial rea lity that is c rea ted by the imp osi tion of meani ng in­ vo lves subjuga tion and soci a l injustices that are uncri tica lly and co ntinu ally reproduced as if they were inev itab le.

The ex a mina t ion o f these sorts o f ju xta pos it ion~ has bee n ce nt ra l to pos tmode rn ism and c rit ic al theory, as we ll as to a noth er po stpos i1ivist perspective-postcolo ni al ism- whic h foc uses on IR 's Eur oce ntri sm and the e mbedd ed rac ism in it juxtapo s ition of a We te rn/ mod e rn Self to a non-Weste rn/backwards Othe r (Said 1979).5 Wh at these pers pec tives share is an inter est in ·' how disco urse is re lated 10 the co nstru ct ion and s ubjuga­ tion of humank ind" (Grego ry 1989: xxi). Th ey see k to inter rogate rep resen­ tat ions, ask ing why it is imp ortan t 10 rep rese nt thin gs in a ce rtai n way, so that e mbedded know ledge and va lue struc tur e may be revea led and cri­ tiqued. They are inte rested in what peo ple say, how they desc ribe the world, and how they ju stify wha t they do in it. beca use the verba l and wriuen de­ sc ript ion and j us1ifica 1ions are as important 10 unde r tan ding the world as the deeds that follow. They wish 10 reveal these embed ded va lue structures in order to oppose them , beca u!>e reve lation ex pose s the ex te nt 10 which in­ d ividual ident ity has been imposed , the ex tent to whic h .. ot hers .. have been de fined and excl uded politica lly and eco nomica lly by such imposition, and th e ex te nt 10 which vio le nce aga inst the se "o thers .. is sa nctioned on the basis of ide ntity di ffere nce. By pu lling apart meani ng-maki ng. the se per­ spec ti ves see k LO reve al the kno wledge- produ c ing powe r struc ture s under­ nea th. Hence they endeavo r " 10 highl ight the ex istence o f co unter-hegemonic or co unte rvailing tende nc ies whic h are invariabl y prese nt within all social a nd pol itica l structures" (Linklate r 1996: 283) . Th ey d o so by unpacking or pulling apart the meanings embedded or implic itly assumed in texts, whether these tex ts are pub lic state men ts by po licy mak er~ or the writ ings of other IR scho lars.

Whil e many o f the id eas abou t mean ing- ma king and ident ity serve as the founda tion for IR co nstru cti vis m a s we ll. ult imately co nstructivism: see ks to c lose off the herm eneu tic c irc le by arguin g that s ince we do create a soc ial re a lity, ii is log ica lly poss ible to use sc ie ntifi c met hodology to

und rhis scienr projec libera provid Bush alries. the inv of thi ically

Ir critica thar, I alizes. assisic emanci trolled assisiec temoloi tivity re "logoce to exrer cannot <

Fro norance tion, an< lies on univers~ have im1 lion of v cinctly r emphasi merely s orienta1i, meta-nar While pre that post dominan subscribt

One lematize "the enu

173 ,I Theory Approaches

. can not know who we are unless we ; bvio us r-elevance to a Westp h a lian ., politi ca l unit s wit h spec ifi c popula­ t ing s uc h di s tin ctions, say to speak of Mex ica ns, we also e n gage in va lu e per and in so doi ng produ ce and reify asis of those va lu e judg m ent s seems itin America' is not just to refer to [or to help reproduc e an in stit ut iona l'.zed minority, Hi spani c part of population s

ligenou s gro ups" (S hapiro l 98~: 1 ~). ted by th e imposition of m ean '.ng m­ :es that are uncr itica lly and continually

..of juxtapo s itions has bee n ce n~r~l _to as well as to anot he r pos tpos1uv1st

'ch focuses on IR 's Eurocentrism and

>sitio n of a Weste rn/ modern Se lf to a . 1979 ) .s What these pe rspec tives ~h are

elated to the const ru c tion and subJu ga­ xxi). They seek to interrogate_ repr ese n­ to represent thin gs in a certa in way, s_o ue structure s may be revea led and cn ­ Jeople say, how they descr ibe th~ wor ld, in it, beca use the ve rbal and wntten de ­ important to und e rstanding the wo rld as revea l th ese embedded value s tru ctu~es

:velation exposes the extent to which m- the exten t to whic h "others" hav e been

;d eco nom ica lly by such impo s ition , and nst thes e "o th ers" is sanctio ned o n the illing apart m ea nin g -m ak in g, the se per­ ledge -pr od ucing powe r struc tur es unde'.­ hlioht the existence of cou nter-hege mo~1c h :re invari ably present w ithin all ~octal : 1996: 283). They do so by un packing or led or impli citly assumed in text s, whether by poli cymake rs or th e wr itin gs of other

ut meanin g- making and id ent it y se r_v~ as ,vism as we ll, ult imatel_Y construct 1v1:: ; circle by arg uing th at s ince we do ere ossible to use scie ntifi c m et hodo logy to

Postmodernism and Critical Theory

und erstand and explain it. Neither pos tm ode rni s m nor critical theo ry views thi s epis temol ogica l middl e gro un d as morally viable, beca use , they argue, sc ie ntific methodology h as bee n harnessed by th e liberal Enlig hte nm ent project, which is not a value - free d isc urs ive str uctur e . A n examp le of ho w liberal discurs ive s tructur es can shape un de rsta nd ing and ju s tify ac tion is provid ed by Rosemar y Shinko in Chapt er 6.2. Sh inko exami nes George W. B ush 's 2002 State of the U nion address , and the iss ue of Iraq i ciYilian casu ­ a lties, to deco nstruc t the lib eral meta-narrative of humanity that underwro te th e in vas ion. Shink o demon s trat es the inc onsistencies and indeterminacies of thi s meta-na rrati ve and argu es that the quest ion of hum anity must be rad­ icall y rethought.

It is on th e s ubject of sc ie nce that the link be tween postmodern ism, cr iti ca l theory , and postpo s itiv ism becomes clea rest. Postposit iv ists argue tha t, like a ll know ledge-prod uc ing s tru ct ure s, liberal is m excl udes, marg in­ alize s, and licenses viole nce and op pre ss ion aga inst pa rtic u la r others. It has assisted a proc ess in which scie ntifi c and technologi ca l advances have ~ot emancipated human beings from th e v ic iss iwde s o f natu re, b ut ra ther con­ troll ed them for the sak e of cap ital is m in parti c ular. He nce liberalism has ass is ted a proc ess of disciplini ng o r re press ing the individua l, and any epis­ temology that ass ists it is morall y impli ca ted as well , protestation s o f objec­ tivit y to th e co ntrar y. In fac t, tho se ve ry pro tes ta tions mark po s itiv is m as "logocent ri c," which means " mi s tak e n ly cla iming leg it imacy by refere nce to exte rnal , univ ersa lly truthful propo s itions " (P. Ro senau 1990: 86), whi ch can not ex is t if soc ia l real ity is a soc ial and hi stori cal constr uction.

From a po s tpos itivist pers pec tive, positivism invo lves philo so phical ig­ noran ce about the co nstru ctio n of soc ia l rea lity, one 's role in that co nst ruc ­ tion , and the ex tent to whic h lib era lis m is a hi s torical meta -n arra tive th at re­ lies on power and dom inati o n, eve n as it is posing as a morally superior unive rsa l truth. It reflects a failur e " to under s tand that int ellect ual proj ec ts have important moral impli cations for the na tio nal and interna t iona l distr ibu­ tion of wea lth and power" (Li nk later l 996: 28 1 ), o r as Robert Cox has s uc­ cinct ly put it, "a ll theory is for so meo ne and for so me purpose " (1981: 128, empha s is in orig inal). Rath er than di scove ri ng social reali ty, then , posit ivi sm mere ly s ucc ee d s in re produ cing it , bec ause it " champ io ns a particu lar va lue orienta tion- ins trum ent al ratio nalit y" (Leonar d 1990: 34 )-w h ic h se rve s the meta-narra tive of liberali s m and rei fies its particu lar for m s of s ubju ga tion , whi le providing no mean s of recog ni zing o r op po sing it. lt is for this reason that post mode rni sm and c riti ca l th eory have a co nt entious re latio nsh ip with dominant or main stream IR th eore tical pe rspec tives, all of wh ich imp lic itly subscrib e to pos itiv ism as the mos t appropr ia te means of und e rsta ndin g IR:

One topic that postpo s itivi s l sc ho lar s ha ve ten ded to focus on and prob ­ lemat ize in particu lar is the di sc iplin e's treatmen t of sove reig nty as s imp ly "the e nun c iat io n of a terr itoriall y base d concept ion of co mmunity that

tive y, er

valu ati, co, to tr st

o , ue s,

174 Postmodern and Critical Theory Approaches

demands the loya lty of its ci ti7ens·· and ha, 111g,therefore, ··a natural esse nce to its ex istence " (Dunne 200 1: 86). Tim Dunne notes that from a postpositivist perspec tive. sovereig nty is ··rhe foundi ng moment of politics itse lf,'" because it "represents the fault-line bet\\'CCn co mmunity and anar­ chy" (200 I: 86-87). It i therefore --what make s Westphalian international politics possib le' · (see also Wrever 1996: 167- 169). According to Andrew Linklater, critical theorists are also interested in unpacking the concept and practice of sove reignty, because sovereignty ··re!>trict ~ the capac ity of out­ siders to parti cipa te in discou rse to consider issues wh ich concern them," while critical theory "env isages the use of unconstrained d iscourses to de­ termine the moral sig nifi cance of national boundarie and to examine the possibility of post-sovereign forms of political life .. ( 1996: 294. 280).

It is here, however. that obvious differences be t\\ een po tmodernism and critical theory also begin to eme rge. While both are interested in discur­ sive practices, postmoderni sm is skeptical o f all meta-narratives, arguing that if truth is embedded in discursive structure!> then it is not ·'out there" waiting to be discovered. Postmodern ism i!> concerned" ith revealing these structure s in order to revea l the power and subjugation that s upport them, but it is largely resigned to the ··postmodern cond ition·· in which truth is re­ vealed to be a socia l construction (P. Rose nau 1990: 104). That is, if we cannot know right or wrong ab ent our own social creat ions. or a David Dess ler puts it, '·causa lly independent of the mind·· ( 1999: 124), then all truth syste ms become equa l and none can claim to be better.

Conversely. critical theorists retain a belief in and comm itment to En­ lightenment ideal s as a "true " discursive structure that liberal is m has mis­ chann eled or co-op ted. The point of revealing the dominant libera l meta­ narrative is to replace it with a discursive tructure that does finally obtain the Enlightenment ideal s of human emancipation. Henc e critical theorists are interested in the discursive practice s of policyma kers not only to reveal discursive struc ture , but becau se they also want policymakers to live up to thei r own libera l rheto ric and actually achieve the Enlightenme nt's universal moral code. Because cr itical theo rists be lieve in a particular meta-narrative in a way that· postmodern ists do not , the laller are as inclined to critique the former as they are real ists, liberal s . and con tructivi ts. The goa ls of post­ modern and critical theory analy s i are quit e different as a result.

A postmodern perspective suggests that all meta-narrat ives require the disciplining of the individua l and the subjugation of the other. Hence the de­ sire to rep lace one meta-narrative with another on the grounds of morality is a sham , since it is esse ntiall y the replacement of o ne sys tem of oppression with another. Because the discursive construct io n o f soc ial reality makes human emancipation imposs ible, the unpa ck ing o f the meta -narrative is the point of analysis for a postmodern scho lar. In other words. postmodernism does not see k to replace the meta-narrativ e it is exam inin g or to construct

an alterna it accuratel ways to int terest or meta-narr accepts in sitions or

Given one of the motes moral IR pos tmodf produce gre; "attempt t dental val and exerci ment" (Der tives in the subjugation postpositivi: explicit exp 1999;Der [

Critical modernism the "true., f universal er liberalism'i squandered cal theory s it, its "emp tween kno, scendant of shares wit! change in I significant "willingne: its transfor lowing M, change it" ory is mea

Howe· social theo example, c modernisn

175 al Theory Approaches

" and ha v ing, th e refore. "a natu ral 11: 86). Tim Dunn e notes that from a y is " th e founding mo men t of politics It-lin e between co mmuni ty and anar­ .vhat makes We stph alian int e rn ati ona l 996: 167- 169) . According to Andrew

1terested in unpa cki n g the concept and !reign ty " res tri cts th e capaci t y of out­ ; onsid er iss ues whi c h co nce rn th em," Jse of unc onstra ined d isco ur ses to de- 1tional bound aries and to exam in e th e ,f po litica l li fe" ( 1996: 294, 280). s d ifferenc es betw ee n pos tmod emi sm ·ge. While bot h are int ereste d in di scur­ e ptical of all meta- na rrati ves, argu in g ve structures th en it is not "o ut th e re " ·nism is concerned wit h revea lin g the se ver and s ubju ga ti on that support them, mod em co nditi on " in whi ch truth is re­ 'P Ro se n au I990 : I 04 ). Th at is , if we ' ~ur ow n s ocial creat ion s, or as D av id ent of the mind " ( I 999 : 124 ), th e n all 1e can cla im to be bette r. :tain a be lief in a nd comm itm ent to En­ mive s tru cture that lib e rali s m has mi s­ )f revea ling the domin a nt lib e ral meta­ :ur sive st ru ct ur e that do es fin all y obta in

1 eman c ipa t io n. Hence crit ica l th eo rists :tices of policy mak ers not o nl y to revea l hey also wa nt po licy m akers to live up to .ly achieve the E nli ghte nme nt 's uni ve r_sal sts be lieve in a p artic ular meta- narr ativ e t the latter are as inclin ed to cr itique the ; 'a nd co ns tru c ti vis ts . Th e goa ls of post­

,' are qu ite diffe re nt as a re s ult. ,gests that all meta- narr ati ves requ ire the 1e subjugation of th e other. He nce th~ d~­ ,;ith ano th er on th e grou nd s of morality 1s replaceme nt of one sys tem of oppressio n ;ive co nstru ct io n of soc ial rea lity makes he unpa ck ing of the meta -na rrat ive is_the

1 scho lar. In othe r word s, postmodermsm -narrati ve it is exam inin g or to co n Slruct

Postmodernism and Critical Theory

an alternative to it. In fact , g ive n that we ca n never know rea lit y o r describe 1t accurately, po st moderni sm assumes that th ere are an infinite number of ways to interpret the sa me text o r eve nt and that all of them are of eq ua l in­ ter es t or va lue. T he po int of po s tmoderni sm is ins tead to challenoe

b exis tin o

b

m eta-narra ti ves by utili z in g alte rn ative methodo logies, and in so doing , " it a~~epts inconsi stency an d contradiction, fee ling no need to reconcile op p o- s 1t1o ns or to choose betw ee n th e m " (P. Rosenau 1990: 86). .

Give n th at all uni ve rsal truth claims are q uestioned in po s tmodernism, on e of t he s tand ard acc usat ion s lev e led aga in s t th e approach is that it pro­ mot es m ora l re lativism and a form of et hi ca l resig nat ion or despai r. Many IR pos tm ode rni sts co unt er th at the opposite is t ru e, and that it can in stea d produce g reate r fo rm s of tolera nce for identi ty diffe re nce. Beca use it is an "a tt empt to und ers tand-w ith ou t reso rt of externa l authoriti es or tra nscen ­ den ta l va lues-w hy one mor a l or p o litica l system a ttain s a h ig he r s tatu s and exe rc ises more influence than ano ther at a particular hi stor ical mo­ ment " (Der Deri an 1997: 58), it can revea l how other theo ret ica l perspec­ ti ves in the discipl in e naturali ze rather than oppose vio lence, poverty , and subj uga ti on in wo rld politi cs. In thi s regard, it is importa nt to note that it is postpos iti vists, ra th er than po sitiv ists , who have been m ore interested in the ex pli cit exp lorat ion of ethi cs in IR (Campbell 1993; Camp bell and Shap iro 1999; Der Deria n 1997) .

C ri tical theory s ha res th ese et hica l concerns, bu t it d iff ers from post­ modernism in its de s ire to sub sti tute o r reco nstruct wha t is believed to be the "true" En li g h tenm e nt meta-narrative. Critical theor y seeks to achieve uni versa l ema nci pati on , wh ich, it arg ues , co uld have bee n rea lized if not fo r libe rali s m 's alli an ce wit h ca pita li s m and sc ie nce, w hi c h has effective ly squand ered and deflected t his possib ili ty. Th e res ult is that , althou gh c rit i­ ca l th eory see k s to deco nstru ct th e li beral meta- narrat ive in o rde r to re place it, its "emp h as is on the ex istence of fo undati on s for maki ng judgments be­ twee n know ledge c laims" demo nstrates that theore tica ll y it is "a d irect de­ sce nd ant of the Ka n tian en light enm ent project" (S . Sm ith 1996: 28) . It a lso sha res w it h co ns tru c ti v ism a be li e f in the po ss ibili t ies of fund amen tal change in IR , and it take s se rio us ly th e notion that IR theo ris ts ca n play a signi ficant ro le in pro m ot ing s uch change. As Ri c har d Wy n Jo nes no tes, its "wi ll ing ness to face up to rea lit y simu ltaneousl y incl ud es a commitme nt to its tran sfo rm at io n and a belief that such a t ransfo rm at ion is feas ib le. Fol­ lowin g Marx, criti ca l th eor ists see k to understa nd th e wor ld in orde r to change it" ( l 999: 22) . Thi s mean s that unl ike po s tmodern ism, c rit ical the ­ ory is mea nt to have prac ti ca l, poli t ica l intent.

Ho weve r, as S tephen Leo nard ha s observe d , "forg ing a link between socia l theory and po liti ca l practi ce is .. . no mean task" (1990 : 3). How, for examp le, doe s o ne move from the same onto logica l pos iti o n as that of pos t­ mod erni s m to o ne in whic h the Enli ghte nm e nt project may be trea ted as a

y. · i di lol er

i

ia te f e

, ,

·

,

176 Postm o dern and Cri ti cal Theory Ap p roac hes

foundational narrative? How can thi project and its goal o f human emanci­ pation be realized in actual political practice? And how can we, as IR schol­ ars, recognize and pro mote the action s and po licies necessa ry to achieve thi s goal ? Different answers to these ques t io n5 have produc ed di fferent variants of criti cal theory. One of the belier-known variants is based on the work o f Habermas, and Chapter 6 .3, by Rodge r Pay ne , is an ex ampl e of what can be called the "linguistic turn " in critica l theo ry. What distin­ gu ishes this variant is its focus on co mmuni cation acts as a possible s ite for foundationa l knowledge claims and the practical achieve ment of emancipa­ tion . Habe rma s has argued that truth and ethi cs are inheren t to lang uage, an d that we ca n, in pri nc iple at least , prod uce s ituations of '' idea l speech acts" that dep end on ethi ca l co nsensus among part ic ipants. In such situa­ tions it would not be power, social identities . or cultural di stortions that de­ termine collective outco mes, but rather the ration ally mo re convincing ar­ gument that would prevail.

The critical theory variant proposed by Habermas entails what is called uni versal pra gmatics or d iscourse ethics. in wh ich ' ·part ic ipants aim to be guided by nothing other than the force of the better arg ument and agree that norms cann ot be va lid unless they co mmand the co nsent o f eve ryone who stand s to be a ffected by them" (Linkl ater 1996 : 286). Beca use consensual communication is a crucial element of the Habc rmasian varia nt, how nation­ states reach collective decisions is ju st as impo rtant as the goa ls they collec­ tive ly pursue. As a result. critical theorists tend to be skeptical of goals that are espoused as ethically desirable but have not been co nsensually and pub­ licly derived. Thi s skepticism is reflected in Payne's analysis of the ways in which pub lic debate and deliberat ive democracy were di sto rted by the Bush admini stration in its allempt to obtain con sent for the invasion. Payne argues that, in the absence of a truly deliberative process that reflected communica­ tive rat ionality, the legitimacy of the invas ion is h ighly q ues tionable.

The need to ove rco me or dismantle nation-state sovere ignty is also cru­ c ial to the appli cati on of disco urse ethics in JR. because as a " bounded moral and politica l communi ty," the natio n-stal e exc lud es others and in­ hibit s the k ind of unconstrain ed commu n ications needed for the achieve­ ment of ideal speech acts (Linklater 1996: 287 ). The res ult is that the Hab­ erma s ian varian t of crit ical theo ry tend s to " re flect a ge neral left-liberal se ns ibilit y" (Wy n Jon es 1999 : 64) , and it shares with lib eral pluralism an exp licit des ire to move beyond the natio n-s tat e. T he va riant pro posed by Habermas also entire ly abandons economics as the potential site for change and emanc ipation. Yet o ther variants of cr itical theory have continu ed to focus on modes of production and class in prov iding alternative answers for how to link theory and practice within a neo- Marxian framework.

One cr itical theor y variant that has reta ined a focus o n econ omics is historical materialism, which is disc us ed in Chapter 7. I along with world

system theor o ry ana ly is nication and fects of the g in cor e and p 1996 : 287). In the Habennas histori cal ma social movem under the sam retica l and prac the sources of grasp the possi can be explore

Thi s i als tinct, despite r critical theory' unconstrained c sation is a pow beyond this to; struggle in thei gies and preser strange to the causal variable and pro vide cc Instead posrmc strange in orde of discursive t on what the po novels, foot bal culture.6 In an terconnecred. 7

(metaphors of down, and "rer sport?).

Although t theorists is not And criti cal th openness thatc looking for pre these criticismi have tended to !he rest of the

177 cal Theory Approach :s

proj ect and its goa l o f hum an eman c i­ Jractice? And ho w ca n we, as IR sc ho l­ ons and policie s necessa ry to ac hie ve se q uest ions have produced differ e nt ;: better-k now n variant s is base d on the 3, by Rod ge r Pay ne, is an exam pl e o f turn " in criti ca l th eo ry. What di s tin-

,mmuni ca tion ac ts as a poss ibl e s ite for the practical achie ve men t of e m anc ip a­ th and et hi cs are inh e re nt to langua ge, st, produce s itu atio ns of " ide al sp~e ch

1sus am ong participants. In such s 1tua­ dent ities, or cultur al d is tortion s th at de- 1ther the rationall y more co nvin ci ng ar-

·Osed by Haberm as en tail s what is c alled ethic s, in whi ch " part ic ip ants ai m to be rce of the bette r argum ent and ag ree th at co mm and the co nse nt of eve ryo ne who nklat er 1996: 286). Bec au se co n se nsual of the Haberm as ian variant , how nation ­

just as impo rtant as th e goa ls they collec­ heorists tend to be ske pti ca l o f goa ls that but have not bee n co nse ns ually and pub­ fleeted in Payne 's analysis of the ways in ve democracy wer e di sto rted by th e Bu sh :1in consent for the invas ion . Pa y ne argu es erat ive pro cess th at refl ec ted co mmuni ca­ he invas ion is hi ghl y que stionab le . iantle nation -state sove re ignt y is also cru­ rse ethi cs in IR , beca u se as a " bounded the n ation -s tate excl ud es oth e rs and in­

co mmuni ca tions needed fo r th e ac hie ve­ ter 1996: 287). The res ult is th at th e Hab­ ry tends to " refle c t a ge n e ra l lef t-!ib era l i), and it sha res w ith lib e ra l plu ra h sm an . he nation -s tate . Th e varia nt propo sed by eco nomics as the pote ntial s ite for change iants of cri tica l th eo ry have co ntinu ed to j class in provid in g alternati ve answers for

vithin a neo- Mar xian framewo rk . . . I S

chat has retain ed a foc u s on eco ~omics d discusse d in C hapte r 7. l a lo ng w ith worl

Postmodernism and Crit ical Theory

sys tem theo ry. Th e difference this alte rnative focus can m ake fo r critica l the­ ory an alys is is str ikin g. Whi le th e Habermas ian variant foc uses on co mmu ­ nicat ion a nd di sco urse, the hi stor ica l ma teria list varia nt focuses on " th e ef­ fects o f the g loba liza tion o f re lations o f prod uct ion and the linkaoes of elites . 0

111 core and pe riph ery on th e di str ibution of the wo rl d 's wea lth " (Linklat er 1996: 287). In seeki ng to ident ify and prom o te the pote ntia l site s for c hange, the Haber m as ian variant focu ses on unrestra ined co mmuni ca tion .s, whil e the hi stor ica l mate ri alism va r ian t e nco u rages co un ter hege m o nic po li tica l and soc ia l m oveme nt s. Yet ult ima te ly these differ e nt va ri a nt s ma y be unit ed und er th e sam e criti ca l theory umb re lla, beca use they s hare th e sa me th eo­ re tica l and pra ctica l goa l. That goa l, acco rdin g to Linkl ater, is " to iden ti fy the source s of pote n tia lly far- reac hin g c ha nge so th at human s ubj ec ts ca n gra s p th e poss ib ility of a lte rnat ive pa th s of hi s torica l deve lop me nt whi ch can be exp lored through co llec tive political ac tio n " (1996: 283-284).

T hi s is a lso why crit ica l th eory and post m ode rni s m mu st be kept d is­ tinct , desp ite their ma ny attribut es in com m on . Pos tm odern ism esc hews cri tica l theo ry's goa ls and is par t ic ularly s kep tica l of Haber mas's notio n of unco nstrained co mmunic ations. From a postmodern pers pective, all conve r­ sati on is a power stru gg le to impo se mean ing , a nd it is no t poss ibl e to move beyo nd thi s to a place un tai nt ed by powe r. In o rder to circ um ve nt the po wer stru gg le in th e ir ow n writin gs, postmodern ists seek alternat ive m et hodolo ­ gies and presenta tion sty les. T h is can m ake po s tm ode rn IR an alysis ap pea r strange to th e posit iv is t, who wo uld expec t analy s is to iden tify pot ential causa l va ri ab les, chart pos s ib le ca usa l linka ges, present factua l ev id e nce, and provide co ncl us ion s abo u t wh ich var iabl es prov ed most exp lan ato ry. Instea d pos tmodern IR seeks to s hake th e reader 's expec tation s, appear stran ge in order to ex pose co mpl ace nc ies, and focu s on th e di sc on tinuiti es of di sc ur sive s tru ctur es to reve a l forced marginali za tions. It may a lso foc us on what the po s itivist wo uld co ns ide r tri via l or unr e lated to IR , s uc h as s py nove ls, footba ll, defe nse m anu als, Star Trek , and oth er e lemen ts of popular cultur e. 6 In an appro ac h th at views eve rything as a tex t and a ll texts as in­ terco nn ected, 7 s uc h topi cs a llow us to see lin kage s th at are un exam in ed (metap h9rs of wa r use d in spo rt s, fo r exa mpl e), to turn meanin g up s id e down , and " reread " w hat we take for gra nt ed (why do we equate wa r w ith sport?) .

A lthough th ey too seek to unp ac k meanin g, the me th od o logy of c riti ca l theori sts is no t nearl y as radica l as pos tm odern is m g iven its differ ent goa ls . And criti ca l th eor is ts are of te n c rit ica l of postmodern ism for its "rad ical openn ess th at cuts out the gro und o n wh ich to s tand in maki ng a c ritiqu e or looking for progre ss" (R engger and Thirke ll-Whit e 2007: 15). Yet desp ite these criti c ism s and d ifference s , th e practitio ners of these approache s in IR have tend ed to a lly th em se lve s in orde r to hi g hli g ht th e ir difference s with the rest of th e di sc ip lin e. Th eir intr odu ct io n in to th e di sc ip lin e during th e

Pc

sci, I g

hola am

an ic L, ;

o ber ed ne ts

s ~ ev

I

r .

i

ature A shl ey 1988; Bartelson Edkin s, Pin-Fat , and Shapiro 1993; and C. Weber

178 Postmodern and Critical Theory Approache s

1980s was by no me an s a co ng e ni a l affai r, involving a " pos t-s tructurali st guerril la war agai n s t the 's ystem "' (Wre ve r 1996 : 169), acco mp a ni ed by equally vehement po s itivi st reaction s, so that " not so long ago mental flak jacket s were de rigueur if one so mu ch as utter ed the 'P-word ' among IR sc holar s " ( De r Deria n 1997: 57 ). Thi s overt ho stilit y has dec lin ed over time, in part beca use co nstructivi sm 's combination of po stpo sit ivist in sig hts with th e di sc ipline' s pr e ferred epi stemolog y ha s m ade the for mer a more acceptab le alternative to the theor etica l main s tream . It is probabl y th e case, then, tha t postpo s itiv is t approaches s uch as po stmoderni sm and critical the­ ory are a lready having a s ignifi ca nt but implicit imp act o n IR th eo ri sts in the making.

1B Further Reading Richard K. Ashley is one of th e be st-known postmod ern IR scholar s (see 1996 , 1987 , 1984), particularly for hi s ea rly postmodern c ritique s of Kenneth Wa ltz 's theor y of neor ea lism . Two other po s tmod ern sc holar s w ho se work has bee n particularl y sem inal are R. B. J . Walker ( 1993, 1987) and James Der Derian ( 1997, 1989). Der Derian 's edited volume Internati onal Theory: Crit­ ical Inve stig ations ( 1995a) juxtapo ses we ll-known arti c les in lR (by both po s itivi s ts and po s tpos itivists) th at co llec ti ve ly demon s trat e the concern s of postmodern ism and the English School di sc usse d in Chapt e r 9. I .

Other exa mp les of po s tmod e rn IR scholarship include Alker 1996; C ampbell J992 ; Conno lly 2002 ; Dillon and Reid 2009; Edkin s 1999; George 1994 ; Jabri 20 10; B. Kle in 1994; Luke 1993 ; Shapiro 1987 ; and Shinko 20 12, 2008. Some feminist sc ho lar s , suc h as V. Spike Pet e rs on and Christine Sylvester, work with a po stmod ern or cri tica l pers pective, but are di sc us sed in Chapter 8. 1 in stea d . Other IR scholar s whose w ritin gs might be cha ra cte rize d as po stmodern , s uch as Roxanne Dot y, Janice Bially Mar­ tern, Iver Neumann, Jutt a Weld es , and Frank e Wilm er, are cited in Chapter 5 . 1. In both cases, th e ir plac e ment in other sec tions is not definitive and might vary according to th e diff e re nt anal ytica l cr iteria of o th e r author s.

Edit e d vo lum es 6f postmodern IR include Der Deri an and Shapiro 1989 , J arvis 2002, and Shapiro and Alker 1996. There are a lso several no­ table s pec ial journal iss ues de vo ted to po s tm odernism, including a "dis si­ dent " iss ue of lm erna tional Studies Quart erly (A s hle y and Walker 1990a, 1990b ), a s pe c ial iss ue of Mill ennium titled " Im ages and N arratives in World Politi cs" (2001 ), and th e ·'Critiquin g Lib era lis m " (20 12) issue of J ournal of International Relations and Deve lopmem . Th e postmo dern liter­

on sove reignty is con s iderable, but particularl y se m inal piece s include 1995; Biersteker and Weber I 996; Campbell 1993;

2004 ; Inaya tull ah and Blane y 2004 ; Walker 1995 . For background on pos tmod ern ism as it relates

to IR and the s ocial as well as Hol linger

Among IR sc Linkl ater 's work is exa mpl es of thi s p Hoffm a n 1987; M. 2001 , 20 I 2 ; Sam hat work of sc hol ars wh variant , s uch as Ro in Chapter 7 . I . Two together are Wyn J o

A number of tex ory, including Edk in a special iss ue of R Thirk ell-White (2007) theory in ge neral, see

On the relati onshi Agger 199 J, Duvall a Kellner 1989 . Semin angelou and Ling 200 Ling 2002, Nayak and suggestions may be fo

The epi ste molo g for the di sciplin e have sues, suc h as M il/enni tions " ( 1988); Int ern, Debate" ( 1989), whicl companying arti c les t Jim George ( 1989): a logue and Synth es is P A variety of ot her sou Biersteker 1984; Boo, 1988; Holli s and Smi r Smith, Booth , and Za

I Notes I. This can obvio,

"many authors in the fi from lhe Frankfurt Schc positivist theories, such ready using the term "p becapitalized here ahh spective to which Dunn

:al Theory Approache s

affair, invo lv ing a "pos t-st ru c turali s t (Wrever 1996: 169 ), accompa ni ed b y ;, so that " not so lo ng ago me ntal flak 1ch as utt ered the ' P- wo rd ' amo n g IR 'his overt ho stilit y h as decl ined over , combinati on of postpositiv ist insight s emolo gy has mad e the fo rm e r a more :a l main stream. It is probab ly the case, .uch as po stm odemi sm and crit ical the- but impli c it impact on IR theori s ts in

st-known po stm odern IR sc hola rs (see is early postmodern cri tiques of Kenneth other postmodern sc hol ars who se work B. J. Walker (1993 , 1987) and Jame s Der j ited volume Internationa l Theor y: Crit ­ ses well-known article s in IR (by both :ollec tively demon strat e the conc erns of ool discusse d in Chapter 9 . l. :n IR sc hol arship includ e Alker 1996 ; Dillon and Rei d 2009 ; Edk in s 1999 ; n 1994 ; Luk e 1993 ; Shapiro 1987; and scholars , such as V. Sp ike Pete rso n and

istmodern or c ritic al pers pecti ve, but are )t her IR scho lars wh ose wr itin gs might ,ch as Roxa nn e Doty, Jani ce Bia lly M at­ and Franke Wi lmer , are c ited in Chapter it in oth e r sec tion s is no t definiti ve and ~nt analy tica l crit er ia of other author s .. :rn IR incl ud e Der Deri an and Shapir o d Alker 1996. Ther e are a lso seve ral no­ ~d to po stmod e rni sm , including a "d issi­ es Quar terly (As hley and Walk e r 1990~, nnium titl ed " Im ages and Narratives JO "Critiquing Lib e rali sm" (2 01 2) iss u~ of : and Deve lopm ent . Th e pos tmodern hter­ •le bu t particularl y se min al pieces include :rs,teker and Web er 199?; Ca mpb e ll i 993; )4; Ina yatullah a nd Blaney 2004'. Walker ickground on po s tm ode rni sm as it relates

Postmodernism and Critical Theory 179

to IR and the s ocial sc ie nces more gene rally, see P. Rose nau 1990 and 1992 as well as Ho llinger I 994 . '

. Among IR sc hol ars who s ub sc rib e to a H abe rm as ian critical theo ry, Link late r 's wo rk is among the be s t known ( I 998, I 996, 1992, 1990). Oth e r exan:ip les of this par ticu lar variant of cr itica l theo ry include Bayn es 1994; H offman l 987; M. Lync h 2002; Mit ze n 2005; Ne ufe ld 1995; R . Pa y ne 200 I , 20 12 ; Sa mhat and Payne 2003; Ri sse 2000; and Roa ch . 2012. Th e work of sc ho lars who s ub sc r ibe to c riti ca l th eo ry's hi s tori ca l ma teriali s m vari ant , s uch as Ro bert Cox , Ste phe n G ill , and C raig Murphy , is di sc usse d in C hapter 7. I. Two ed ited vol um es that brin g prac titi o ner s of both va riants toge ther are Wy n Jone s 200 1 and Bri nca t, Lim a, and N un es 2012 .

A numb er of texts als o eva luate c ritical theory's co ntribu tion to IR the­ ory, inclu d ing Edkin s and Vaughan-Wil liams 2009, Hamat i-A taya 20 12 , a nd a s_pecia l iss_ue of R eview of International SlLidies ed ited by Re ngger and Thirk e ll-W h1te (2007). For background on the Frankfurt Schoo l and cri tical theory in ge neral, see Bronn er 1994 , He ld 198 0 , and Wigger sh aus 1994. -

On the re lation ship between pos tm ode rni sm and c ritica l theor y, cons ult Agger l 99 l , Du vall and Varadarajan 2012 , George an d Campbell 1990, and Ke llne r 1989. Seminal exa mpl es of postco lo n ia lism IR includ e Agath­ an ge lo u and Ling 2005, Beie r 2005 , Chowd hr y and Na ir 2002 , Jabri 2012 , Ling 2002 , Nayak and Se lbi n 20 I 0, and Sa lte r 2002. Additiona l postcoloni al sugges tions may be fou nd in the Furth e r Read ing sect io n of Chapter 8. 1.

Th e e pis temo logica l iss ues tha t these po s tpos it iv ist approache s rai se for the disc ip line have bee n co ns ide re d in a num be r o f spec ial IR journ al is­ sues, s uch as Mill enn ium 's " Phil osop h ica l Tradition s in Int ernation al Rela ­ tions" ( 1988); International S tud ies Quar terly's " Exc h ange on the Th ird Debate" ( l 989), which co ntain s Yosef Lap id 's "t hird debat e" arti cle and ac­ compan ying art icle s by Ka i Hol s ti ( l 989), Th o ma s B iers te ker (I 989) , and Jim Geo rge ( 1989); and the Internati on al S tudies R eview fo rum " Are Dia ­ logue and Sy nth esis Po ss ib le in Int ern ationa l Re latio ns?" (Hell mann 2003 ). A vari ety of o ther sources exp lore this top ic, s uc h as A Iker l 996 ; A lke r and Bie rs teker 1984; Booth and Smith 1995; Crawfor d and Jar vis 2000 ; Geor ge 1988; HoJlis and Sm ith 1990; Sjoland er and Cox 1994; S. Smith 2002; and Smith , Booth , and Zal ews ki 1996.

• Notes l. Th is ca n ob v iou s ly ge nera te som e conf us io n. a nd T im Dunn e n otes th a t

"many a uth ors in the fie ld draw a di s tin c tion be tween Cri ti cal T heo ry desce nd ed from _the Fra nkfort Sc hool , and c r itica l th eo ries referri ng to a ra nge of a nti- or post­ pos1t1v1s1 theo ries, suc h as femini sm and post m oderni s m " (200 1: 73). Si nce I am a l­ ready us i~g 1he 1erm "pos 1posi ti vis m" for the lauer purpo se, c ritic al theo ry w ill not be cap ita lized here, a lthough its usage is mea n t to indi c aie the Frankfurt School per­ spective to wh ic h Dunn e refe rs .

,

10

I de

ts

1h:

f t

"v b,

t 1

180 Postmodern and Critical Theory Approaches

2. In a dditi on to Agger·~ ( 1991 ) acc essi ble d iscuss ion of the !>imi larities and differ e nces be t wee n c riti ca l th eory. po sts t ruc tura l is m. and postmodernism. sec Call ­ inic os 1985 and G eo rge and Ca mpb ell 1990. Sec also Rosemary Shi nko's di sc us s ion of thi s topi c at the s tart of C h apt e r 6.2.

3. How th e stud y of IR var ies com para11vely in different n ational e11in gs, as we ll a s w ha t diff ere nce US h egemo n y makes to IR theorizing. ha s been exam ined by R . Crawford 2000, Crawfo rd and Jarvi s 2000. Tic kn er 2003, Wa:.ver 1998. and S. Smith 2002.

4. In ove rv iews of di sc iplin a ry hi story . th e fi rst deba te is usua l ly iden tified as occu rrin g in th e 1920s a nd 1930s betw een ideal is m and rea li sm . w ith the la1ter e me rg ing as v ic tori ou s . Th e seco nd debat e occ urred in the 1950s and 1960s , in volv­ in g m e th odo logical di sag ree men ts over whether to stud y IR as hi s tor y or a behav­ iora l sc ience, with the latt e r emergi ng as vic torious. Howeve r. schola rs disag re e ove r ho w to da te th ese debate s . wha t exactly th e ir sub tan ce invo lved, o r w hat the ir o ut co m es were; see, for exam ple, Wa:.ver 1997. 1996: Kahle r 1997.

5. As wi th other post po s itiv ist approa c he s . pos tco lon ialism ·s introduction into IR has been re la t ive ly rece nt , and much of the ear ly pos tcolon ial work in the disci­ pline was don e by fem ini t scho lar s. Examples of pos tcolo ni al IR texts are provided in th e Furth er Reading~ sec tion of thi s c hapte r. a s well as in C h a pter 8.1 .

6. See the variou~ con tributi o ns in Der D c rian and Shapir o 1989, ·· Images and arra t ive s in World Po liti cs· · 2001, and We Ides 2003. Th e extent to \\ hich modem

tec hno logy mediate s re prese ntati o n is ano th e r subject of o ngoing inqui ry for post­ mo d e mi sts, since the ma s media ca nn ot s impl) ··report the new ·· as i f it were out the re to be objectively discovered. b ut rely o n discursive prac tices to convey mean­ ing a n d create the '· new~" ins tead. S imilarly the use of mode rn tec hn o logy in war ha s become a s ubs titut e rather than fac ilitat or for the activi ty. so th a t th e b lip s on a co mput e r scree n n ow d e termine what v ic t ory mean for com batant s o n th e batt le­ fie ld . From a p os tmod e rn per specti ve thi s ha s produced a cr is is of represe nt at ion, in whic h " th e realitie s o f wor ld po liti cs inc reasing ly are ge nerated. me diated, even s imul a te d by s uccess ive tec hni ca l mean s o f reproduc t ion. further dis tancing them fr o m so m e or ig ina l and ulti mately my thi ca l meaning ·· ( Der D eria n 199 7: 57; see al so Deibe rt 1997 a nd Der De rian 200 I. I 992).

7. Or as Paul ine Ro se na u put s it. ··po st -moderni s m is text-cente red a nd , in the ex t reme. a ll th e wo rld is a text: a li fe expcrien ce, a po l itica l ral ly. an e lec tion , nego­ tiatin g a tr ea ty. a pe rso nal relationship, a vaca tion. buying a ca r. see kin g a job-all a re tex ts. Even speec h is a~signed th e s ta tu s of text"· ( 1990: 88).

Post Roserr

The first issue poststru ctura/ism tions theo ry. 1

retical approach cept s, and tex patterns of thouol about things 0 on its theo retical ings where 1hou discipl ine ii. Th modern wri1er what will have

Most studen and inquir y tha1 1hought and crea theory of IR, bur resists atcempts attention 10 the proaches rely ur genealogy ( iet: erate to destabil principles upon been based.3

In pan wha1 proaches to 1he perhaps even m of scholar s like and Derr ida, a1 and/or problem~ biopower to sup understand ho'-' tional," while[\, Levinas to forrr an "ethics of en

This pa t1e1 scholarship.~ Tl concept of hun how it has bee