SpringerLink
Log in

Decolonization and the Reclamation of Ontological Multiplicity: Toward the Rescripting of the History of Ideas in International Relations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Decolonizing Grand Theories

  • 141 Accesses

Abstract

Order building in International Relations has been pivotal in determining the epistemic trajectory of explaining systemic change in world politics (Lascurrettes, 2020, p. 1). Such a thrust on the significance of the debate on order building for the technical discourse of the discipline of International Relations tends to have received a distinct epistemic treatment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 93.08
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
EUR 117.69
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    On the treatment of the disciplinary history of IR, please see chapter two and three of this book.

  2. 2.

    For a treatment of the internal discursive critical history of the discipline of IR, please see chapter three of this book.

  3. 3.

    The patterns of authorityin international politics could be disaggregated into two analytical facets. First is particularism/cosmopolitanism that refers to the degree to which the prevailing norms, identities and institutions, would facilitate one polity to exercise authoritative claims over the behavior of another polity. Second dimension which has been designated as the degree of substitutability indicates the extent to which these norms, identities and institutions allows the incorporation of one polity into another (Nedal & Nexon, 2019, p. 170).

  4. 4.

    Unlike the designation of cultures as monoliths and civilizations as closed monads,the conception of civilizational complex recognizes the ability of cultures and civilizations to interact with each other and form a concentric circle (Inglis, 2010, p. 146).

References

  • Armitage, D. (2007). The Declaration of Independence: A Global History. Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ayoob, M. (1995). The Third World Security Predicament. Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayoob, M. (1998). Subaltern Realism: International Relations Meets the Third World. In S. G. Neuman (Ed.), International Relations Theories and the Third World (pp. 31–49). St. Martins Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayoob, M. (2002). Inequality and Theorising in International Relations: The Case for Subaltern Realism. International Studies Review, 4(3), 27–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkawi, T., & Laffey, M. (2006). The Postcolonial Moment in Security Studies. Review of International Studies, 32(2), 329–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkin, S. J. (2010). Realist Constructivism: Rethinking International Relations Theory. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barkin, J. S. (2021). The sovereignty cartel. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beitz, C. (1979). Political Theory and International Relations. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. (2010). Political thought and international relations: Variations on a realist theme. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, N. (2000). Holism: Mental and Semantic. In E. Craig (Ed.), Concise Routledge Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bluhm, W. (1965). Theories of the Political System: Classics of Political Thought and Modern Political Analysis. Printice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth, K., & Smith, S. (1995). International relations theory today. Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boucher, D. (1998). Political Theories of International Relations: From Thucydides to the Present. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C. (1992). International Relations Theory: New Normative Approaches. Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, T. (2011). Interpreting and Appropriating Texts in the History of Political Thought: Quentin Skinner and Poststructuralism. Contemporary Political Theory, 10(3), 313–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, C. R., & Griffiths, R. (2017). Between Eurocentrism and Babel: A Framework for the Analysis of States, State Systems and International Orders. International Studies Quarterly, 61(2), 328–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buzan, B. Jones, C., & Little, R. (1993). The Logic of Anarchy: Neorealism to Structural Realism. Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catlin, G. (1950). A History of the Political Philosophers. George Allen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakrabarty, D. (2000). Provincialising Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chowdhury, A. (2018). The Myth of International Order: Why Weak States Persist and Alternatives to the State Fade Away. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, I. (1999). Globalisation and International Relations Theory. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dallmayr, F. (1981). Twilight of Subjectivity. University of Massachusetts Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1986). Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature, trans Dana Polan. University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dessler, D. (1989). What’s Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate? International Organisation, 43(3), 441–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deudney, D. (2011). Anarchy and Violence Interdependence. In K. Booth (Ed.), Realism and World Politics (pp. 17–34). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, J. (2008). The Ethics of Realism. In C. Reus-Smit & D. Snidal (Eds.), The Oxford Hand Book of International Relations (pp. 150–162). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, J. (2009). Rethinking Political Structures: From Ordering Principles to Vertical Differentiation and Beyond. International Theory, 1(1), 49–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, J. (2015). The Discourse of Anarchy in IR. International Theory, 7(3), 393–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, J. (1968). The Identity of the History of Ideas. Philosophy, 43(164), 85–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elton, G. R. (1991). Political History: Principles and Practice. Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Femia, J. V. (1988). An Historicist Critique of Rivisionist Methods of Studying the History of Ideas. In J. Tully (Ed.), Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and His Critiques (pp. 156–175). Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frost, M. (2009). Global Ethics: Anarchy, Freedom and International Relations. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadamer, H. G. (2013). Truth and Method. Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzzini, S. (1998). Realism in International Relations and International Political Economy: The Continuing Story of a Death Foretold. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzzini, S. (2013). Power, Realism and Constructivism. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1984). Theory of Communicative Action (C. Taylor, Trans.). Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, A. (1954). Capital and Carbuncles: The Great Books Reappraised. American Political Science Review, 48(3), 775–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hassner, P. (1997). Violence and Peace: From the Atomic Bomb to Ethnic Cleansing (J. Brenton, Trans.). Central European University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Held, D. (Ed.). (1991). Political Theory Today. Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Held, D. (Ed.). (1995). Democracy and the Global Order: From Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobson, J. M. (2012). The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hobson, J. M. (2014). The Twin Self-Delusions of IR: Why ‘Hierarchy’ and Not ‘Anarchy’ Is the Core Concept of IR. Millennium, 42(3), 557–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobson, J. M., & Sharman, J. C. (2005). The Enduring Place of Hierarchy in World Politics: Tracing the Social Logics of Hierarchy and Political Change. European Journal of International Relations, 11(1), 63–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollis, M., & Lukes, S. (1982). Introduction. In M. Hollis & S. Lukes (Eds.), Rationality and Relativism (pp. 1–20). MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurrell, A., & Macdonald, T. (2012). Ethics and Norms in International Relations. In W. R. T. Carlsnaes & B. A. Simmons (Eds.), Hand Book of International Relations (2nd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchings, K. (1999). International Political Theory: Rethinking Ethics in a Global Era. Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchings, K. (2008). Time and World Politics: Rethinking the Present. Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchings, K. (2010). Global Ethics: An Introduction. Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikenberry, J. G. (2001). After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order After Major Wars. Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ikenberry, J. G. (2011). The Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis and Transformation of the American World Order. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inglis, D. (2010). Civilizations or Globalisation? Intellectual Rapprochements and Historical World-Visions. European Journal of Social Theory, 13(1), 135–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, P. T. (2011). The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations: Philosophy of Science and Its Implications for the Study of World Politics. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, R. (1990). Martin Wight, International Theory and the Good Life. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 19(2), 261–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, R. (1996). Is There a Classical International Theory? In S. Smith, K. Booth, & M. Zalewski (Eds.), International Theory: Positivism and Beyond (pp. 203–218). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R. O. (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lake, D. A. (2011). Hierarchy in international relations. Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laroche, C. D., & Pratt, S. F. (2018). Kenneth Waltz Is Not a Neorealist and Why It Matters. European Journal of International Relations, 24(1), 153–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lascurettes, K. M. (2020). Orders of Exclusion: Great Powers and the Strategic Sources of Foundational Rules in International Relations. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lechner, S. (2017). Why Anarchy Still Matters for International Relations: On Theories and Things. Journal of International Political Theory, 13(3), 341–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundborg, T. (2019). The Ethics of Neorealism: Waltz and the Time of International Life. European Journal of International Relations, 25(1), 229–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, A. (1976). Is a Science of Comparative Politics Possible? In A. Ryan (Ed.), The Philosophy of Social Explanation (pp. 177–188). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKay, J. (2022). Kenneth Waltz’s Approach to Reading Classic Political Theory and Why It Matters. International Theory, 14(2), 338–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattern, J. B., & Zarakol, A. (2016). Hierarchies in World Politics. International Organisation, 70(3), 623–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McColskey, R. (1957). American Political Thought and the Study of Politics. American Political Science Review, 51(1), 115–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCoy, C. (1963). The Structure of Political Thought: A Study of the History of Political Ideas. McGraw Hill Book Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • McQueen, A. (2018). Political Realism in Apocalyptic Times. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merkl, P. H. (1967). Political Continuity and Change. Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molloy, S. (2009). Aristotle, Eppicurus, Morgenthau and the Political Ethics of the Lesser Evil. Journal of International Political Theory, 5(1), 94–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nedal, D. K., & Nexon, D. H. (2019). Anarchy and Authority: International Structure, Balance of Power and Hierarchy. Journal of Global Security Studies, 4(2), 169–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pangle, T. L., & Alirensdorf, P. J. (1999). Justice Among Nations: On the Moral Basis of Power and Peace. University Press of Kansas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, A. (2011). War, Religion and Empire: The Transformation of International Orders. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pichler, H. K. (1998). The Godfathers of Truth: Max Weber and Carl Schmitt in Morgenthau’s power Politics. Review of International Studies, 24(2), 185–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pocock, J. G. A. (1962). The History of Political Thought: A Methodological Enquiry. In P. Lalett & W. G. Runciman (Eds.), Philosophy, Politics and Society: Second Series. Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pocock, J. G. A. (2009). Political Thought and History: Essays on Theory and Method. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pocock, J. (2008). Theory in History: Problem of Context and Narrative. In The Oxford Hand Book of Political Theory. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pond, E., & Waltz, K. N. (1994). Correspondance: International Politics, Viewed from the Ground. International Security, 19(1), 195–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rengger, N. (2000). Political Theory and International Relations: A Promised Land or the Exit from Eden? International Affairs, 76(4), 755–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reus-Smit, C. (2013). The Liberal International Order Reconsidered. In R. Friedman, K. Oskanian, & R. Pacheco-Pardo (Eds.), After Liberalism (pp. 167–186). Palgrave..

    Google Scholar 

  • Reus-Smit, C. (2018). On Cultural Diversity: International Theory in a World of Difference. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ricoeur, P. (1976). History and Hermeneutics. The Journal of Philosophy, 73(19), 683–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ripsman, N. M., Taliaferro, J. W., & Lobell, S. E. (2016). Neoclassical Realist Theory of International Politics. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, G. (1998). Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy. World Politics, 51(1), 144–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. (2011). Conceptualising the Social World: Principles of Sociological Analysis. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, Q. (1966). The Limits of Historical Explanations. Philosophy, 41(157), 199–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, Q. (1969). Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas. History and Theory, 8(1), 3–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, Q. (1996). Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, Q. (2002). Visions of Politics: Regarding Method, (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, B. C. (2002). Together Again: Reuniting Political Theory and International Relations Theory. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 4(1), 115–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. (1992). The Forty Years Detour: The Resurgence of Normative Theory in International Relations. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 21(3), 489–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. (1995). Self-Images of a Discipline: A Genealogy of International Relations Theory. In K. Booth & S. Smith (Eds.), International Relations Theory Today. Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spruyt, H. (2020). The World Imagined: Collective Beliefs and Political Order in the Sinocentric, Islamic and the Southeast Asian International Societies. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sterling-Folker, J. (2009). Neoclassical Realism and Identity Peril Despite Profit Across the Taiwan Strait. In S. Lobell, N. M. Ripsman, & J. W. Taliaferro (Eds.), Neoclassical Realism, The State and Foreign Policy (pp. 99–138). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Taliaferro, J. W., Lobell, S. E., & Ripsman, N. M., et al. (2009). Introduction: Neoclassical Realism, The State and Foreign Policy. In S. E. Lobell, N. M. Ripsman, & J. W. Taliaferro (Eds.), Neoclassical Realism, The State and Foreign Policy (pp. 19–28). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C. (1971). Interpretation and the Sciences of Man. The Review of Metaphysics, 25(1), 3–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der veer, P. (2013, Novemberr 13). The Value of Comparison. Hau-Morgan Lectures Initiative. Transcript of the Lewis Henry Morgan Lecture. University of Rochester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, R. B. J. (1993). Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, R. B. J. (2010). After the Globe: Before the World. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Walt, S. M. (1987). The Origins of Alliances. Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltz, K. N. (1959/2001). Man, the State and War: A Theoretical Analysis. Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltz, K. N. (1986). Reflections on Theory of International Politics: A Response to My Critiques. In R. O. Keohane (Ed.), Neorealism and Its Critiques. Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltz, K. N. (1990). Realist Thought and Neorealist Theory. Journal of International Affairs, 44(1), 21–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltz, K. N. (2004). Kenneth N. Waltz: A Presentation of the Ten Works that Shaped Waltz’s Intellectual Development. Politik, 1(4), 93–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wight, M. (1966). Why Is There No International Theory? In H. Butterfield & M. Wight (Eds.), Diplomatic Invesstigations (pp. 17–34). George Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M. C. (2005). The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Relations. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M. C. (2011). The Politics of Theory: Waltz, Realism and Democracy. In K. Booth (Ed.), Realism and World Politics (pp. 50–64). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical Investigations (G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans., 2nd ed.). Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfers, A. (1960). The Anglo-American Tradition in Foreign Affairs. In S. Hoffmann (Ed.), Contemporary Theory in International Relations (pp. 240–255). Printice-Hall..

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolforth, W. C. (1999). The Stability of a Unipolar World. International Security, 24(1), 5–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zehfuss, M. (2009). Jacques Derrida. In J. Edkins & N. Vaughan-Williams (Eds.), Critical Theorists and International Relations (pp. 137–149). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India

    Sanjeev Kumar H.M.

Authors
  1. Sanjeev Kumar H.M.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sanjeev Kumar H.M. .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kumar H.M., S. (2023). Decolonization and the Reclamation of Ontological Multiplicity: Toward the Rescripting of the History of Ideas in International Relations. In: Decolonizing Grand Theories. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4841-3_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation