This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: 03/12/2006 18:38:00 B &amp; Ls 5 main critiques -Presentism: concerned w/ contemporary history, expertise needed on current events. Calls for forward thinking rather than backward thinking. -Ahistorism: the search for general laws that apply to the past as well as the present. Theorists seek to identify laws that are immune too historical variation. -Eurocentrism: self evidently true. Brought 1 st International system together through colonialism and those not with Euro stamp were forced to conform for example Japan. May be true but the history can be told by ignoring and distorting info. Eurocentric accounts invariably ignore Afro-Eurasian system that evolved long before the Euros began to extend across the globe. Very closely related to Edward Saids Orientalism. IR is too commonly studied from this very Eurocentric perspective w/a concommitment failure to come to terms w/how non-euros others understand IR and organize their world. -Anarchophilia: IR for past 5000 years has not been anarchic, but arranged on a spectrum, anarchy at one end empire at the other. w/ hegemony, suzerainty, and dominion in between. -State Centrism: almost inseparable from anarchophilia. Big reason for the underdeveloped conceptualization of the int. system. Critiques to Neo-Realism- Ahistorism- widely accepted that texture of international politics did not change over time because patterns recur and events repeat themselves endlessly They assume that the balance of power provides the basis for a transhistorical theory that accounts just as well for behavior in greek city-states as it did for relations between the soviet union and the US. Euro-centrism- everything started and ends with Europe Anarchophilia- it is the normative assumption in neo-realsim. State Centrism- reason for why so focused on military political especially because politics are secured only on state level, they are linked indissolubly with the state. Attempts to dissolve weaknesses Want to develop open-ended approach to int. system which does not prejudge the nature of the dominant units in the system, which also doesnt privilege one sector of activity over another (politics over econ.) or give precedence to one mode pf explanation over another (process over structure). Wants main resource to be history and theory. Three broad tools they utilize to get away for critiques: 1. Levels of Analysis-degree and aggregation International system all the way to individual level....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 10/08/2007 for the course IR 210 taught by Professor Lynch during the Fall '06 term at USC.
- Fall '06
- International Relations, modern state, international society, modern states