Publication details
Saving Identity from Postmodernism? The Normalisation of Constructivism in IR
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2009 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | Contemporary Political Theory |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Field | Political sciences |
| Keywords | constructivism; post-structuralism |
| Description | This article uses Foucauldean archaeologico-genealogical strategy of problematisation to analyse the emergence and disciplinary trajectories of Constructivism in IR. Particular attention is paid to the process of its normalisation that has brought Constructivism close to Neo-utilitarian mainstream IR. The analysis investigates how this 'successful' normalisation purged Constructivism of its early critical potential and includes the discussion of its theoretical and practical consequences. The article begins with addressing the fact that IR's intellectual history is almost always treated in isolation from both its disciplinary and wider (political) contexts. The first part shows that intellectual configuration and historical fortunes of Constructivism are inseparable from readings of the Philosophy of Social Science (PoSS) which presents considerable internal tensions. The second and third parts subsequently chart the actual genealogies of Constructivism, breaking its overall normalisation down into two stages, each revolving around certain practices and events. In concrete terms, the second part concentrates on earlier genealogies, identifying practices of Constructivism's taxonomisation and distillation as well as its immunisation (together with the rest of the mainstream scholarship) against Postmodernism/post-structuralism as key events. As for the third part, the attention is directed to the most recent genealogies, revealing new attempts to reconstruct Constructivism. Specifically, the practices of indirect neutralisation connected to the formulation of 'Pragmatist' Constructivism and of direct neutralisation through which 'Realist' Constructivism has been forged are recognised as key events. It is this complex (re)productive process, rather than a simple intellectual history, which explains both the normalisation of Constructivism and the continued marginalisation of Postmodern/post-structural approaches. In conclusion, it is suggested that the debate over Constructivism remains crucial both to IR's infra-disciplinary balance of intellectual power, and to the vision of international politics which, from this field, spills over into policy design and public debate. |
| Related projects: |