Comparison Post-Colonialism and Post-Structuralism
The aim of this essay is to compare and contrast post-colonialism and post-structuralism as theories of international politics, by providing an explanation of the basic principles of each theory and an analysis of the similarities and differences.
The first part of this essay will explain the basic principles of post-colonialism and post-structuralism as theories of international politics in order to examine the differences and similarities between these two approaches. In the second part of the essay some differences and similarities will be highlighted and finally I will briefly summarize and highlight the differences and similarities between post-colonialism and post-structuralism.
I will start by explaining core principles of post-colonialism as a theory of international politics. Post-colonialism became part of international relations in the 1990s and is therefore a relatively young approach. It did not start as a branch of international relations, but it challenges the basis of IR theories and in particular the “eurocentrism” of the IR theories. The main idea of post-colonialism is that it refuses the idea that nation-states are always the key actors in international relations and it rather focuses on the view on events from colonized parts of the world instead of the colonizing Western world. The aim is to give the subaltern a voice so it can be heard. Post-colonialists argue that the effects of colonialism and imperialism are still being felt today among the countries that were colonized. According to Baylis, fiction, poetry are part of the scope of this approach (Baylis, 2011, p190). Post-colonialism encourages the use of novels, diaries, poetry and testimonials.
Just as post-colonialism, post-structuralism brings a critical perspective to the study of International Relations. It is critical towards the way most states conduct their foreign policies and they are critical of how most IR theories tell us to study what states do.
The first part of this essay will explain the basic principles of post-colonialism and post-structuralism as theories of international politics in order to examine the differences and similarities between these two approaches. In the second part of the essay some differences and similarities will be highlighted and finally I will briefly summarize and highlight the differences and similarities between post-colonialism and post-structuralism.
I will start by explaining core principles of post-colonialism as a theory of international politics. Post-colonialism became part of international relations in the 1990s and is therefore a relatively young approach. It did not start as a branch of international relations, but it challenges the basis of IR theories and in particular the “eurocentrism” of the IR theories. The main idea of post-colonialism is that it refuses the idea that nation-states are always the key actors in international relations and it rather focuses on the view on events from colonized parts of the world instead of the colonizing Western world. The aim is to give the subaltern a voice so it can be heard. Post-colonialists argue that the effects of colonialism and imperialism are still being felt today among the countries that were colonized. According to Baylis, fiction, poetry are part of the scope of this approach (Baylis, 2011, p190). Post-colonialism encourages the use of novels, diaries, poetry and testimonials.
Just as post-colonialism, post-structuralism brings a critical perspective to the study of International Relations. It is critical towards the way most states conduct their foreign policies and they are critical of how most IR theories tell us to study what states do.
Bibliography: Ashenden, S. & Owen, D. (1999). Foucault contra Habermas: Recasting the dialogue between genealogy and critical theory. SAGE Publications Limited. Baylis et al. (5th Ed ). (2011). The Globalization of World Politics. Oxford University Press: New-York Dunne, T., Kurki, M., Smith, S McLead, J. (2000). Beginning postcolonialism. Manchester University Press. Jacques Derrida. (2011, June 3). Retrieved on April 22, 2013, from the Stanford Encyclopedia of philsophy web site: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/derrida/ Spivak, G. (1998). Spivak in other worlds. New York: Routledge. Stephens, M. (1994, January 23). Jacques Derrida and deconstruction. Retrieved on March 16, 2013, from the NYU web site: http://www.nyu.edu/classes/stephens/Jacques%20Derrida%20-%20NYT%20-%20page.htm Viotti, PR. & Kauppi, M.V. (2010). International relations theory. Pearson Education. Weber, C. (2010). International relations theory: a critical introduction. Taylor & Francis.