Is critical theory always for the white West and for Western imperialism? Beyond Westphilian towards a post-racist critical IR
Is critical theory always for the white West and for Western imperialism? Beyond Westphilian towards a post-racist critical IR
复制标题
批判理论总是为白人西方和西方帝国主义服务的吗？
DOI：
10.1017/s0260210507007413
复制
发表时间：
2007
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
J. Hobson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Hobson
在25年后对批判国际关系理论进行评价时，本文首先提出一个问题，即批判理论是否含蓄地强化了西方文明的“优越性”，并使西方帝国主义自然化。在揭示许多批判性国际关系理论的欧洲中心主义时，本文通过将其引导到新的非欧洲中心主义方向来重建它。这并不是说现存的批判理论已经奄奄一息，因为它无疑有很多东西可以提供。但这也就是说，除非欧洲中心主义的问题从其身体理论中被驱除，否则批判理论无意中就有加入解决问题理论行列的危险。前两个部分解构了批判性国际关系理论的主要流派——葛兰西主义、后现代主义和女权主义——以揭示它们经常陷入欧洲中心主义，而最后一个部分试图通过重建“后种族主义国际关系”来实现“威斯特利亚”批判性国际关系的非殖民化。这反过来又引出了结论，它勾勒出一个后种族主义的解放政治项目，可以帮助开始实现东西方之间全球和解的紧迫任务。
ABSTRACT In appraising critical IR theory after twenty-five years, this article begins by asking whether critical theory implicitly reinforces the ‘superiority’ of Western civilisation and naturalises Western imperialism. In revealing the Eurocentrism of much of critical IR theory the article proceeds to reconstruct it by steering it in fresh non-Eurocentric directions. This is not to say that extant critical theory is moribund since it undoubtedly has much to offer. But it is to say that until the problem of Eurocentrism is exorcised from its body theoretique, critical theory inadvertently lies in danger of joining the ranks of problem-solving theories. The first two sections deconstruct the leading schools of critical IR theory – Gramscianism, postmodernism and feminism – to reveal their frequent lapsing into Eurocentrism, while the final section seeks to decolonise ‘Westphilian’ critical IR by reconstructing a ‘post-racist IR’. And this in turn leads on to the conclusion, which sketches out a post-racist emancipatory political project that can help begin the urgent task of effecting global reconciliation between East and West.