{"title":"The Empire Cites Back: The Occlusion of Non-Western Histories of IR \u2028and the Case of India","authors":"Martin J. Bayly","doi":"10.1177/00208817241247174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The call for a ‘global’ and ‘post-Western’ international relations (IR) discipline is rightly gathering momentum, yet arguably this research agenda contains presumptions as to the absence of a historical tradition of IR thinking in places such as India. Turning attention to marginalized histories of Indian IR, this commentary on the global IR debate offers a historical corrective to these presumptions and calls for greater attention to extra-European disciplinary histories. In so doing, important patterns of co-constitution reveal the connected histories of disciplinary development that challenge the analytical categories that often characterize the global IR and post-Western IR literature. A more historicized global IR debate offers a fruitful research agenda that explores the multiple connected beginnings of IR as a global discipline responsive to a variety of intellectual lineages, encompassing a variety of political purposes and revealing entanglements of imperial and anti-imperial knowledge.","PeriodicalId":512609,"journal":{"name":"International Studies","volume":" 33","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208817241247174","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The call for a ‘global’ and ‘post-Western’ international relations (IR) discipline is rightly gathering momentum, yet arguably this research agenda contains presumptions as to the absence of a historical tradition of IR thinking in places such as India. Turning attention to marginalized histories of Indian IR, this commentary on the global IR debate offers a historical corrective to these presumptions and calls for greater attention to extra-European disciplinary histories. In so doing, important patterns of co-constitution reveal the connected histories of disciplinary development that challenge the analytical categories that often characterize the global IR and post-Western IR literature. A more historicized global IR debate offers a fruitful research agenda that explores the multiple connected beginnings of IR as a global discipline responsive to a variety of intellectual lineages, encompassing a variety of political purposes and revealing entanglements of imperial and anti-imperial knowledge.
建立 "全球 "和 "后西方 "国际关系(IR)学科的呼声正蓄势待发,然而,可以说这一研究议程包含了一些假定,即印度等地缺乏国际关系思想的历史传统。这篇关于全球 IR 辩论的评论将注意力转向被边缘化的印度 IR 历史,对这些假定进行了历史性的纠正,并呼吁更多地关注欧洲以外的学科历史。在这样做的过程中,重要的共同构成模式揭示了学科发展的关联历史,对通常作为全球投资者关系和后西方投资者关系文献特征的分析类别提出了挑战。更加历史化的全球 IR 辩论提供了一个富有成果的研究议程,它探讨了 IR 作为一门全球学科的多重联系的起源,这门学科回应了各种思想脉络,涵盖了各种政治目的,并揭示了帝国知识与反帝国知识之间的纠葛。