Understanding politics of racialisation is central to the study of IR. Discuss?
With international relations (IR) becoming more interconnected, and theories from all
centuries being debated, what is central to the study of IR is an extremely complex
discussion. However, the eurocentricity of IR along with the post-colonial structure of
globalisation highlight that understanding the politics of racialisation may actually be central
to the study of IR. Particularly when you delve into meta-theory for example, Democratic
Peace Theory and how it either disregards or incorrectly depicts the Middle East and North
Africa. However, IR theories such as Realism stress very relevant information that explain
the current state of IR and how and why states negotiate and their intention when making
global decisions. This paper also discusses Edward Said’s ‘The Other’ and how the western
world needs ‘The Other’ to prosper and have an economic and social gain. Overall, it seems
likely that racialisation is more ingrained in the study of IR than at first glance, particularly
with the rise of globalisation and the Global North and South divide which has organisations
utilise charities to have the Global North ‘save’ the South.
Understanding the politics of racialisation is central to the study of international relations (IR)
as IR can be argued to be an extremely white and Eurocentric study. To understand why the
eurocentricity of IR is central to its study, it is important to first recognise what IR is. At its
foundation and core, IR theory ‘allow us to understand and try to make sense of the world
around us through varies lenses’ (Gold and McGlinchey, 2017). To argue that IR theory is
white delves into the ‘epistemological tropes, locations, assumptions, and commitments
naturalise racialized accounts of world politics’ (Sabaratnam, 2020). For example, the
western world has celebrations for events that have been heavily glorified despite the lives
, lost and the racial motive. In the US, Columbus Day does not clearly depict the truly
historical events ‘Columbas did not discover the Americas…in contrast to the brave, civil,
and adventurous representations of Columbus, historical accounts reveal him to arguably be
one of the most brutal colonisers in recorded history’ (Eason et al., 2021 p.4-5; Zinn, 1999).
With a poll conducted in America showed that 56% maintain a positive impression of
Columbus (Knights of Columbus & Marist Polls, 2017). This eurocentric of IR is ingrained
in most IR theories such as the Democratic Peace Theory (DPT). The theory influenced by
Kant’s ‘Perpetual Peace’ was further evolved to claim that ‘democracies almost never go to
war against each another’ (Mello, 2014, p.1) however, not only does the record not prove this
but in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) ‘ democratising states have experienced
more internal conflicts than their less democratic peers yet leaders in the west have invoked
DPA to justify invading and occupying less-democratic and notably less-white countries’
(Kelebogile Zvobgo and Loken, 2020). Therefore, the meta-theory of IR can be argued to be
inherently Eurocentric and white, highlighting that understanding political racialisation is
central to studying IR as the pre-existing theories are inconsiderate of the non-white Eastern
world.
On the other hand, understanding the politics of racialisation can be disputed as realism can
be argued to be central to the study of IR. Morganthau sets out the six principles of realism:
politics is governed through the constant and immutable roots of humans nature, states act
from their interest in power, the definition of power is not set and can change between
cultures, there is no political morality without prudence, states ‘clothe their own particular
aspirations and actions in the moral purposes of the universe’ and finally realists’ prioritise
the autonomy of the political sphere and think ‘interest defined as power’ (Hans Joachim
Morgenthau and Thompson, 1985). The realist theory is incredibly relevant to international
With international relations (IR) becoming more interconnected, and theories from all
centuries being debated, what is central to the study of IR is an extremely complex
discussion. However, the eurocentricity of IR along with the post-colonial structure of
globalisation highlight that understanding the politics of racialisation may actually be central
to the study of IR. Particularly when you delve into meta-theory for example, Democratic
Peace Theory and how it either disregards or incorrectly depicts the Middle East and North
Africa. However, IR theories such as Realism stress very relevant information that explain
the current state of IR and how and why states negotiate and their intention when making
global decisions. This paper also discusses Edward Said’s ‘The Other’ and how the western
world needs ‘The Other’ to prosper and have an economic and social gain. Overall, it seems
likely that racialisation is more ingrained in the study of IR than at first glance, particularly
with the rise of globalisation and the Global North and South divide which has organisations
utilise charities to have the Global North ‘save’ the South.
Understanding the politics of racialisation is central to the study of international relations (IR)
as IR can be argued to be an extremely white and Eurocentric study. To understand why the
eurocentricity of IR is central to its study, it is important to first recognise what IR is. At its
foundation and core, IR theory ‘allow us to understand and try to make sense of the world
around us through varies lenses’ (Gold and McGlinchey, 2017). To argue that IR theory is
white delves into the ‘epistemological tropes, locations, assumptions, and commitments
naturalise racialized accounts of world politics’ (Sabaratnam, 2020). For example, the
western world has celebrations for events that have been heavily glorified despite the lives
, lost and the racial motive. In the US, Columbus Day does not clearly depict the truly
historical events ‘Columbas did not discover the Americas…in contrast to the brave, civil,
and adventurous representations of Columbus, historical accounts reveal him to arguably be
one of the most brutal colonisers in recorded history’ (Eason et al., 2021 p.4-5; Zinn, 1999).
With a poll conducted in America showed that 56% maintain a positive impression of
Columbus (Knights of Columbus & Marist Polls, 2017). This eurocentric of IR is ingrained
in most IR theories such as the Democratic Peace Theory (DPT). The theory influenced by
Kant’s ‘Perpetual Peace’ was further evolved to claim that ‘democracies almost never go to
war against each another’ (Mello, 2014, p.1) however, not only does the record not prove this
but in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) ‘ democratising states have experienced
more internal conflicts than their less democratic peers yet leaders in the west have invoked
DPA to justify invading and occupying less-democratic and notably less-white countries’
(Kelebogile Zvobgo and Loken, 2020). Therefore, the meta-theory of IR can be argued to be
inherently Eurocentric and white, highlighting that understanding political racialisation is
central to studying IR as the pre-existing theories are inconsiderate of the non-white Eastern
world.
On the other hand, understanding the politics of racialisation can be disputed as realism can
be argued to be central to the study of IR. Morganthau sets out the six principles of realism:
politics is governed through the constant and immutable roots of humans nature, states act
from their interest in power, the definition of power is not set and can change between
cultures, there is no political morality without prudence, states ‘clothe their own particular
aspirations and actions in the moral purposes of the universe’ and finally realists’ prioritise
the autonomy of the political sphere and think ‘interest defined as power’ (Hans Joachim
Morgenthau and Thompson, 1985). The realist theory is incredibly relevant to international
