SavedAdd your journal

Journals / All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace / 2020 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2

Dialogue of the “Globals”: Connecting Global IR to Global Intellectual History

Deniz KURU
Pages
229–248
Publication Date
2020-06-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Such an approach enables a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics that have led to an overall focus on the “global.” The first part elaborates how the idea of Global IR has emerged as a novel disciplinary tool, and pinpoints the various meanings it has gained.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to provide an exploratory analysis of Global IR, by pointing to its novelty as a tool for expanding our disciplinary frameworks, and furthermore, by connecting it to the quite simultaneously emerging field of Global Intellectual History.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Such an approach enables a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics that have led to an overall focus on the “global.” The first part elaborates how the idea of Global IR has emerged as a novel disciplinary tool, and pinpoints the various meanings it has gained.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It concludes by discussing the value of Global IR in terms of its potential role for broadening the discipline not just in ways that are more (IR-)introspective but also in its bridge-building capacity to other fields with similar concerns, extending to Global Intellectual History and beyond, and provides a brief list of initial suggestions.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Global IR · Global Intellectual History · History and IR

Abstract

This study aims to provide an exploratory analysis of Global IR, by pointing to its novelty as a tool for expanding our disciplinary frameworks, and furthermore, by connecting it to the quite simultaneously emerging field of Global Intellectual History. Such an approach enables a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics that have led to an overall focus on the “global.” The first part elaborates how the idea of Global IR has emerged as a novel disciplinary tool, and pinpoints the various meanings it has gained. Second, the focus shifts to the novel scholarship of Global Intellectual History. Elaborating this field’s most significant contributions will make it possible to emphasize the useful role it can play in furthering the idea of Global IR in a more historically (self-)conscious manner. The importance of this approach will also be underlined by referring to the increased relevance of disciplinary critique in the specific context of IR-history (dis)connections. The third part turns its attention to various cases (as vignettes) that aim to visualize how connecting these two new “Globals” (i.e. Global IR and Global Intellectual History) could provide the discipline of IR with a better means to deal with the past and present of global politics. Therefore, by explaining the conceptual, ideational, and geo-epistemological divergences and commonalities whose roots can be more concretely studied through a broader engagement with Global Intellectual History, the article clarifies the advantages of this “inter-Global” connection. It concludes by discussing the value of Global IR in terms of its potential role for broadening the discipline not just in ways that are more (IR-)introspective but also in its bridge-building capacity to other fields with similar concerns, extending to Global Intellectual History and beyond, and provides a brief list of initial suggestions.

🔖

Cite This Article

KURU, D. (2020). Dialogue of the “Globals”: Connecting Global IR to Global Intellectual History. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2, 229–248. https://ajindex.com/articles/119705

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Acharya, Amitav. “Advancing Global IR: Challenges, Contentions, and Contributions.” International Studies Review 18, no. 1 (2016): 4–15. –––. “Dialogue and Discovery: In Search of International Relations Theories beyond the West.” Millennium 39, no. 3 (2011): 619–37. –––. “Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds: A New Agenda for International Studies.” International Studies Quarterly 58, no. 4 (2014): 647–59.
  2. Acharya, Amitav, and Barry Buzan. The Making of Global International Relations: Origins and Evolution of IR at Its Centenary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019.
  3. Acharya, Amitav, and Barry Buzan, eds. Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives from Asia. London: Routledge, 2009.
  4. Acharya, Amitav, and Barry Buzan. “Why Is There No Non-Western International Relations Theory? An Introduction.” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 7, no. 3 (2007): 287–312.
  5. Armitage, David. Foundations of Modern International Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. –––. “The International Turn in Intellectual History.” In Rethinking Modern European Intellectual History, edited by Darrin M. McMahon, and Samuel Moyn, 232–52. New York: Columbia University Press, 2014.
  6. Aydın, Cemil. “Approaches to Global Intellectual History.” In Moyn and Sartori, Global Intellectual History, 159–86.
  7. Aydinli, Ersel, and Julie Mathews. “Periphery Theorising for a Truly Internationalised Discipline: Spinning IR Theory out of Anatolia.” Review of International Studies 34, no. 4 (2008): 693–712.
  8. Baker, Catherine. Race and the Yugoslav Region: Postsocialist, Post-conflict, Postcolonial? Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2018.
  9. Bakhle, Janaki. “Putting Global Intellectual History in Its Place.” In Moyn and Sartori, Global Intellectual History, 228–53.
  10. Belich, James, John Darwin, and Chris Wickham. “Introduction.” In Belich, Darwin, Frenz, and Wickham, The Prospect of Global History, 3–22.
  11. Belich, James, John Darwin, Margret Frenz, and Chris Wickham, eds. The Prospect of Global History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.
  12. Bell, Duncan. “Making and Taking Worlds.” In Moyn and Sartori, Global Intellectual History, 254–79.
  13. Bew, John. Realpolitik: A History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
  14. Bilgin, Pinar. “Thinking Past ‘Western’ IR?” Third World Quarterly 29, no. 1 (2008): 5–23.
  15. Blaney, David L., and Arlene B. Tickner. “Worlding, Ontological Politics and the Possibility of a Decolonial IR.” Millennium 45, no. 3 (2017): 293–311. B