Abstract
Rather than dealing in death, if IR is to retain relevance among the social sciences in seeking to both account for and change a world in the midst of a deepening ‘polycrisis’, it needs to recognise and take its place in the web of life. In this article, I firstly argue for the need to ‘choose life’ by de-centring three key (interrelated) pillars of the discipline: the normalisation of militarism as a means and end of foreign policy; economic growth as the means and end of industrial economies and anthropocentrism and its unstated ideology of human supremacy in world affairs. Secondly, I propose a series of conceptual and methodological innovations by which a more ecological view of IR might take hold in the discipline, as well as concrete political strategies for embedding it in the conduct of IR. I suggest that these moves form the basis of both an improved account of the underlying sources of key threats in world politics such as war, poverty and ecological crises and an alternative source of solutions focussed on transcending dominant features of the discipline through a more than human account of IR and a more global and pluriversal account of world politics and the relations which matter most within it.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
