beratwrites

The emergence of post-structuralism came to place  during the 1980s in the discipline of IR. The understanding of post-structuralism was totally different from the other theories. Typically, it conveyed the critique of prevailing theories within the global system, particularly those of realist and liberal orientations. Rather than being a theory, post-structuralist IR focused on being a criticism.

“Instead of being another school with its own actors and issues to highlight, post-structuralism promotes a new set of questions and concerns into the literature.”

In contrast to other theoretical frameworks, the post-structuralist perspective on international relations considers theory as a form of practice. In addition, the topic of discussion that post-structuralist IR debates, such as knowledge and power, leads to the question of, “Does knowledge equate to power?” After its critique of realist theories and emphasis on power and knowledge, it also raises the question of “How states became the leading actors in international relations?”. After understanding all of these, we will try to answer the question of whether post-structuralist IR is more interested in the analyst than it is in international politics.

Post-structuralism underlines the role of important actors in international relations like discourse, language, and power. Since post-structuralism focuses on these, subjectivity and positionality become crucial. Because they shape how knowledge is produced in international politics and the role of knowledge. Post-structuralists focus on the human subjects rather than states and state related power. “It is a critical attitude, approach, or ethos that calls attention to the importance of representation, the relationship of power and knowledge, and the politics of identity in an understanding of global affairs.” Post-structuralism does not seek to bring an entirely general theory into the field of international relations; rather, it focuses mainly on exposing its concerns regarding the field in general as well as the other theories.

“This means that instead of theory being understood as simply a tool for analysis, poststructuralism treats theory as an object of analysis.”

Post-structuralist approaches to IR place the emphasis on the analyst in an effort to uncover the power dynamics, ideologies, and discourses that lie beneath the surface of our understanding of international politics. The influence of poststructuralist IR in the field actually lies behind its ability to critique mainstream theories and examine power relations by dictating political events. However, it doesn’t mean that post-structuralist IR completely denies the fact that international politics exist. It seeks to understand and analyze world international politics through a critical lens that takes into account the influence of discourse, power, knowledge and subjectivity on how we comprehend the world.