1. Evolution of Post-Structuralism in IR
2. Basic Features
3. Post-structuralist Scholars
3.1. 1.Jacques Derrida- Deconstruction and Double Reading
3.2. 2.Michel Foucault- Power and Knowledge
4. Evaluation
5. Evolution of Post-Modernism in IR
6. Basic Assumptions
7. Post-modern Critique
8. Evaluation/Criticism
9. Conclusion
Select Langauge
Hey champs! you’re in the right place. I know how overwhelming exams can feel—books piling up, last-minute panic, and everything seems messy. I’ve been there too, coming from the same college and background as you, so I completely understand how stressful this time can be.
That’s why I joined Examopedia—to help solve the common problems students face and provide content that’s clear, reliable, and easy to understand. Here, you’ll find notes, examples, scholars, and free flashcards which are updated & revised to make your prep smoother and less stressful.
You’re not alone in this journey, and your feedback helps us improve every day at Examopedia.
Forever grateful ♥
Janvi Singhi
Give Your Feedback!!
Topic – Post-Structuralism and Post-Modernism (Notes)
Subject – Political Science
(International Relations)
Table of Contents
Evolution of Post-Structuralism in IR
- The term post-structuralism refers to a set of approaches that emerged after structuralism.
- These approaches aimed to gain deeper insights into society by critiquing and deconstructing social and cultural processes.
- Structuralism sought to explain all phenomena through binary oppositions such as male/female, culture/nature, and reason/emotion, focusing on the interrelations between them.
- It assumed that any social or cultural phenomenon could be analyzed using its structuralist methodology.
- Post-structuralists rejected this reductionism, arguing that meaning is fluid, unstable, and dependent on context and discourse.
- They emphasized that structures are not fixed and that language and meaning are constantly shifting.
- Post-structuralism is not a single, unified theory but a collection of diverse approaches that share a common foundation in the critique of structuralism’s determinism and rigidity.
- Post-structuralism engages with issues of representation, the relationship between power and knowledge, and the politics of identity in the production and understanding of global politics.
- Post-structuralism should not be perceived as a new paradigm in IR; rather, it is a critical attitude, approach, or ethos that draws attention to the importance of representation, power/knowledge relations, and identity politics in understanding global affairs.
- The critical attitude of Post-structuralism can be traced in the writings of Michel Foucault.
- Post-structuralism as an approach emerged in the field of IR during the 1980s.
- The prominent scholars who introduced Post-structuralism include Richard Ashley, James Der Derian, Michael J. Shapiro, David Campbell, and R.B.J. Walker.
- Post-structuralism mainly focuses on the following points:
- Articulates a meta-theoretical critique of dominant paradigms such as realist theories of IR.
- Connects IR to its interdisciplinary context by introducing new sources of theory.
- Is concerned with the mutual construction of the relations of inside and outside.
- Focuses on identity, subjectivism, and power.
- Shifts analysis from assumptions about pre-given subjects to the problematic of subjectivity and its political enactment.
- Employs methodological precepts of interpretation, representation, and politics instead of narrativizing historiography.
- Ashley pointed out that Neo-realism, which attempted to replace the subjectivism of realism with a scientific approach, sought to identify the objective structures of social power that are constitutive of states and their interests.
- Critical scholars were dissatisfied with how Realism and Neo-Realism remained dominant even amidst global transformations.
- Post-structuralists highlighted the neglect of Realism regarding transnational actors, issues, relationships, and the voices of excluded people and perspectives.
- The influence of Post-structuralism in IR opened new dimensions in the study of the discipline.
- The newer research included:
- Studies on the gendered character of state identity in the context of US intervention (Weber, 1994, 1999).
- Studies on the centrality of representation in North–South relations and immigration policies (Doty, 1993, 1996).
- Deconstructive accounts of famine and humanitarian crises (Edkins, 2000).
- Interpretative readings of diplomacy and European security (Dillon, 1996).
- Rethinking finance and the field of international political economy (de Goede, 2005, 2006).
- Poststructuralist thought begins by questioning the traditional belief that there exists an objective, external standpoint from which the world can be observed neutrally.
- According to poststructuralists, this kind of “God-like detachment” is impossible, since scholars are active participants in world politics rather than neutral observers.
- Hence, neither theorists nor theories are politically neutral—they inherently have political and social implications.
- Poststructuralism shares key features with post-empiricism and the Frankfurt School’s critical theory, particularly their belief in the centrality of language in constructing social reality.
- These approaches emphasize the historicity of knowledge, meaning that knowledge is produced within socio-cultural and power structures and cannot be universal or timeless.
- As Robert Cox famously said, “Theory is always for someone and for some purpose,” underscoring that social analysis is never value-free.
- Thus, theoretical knowledge is always shaped by the values, ideologies, and beliefs of the theorist.
- In poststructuralist analysis, language, culture, identity, and historicity play a crucial role, contrasting with structuralist and positivist approaches that ignore historical context.
- Richard Ashley’s essay “The Poverty of Neorealism” critiques Kenneth Waltz’s Neorealism for its state-centrism, positivist bias, ahistoricism, and tendency to reinforce hegemonic power structures.
- David Campbell explores how foreign policy, speech, and identity are mutually constructed, challenging the realist notion of an objective, disembodied international realm.
- Michael J. Shapiro argues that foreign policies are shaped by cultural, racial, and political identities, not by abstract rational calculations.
- Traditional approaches treat the state as a natural and pre-given entity, whereas poststructuralists argue that the state is socially constructed through discursive and performative practices.
- Cynthia Weber contends that the sovereign state is not an a priori reality but an “ontological effect”—a product of continuous practices that enact sovereignty and identity.
- Therefore, sovereign nation-states are not fixed entities but subjects in process, continuously reproduced through political, historical, and discursive acts.
- The identity of the state emerges through foreign and domestic policy discourses, security strategies, and international participation.
- However, poststructuralists are not anti-state; they do not aim to abolish or transcend the state.
- Instead, they critique the state-centric perspective in International Relations, exposing how it limits understanding of global politics by ignoring alternative actors, identities, and discourses.
- Consequently, poststructuralist thought focuses on discursive practices that construct and sustain the state-centric worldview, revealing its political and epistemological costs.
- Poststructuralist critics emphasize the historical construction of the modern state, arguing that it is shaped through discursive practices rather than existing naturally or a priori.
- Within these discourses, sovereignty plays a central role in establishing the state as the most important and rational actor in international politics.
- Sovereignty acts as both the minimum and fundamental common ground in the discursive construction of the modern state .
- It demarcates the “inside” (the controlled, governed space) from the “outside” (the anarchic, uncontrollable international system).
- According to David Campbell, the very need for boundaries drives states toward violence, since the process of defining the “inside” requires designating the “outside” as different or threatening.
- As states strive to create a homogeneous national identity, they simultaneously construct “others” through processes of exclusion and boundary-drawing.
- Hence, sovereignty is not an innocent concept; it legitimizes both internal control and external violence in the name of defending territorial integrity.
- Judith Butler, drawing on Agamben’s conception of sovereignty, shows how the sovereign decides the exception—who belongs to the political community and who can be excluded.
- Butler uses the American “war on terror” as an example, arguing that through the “declaration of emergency rule”, the U.S. temporarily suspended the supremacy of law to justify indefinite detentions and extra-legal actions.
- Referring to Guantánamo Bay, Butler notes that sovereignty enables the state to suspend constitutional protections, manipulate geography, and evade international law, illustrating the performative power of sovereignty.
- Thus, poststructuralists highlight that even liberal states construct themselves through violence, exclusion, and practices of domination.
- Another crucial focus of poststructuralism is identity. However, poststructuralists differ from constructivists in their treatment of identity.
- Constructivists view identity as having causal effects on foreign policy, whereas poststructuralists analyze how identity itself is discursively produced through language and power.
- The key distinction lies in ontology—for poststructuralists, language and discourse are the basis of reality itself, not merely tools for describing it.
- While constructivists ask “what is a state’s identity and how does it affect policy?”, poststructuralists ask “how do discourses construct difference as danger, threat, or opposition?”
- They study how differences become marginalized, conceptualized as threats, and used to justify containment, discipline, or exclusion.
- According to poststructuralism, states construct the “Self” in opposition to the “Other”, and this process of differentiation sustains their identity and legitimacy.
- For instance, during the Cold War, the United States constructed itself as “civilized” and the Soviet Union as the “barbaric other” through political and cultural discourse.
- This binary helped the U.S. legitimize its national identity and foreign policies under the guise of defending itself from an external threat.
- After the end of the Cold War, poststructuralists noted the U.S. faced a crisis of identity, as its national security discourse had long depended on the existence of an identifiable enemy, such as communism.
International Relations Membership Required
You must be a International Relations member to access this content.
Already a member? Log in here