POST-MODERNISM THEORY

1. POST-MODERNISM THEORY • Defining of the Postmodern theory; • Identification of the key assumptions of the theory; • Evaluate the theory i.e. strengths & weaknesses. NB// The theory is also referred to as Poststructuralist.

2. What is Postmodern Theory? • It is a post-positivist approach to IR that rejects the theoretical revolution as the basis for understanding the international system. • It is defined as incredulity (disbelief) towards metanarratives (any story told to justify another story) (Lyotard, 1984). • A multi-faceted theoretical approach which challenges the certainties and dualisms of modernism but promotes pluralism (Garner et al, 2009). • It is powered by Michael Foucault & Jacques Derrida.

3. Key Assumptions of Postmodernism Political Ideologies have: • No foundations; • No objective standards; • No fixed points; • No universalism; and • No knowledge which is constructed. (Gamble, 2000). • But celebrates diversity and difference; and • The world is a social construction.

4. POST-MODERNISM THEORY • This is an applied theory in IR once on the margin of the discipline but has gained ground in the post-cold war era. • Modernity is generally viewed as an era of industrialization, urbanization, globalization and democratization. • However, in academic sense, modernity means theoretical revolutions aimed at objective truth. • But postmodernity refers to an era beyond modernity. • IR postmodernism theory challenges both the neo-realist and neo-liberalist schools’ view of state rationality, self-help & absolutism. • It emerged from the French Philosophers in the 1940s and entered the IR discipline in the 1980s. • Theneo-realist and neo-liberalist schools denotes an idea that IR can be scientifically studied. • That is, a certain trend can be articulated in IR e.g. Causes of War, State co-operation, conflict, humanitarian intervention etc.

5. Cont. • Thus, based on neo-realists and neo-liberalists, IR can be explained in a singular model and theory. • The factthe neo-realists and neo-liberalists try to sell is that, world events follow a certain pattern (repetitive). • Post-modernists however dispute this idea of patterns and regular cycles of the international system. • They argue that mainstream theories are a historical and marginalizes non-state actors. • Post-modernists rather views it as entirely a product of human construction/ deconstruction. • Based on this, there is no objective knowledge of social phenomena. • Rather, each theory on any given event partially explains the phenomena but not wholesomely since it’s a product of individual human thinking.

6. Cont. • Thus, a different crop of world citizens is more likely to have a different taste and attitude in the global political arena. • They view other theories as too historical. • The way people view the global economy, war, etc. is different from that of the past generation. • If people have seen devastations of a war, why should they wage wars again. • Thus this human dynamism makes it impossible to formulate theories/ models in IR or the social world.

7. Cont. • Post-modernists argue that metanarratives are constructed by the theorists, hence ‘untruths’. • Defining threats, dangers, enemies as well as poverty is all but human construction. • The major argument is that there is no one with direct access to the truth. • However, power requires knowledge and knowledge reinforces existing power relations. • Knowledge is not immune from the workings of power. • Thus postmodernists are committed to explore the complexities of power and knowledge. • E.g.: The creature called State, i.e who is the State but yet idealists/ realists says it’s one of the major actors in IR.

8. Cont. • Thus, objective truths can not be established in the realm of IR thru a single theory but a multifaceted approach. • They argue that the ‘human world’ is beyond study, since he is dynamic thus no one can theorise him. • The postmodernists reject the idea of fashioning institutions that are just and fair for all humankind. • Thus, international institutions serves a certain group/individuals. • They debunk the notion of universal human progress (Jackson and Sorensen, 2010: 289). • They view attempts to theorize IR as an intellectual illusion, academic arrogance & extremely subjective equitable to religion. • To them, any theory that attempts to claim that it has found the truth about the ‘Social World’ is far-fetched& misplaced.

9. Strengths of Theory • Deflation of academic egos. • Rejection of universal truth. • It invokes critical thinking on how people construct the world.

10. Weaknesses of Theory • Too utopian since it claims to discard other theories, yet it’s a theory in itself. • Why should we believe it also if the theorization of the world is social construction and always biased as it claims. • The theory ignores the real world events, it’s more of a hesitation to unpack the ‘global man’. Its too destructive. • It is a critique of other ideologies than being an ideology in itself. • It offers no coherent explanation of the IR field other than criticizing other theorists. • Thus, the theory is viewed to be criticism for the sake of criticism.