Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-wlg5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-29T23:29:25.010Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How to remedy Eurocentrism in IR? A complement and a challenge for The Global Transformation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2016

Pinar Bilgin
Pinar Bilgin*
Affiliation:
Department of International Relations, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey
*
E-mail: pbilgin@bilkent.edu.tr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

While IR’s Eurocentric limits are usually acknowledged, what those limits mean for theorizing about the international is seldom clarified. In The Global Transformation, Buzan and Lawson offer a ‘composite approach’ that goes some way towards addressing IR’s Eurocentrism, challenging existing myths about the emergence and evolution of the international system and society. This paper seeks to push the contribution made by Buzan and Lawson in two further directions: first, by underscoring the need to adopt a deeper understanding of Eurocentrism; and second, by highlighting how this understanding helps us recognize what is missing from IR theorizing – conceptions of the international by ‘others’ who also constitute the international. I illustrate this point by focussing on a landmark text on Ottoman history, Ortaylı’s The Longest Century of the Empire.

Information

Type
Symposium: Theory, History, and the Global Transformation
Information
International Theory , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , November 2016 , pp. 492 - 501
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abou-El-Haj, Rifaat Ali. 2003. “Ottoman Diplomacy at Karlowitz.” In Ottoman Diplomacy: Conventional or Unconventional?, edited by Nuri Yurdusev, 89–113. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Aksan, Virginia H. 1993. “Ottoman Political Writing, 1768-1808.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 25(1):53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amin, Samir. 2009 [1989]. Eurocentrism, Translated by Russell Moore and James Membrez. New York: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
Barkawi, Tarak, and Laffey, Mark. 2006. “The postcolonial moment in security studies.” Review of International Studies 32(2):329–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernal, Martin. 1987. Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Bilgin, Pinar. 2016. The International in Security, Security in the International. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhambra, Gurminder K. 2007. Rethinking Modernity: Postcolonialism and the Sociological Imagination. New York: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumi, Isa. 2011. Foundations of Modernity: Human Agency and the Imperial State, vol. 9. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2009. Hegel, Haiti, and Universal History. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burçak, Berrak. 2007. “The Institution of the Ottoman Embassy and Eighteenth-Century Ottoman History: An Alternative to Göçek.” In Identity and Identity Formation in the Ottoman World: A Volume of Essays in Honor of Norman Itzkowitz, edited by Baki Tezcan, and Karl K. Barbir, 147–151. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Buzan, Barry, and Lawson, George. 2015. The Global Transformation: History, Modernity and the Making of International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buzan, Barry, and Little, Richard. 2002. “International Systems in World History: Remaking the Study of International Relations.” In Historical Sociology of International Relations, edited by Steve Hobden, and John M. Hobson, 200–220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Deringil, Selim. 1998. The Well-Protected Domains: Ideology and the Legitimation of Power in the Ottoman Empire, 1876-1909. London: I.B. Tauris.Google Scholar
Grovogui, Siba N. 2006. Beyond Eurocentrism and Anarchy: Memories of International Order and Institutions. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobson, John M. 2004. The Eastern Origins of Western Civilization. Cambridge, UK and New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobson, John M. 2009. “The Myth of the Clash of Civilizations in Dialogical-Historical Context.” In Global Security, in Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), edited by Pinar Bilgin, and Paul D Williams. Oxford: UNESCO, EoLSS Publishers.Google Scholar
Hobson, John M. 2012. The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics: Western International Theory, 1760-2010. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jabri, Vivienne. 2014. “Disarming norms: postcolonial agency and the constitution of the international.” International Theory 6(2):372–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mignolo, Walter. 2003. The Darker Side of the Renaissance: Literacy, Territoriality, and Colonization. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mignolo, Walter D., and Tlostanova, Madina V.. 2006. “Theorizing From the Borders Shifting to Geo-and Body-Politics of Knowledge.” European Journal of Social Theory 9(2):205–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy. 2000. Questions of Modernity, Contradictions of Modernity . Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Musgrave, Paul, and Nexon, Daniel. 2016. “The Global Transformation: More than Meets the Eye.” International Theory 8(3):436–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neumann, Iver B. 2011. “Entry Into International Society Reconceptualised: The Case of Russia.” Review of International Studies 37(2):463–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortaylı, İlber. 1983. İmparatorluğun En Uzun Yüzyılı (The Longest Century of the Empire). İstanbul: Hil Yayınları.Google Scholar
Phillips, Andrew. 2016. “The Global Transformation, Multiple Early Modernities and International Systems Change.” International Theory 8(3):481–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Said, Edward W. 1975. Beginnings: Intention and Method. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Said, Edward W. 1993. Culture and Imperialism. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Shilliam, Robbie. 2008. “What the Haitian Revolution Might Tell us About Development, Security, and the Politics of Race.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 50(3):778–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Subrahmanyam, Sanjay. 1997. “Connected Histories: Notes Toward a Reconfiguration of Early Modern Eurasia.” Modern Asian Studies 31(3):735–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1997. “Eurocentrism and its Avatars: The Dilemmas of Social Science.” New Left Review (I/226):93–108.Google Scholar
Yurdusev, Nuri. ed. 2003. Ottoman Diplomacy: Conventional or Unconventional? New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar