IR Obscurity

Influences:

1. Proff. Martin Griffiths
2. Auguste Comte
3. Hegel
4. Max Muller
5. Auldus Huxley
6. (Maybe) Annie Besant
7. Random mainstream IR guys

The basis of the argument is a ‘statement of fact’ from the Professor, stating that “IR theory is essentially manufactured in the West and is fed to the rest of the world”.

On the other hand we have Auguste Comte’s Law of three phases. According to this law, every society goes through three phases of development, namely, Theological, Metaphysical, and Scientific.

The “East” has a predominant theological basis of society. The impact of religion on designing the value system in the Eastern part of the world has been widely discussed in the historical literature, although it has mellowed down lately. Nevertheless, religion, I argue and assume, for the sake of this paper, forms the bedrock of the social structure in the Eastern world.

This proposition, I insist, is further consolidated in the modern context with the rise of “religious extremism” from that part of the world. I also argue that the limitation of contemporary IR theory lies in the fact of a ‘statement of fact’ from Proff. Griffith, which states that IR theory is produced in the West and then distributed to the rest of the world. Another example which further elaborates these limitations is enshrined in a famous question asked by the Secretary of State of US, Condoleezza Rice during the post 9/11 rhetoric while expressing her sentiments, “Why do they hate us?”

The apparent confusion on the part of the representative of the most powerful western nation speaks a lot aobut their assumptions and the narrowness of their policy, when it reckons the eastern Sociography.

On the same token, I would like to criticize the eastern social mindscape, which, from my personal experience, in the moment of reckoning tends to takes refuge behind its “historical antiquity”, “cultural heritage”, “religious self-righteousness” and other such jargons.

Nevertheless, “subjectivity” to an eastern mind is as pious as “objectivity” is to the western. Proof of this can be found through out the mainstream philosophical thoughts from the past. No wonder then that Mr. Comte, after his extensive study, eventually decided on the “Scientific” phase as to be the one which would eventually provide salvation to the humanity. The eastern thought at that point argues more of cyclical phases of progress. The apparent extremes of the spectrum is beautifully illustrated in the famous ballad of Rudyard Kipling, “East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet”

There also exists a foundational bias within the IR discipline, which is supported by the professor’s statement, although he probably means it in a good way, whereas I see it as a delusional behaviour which the IR academicians seemingly maintain to apparently muse themselves. But then, the professor also follows up on that by adding “just ride the wave and don’t get too carried away” (or something to that effect), which is sufficient to kill the curiosity.

The origins of IR can be found in the days of British Colonialism, and the literature of that time. However, it’s my inkling, that the idea of racial supremacy, which echoed till the late years in the rhetoric of Churchill, and in all probability is still lurking around, forms the basic foundations of the International Relations. The loose idea of promoting English “cultured values” to the rest of the world seems to me to have formed the breeding grounds in the post world war 1 environment, and the formation of the league of nations. Although, apparently well-intended, the idea obviously lacked the universal will and fell flat on its face, for not many consider the English cultured. Nevertheless, since this is a mere speculation I don’t want to tread there to avoid wasting time to find facts of lesser importance.

At this point in time I would like state a certain assumption that I would like to make. That is, inasmuch as Comte’s law of Three Phases is apparently sound, I believe, that Metaphysics ‘occurs’ only when one extreme of the spectrum mingles with the other. In this case, the Meeting of Theological phase with the Scientific phase gives rise to the Metaphysical. At the same time, now, I want to look at them not as phases but as realms of temperament which are perpetually present, albeit only one is temporally dominant.