你的工作不是国际关系

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Alternatives Pub Date : 2022-03-03 DOI:10.1177/03043754221076965
Amal Abu-Bakare
{"title":"你的工作不是国际关系","authors":"Amal Abu-Bakare","doi":"10.1177/03043754221076965","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This is an eight-page reflection piece on gatekeeping in IR knowledge production and the politics that goes into presenting national racial contestations as issues unworthy of international study and consideration. Premised on a personal experience of scholastic rejection, this commentary is a reflective intervention concerning the state of the field and the imperial connotations of methodological disciplinarity – the process in which IR research is restricted within disciplinary borders because of scholastic endeavours to keep the discipline pure. Here, using anti-imperial thought, I press for deeper consideration and re-evaluation of how academics come to decide which experiences of the world should be deemed worthy of global recognition and where the boundaries of IR should come to an end.","PeriodicalId":46677,"journal":{"name":"Alternatives","volume":"47 1","pages":"115 - 122"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Your Work Is Not International Relations\",\"authors\":\"Amal Abu-Bakare\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/03043754221076965\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This is an eight-page reflection piece on gatekeeping in IR knowledge production and the politics that goes into presenting national racial contestations as issues unworthy of international study and consideration. Premised on a personal experience of scholastic rejection, this commentary is a reflective intervention concerning the state of the field and the imperial connotations of methodological disciplinarity – the process in which IR research is restricted within disciplinary borders because of scholastic endeavours to keep the discipline pure. Here, using anti-imperial thought, I press for deeper consideration and re-evaluation of how academics come to decide which experiences of the world should be deemed worthy of global recognition and where the boundaries of IR should come to an end.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46677,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Alternatives\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"115 - 122\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Alternatives\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/03043754221076965\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alternatives","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03043754221076965","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

这是一篇长达八页的反思文章,内容涉及IR知识生产中的把关问题,以及将国家种族争论视为不值得国际研究和考虑的问题的政治。这篇评论以学术排斥的个人经历为前提,对该领域的现状和方法论学科的帝国内涵进行了反思性干预——在这个过程中,由于学术界努力保持学科的纯洁性,IR研究被限制在学科边界内。在这里,我利用反帝国思想,敦促对学术界如何决定世界上哪些经历应该被认为值得全球认可,以及IR的边界应该在哪里结束进行更深入的思考和重新评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Your Work Is Not International Relations
This is an eight-page reflection piece on gatekeeping in IR knowledge production and the politics that goes into presenting national racial contestations as issues unworthy of international study and consideration. Premised on a personal experience of scholastic rejection, this commentary is a reflective intervention concerning the state of the field and the imperial connotations of methodological disciplinarity – the process in which IR research is restricted within disciplinary borders because of scholastic endeavours to keep the discipline pure. Here, using anti-imperial thought, I press for deeper consideration and re-evaluation of how academics come to decide which experiences of the world should be deemed worthy of global recognition and where the boundaries of IR should come to an end.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Alternatives
Alternatives INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: A peer-reviewed journal, Alternatives explores the possibilities of new forms of political practice and identity under increasingly global conditions. Specifically, the editors focus on the changing relationships between local political practices and identities and emerging forms of global economy, culture, and polity. Published in association with the Center for the Study of Developing Societies (India).
期刊最新文献
What Do We Know About People’s Politics? Testing a New Framework for Understanding Different Conceptions of Politics Running in Place: “Czeching” out the W/E(a)stern Performative Presidential Geoprostitution Discoursive Region Building in Latvia: The Case for a Contemporary Identity Search Civil-military Relations in Mexico: From One-Party Dominance to Post-Transitional Insecurity Sovereignty, Discipline, Governmentality, and Pastorate: The Ménage à Quatre of Contemporary Authoritarian and Right-Wing Populist Power
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1