Why Race Matters in International Relations

 Why Race Matters in International Relations was one of the readings that we had discussed in class which stuck out to me because of how relevant it is today, and how the authors connected past events to current events. The author discusses the crucial impacts that International Relations has historically had on people of color, but also articulates the point that international relations scholars are broadly discriminated and unequally treated throughout the field of study. I concur with Zvobgo’s and Loken’s opinions on racial prejudice in the scholarly world, and would argue Eurocentric views in nearly all scholarly fields of study have impacted scholars and students in the educational system today. Not acknowledging issues with race and culture in the studies of international relations creates further issues for people of color not being recognized and creates more of a boundary between white scholars and scholars who identify as people of color. 

American politics is currently centered around race and has since the beginning of politics, and race is also a centralizing feature around world politics (Zvobgo and Loken 2020). Minorities in America have been a large target of many government policies without having their voices heard, or even being a part of the decision making. For instance the War on Drugs which was a global campaign that started in the early 70’s disportionately affected black dominant neighborhoods and individuals compared to their white counterparts, where drug use was at the same or similar levels. One major issue regarding how a majority of scholars in this field of study regard race is that they don’t. Most scholars deny the fact that race is a very crucial part to understanding the world, and by doing so disregard its importance (Zvobgo and Loken 2020). This puts pressure on scholars of color to make others aware of identifying race and its importance—especially around modern politics—rather than scholars simply acknowledging it. In the essay, the authors claim that the core principles and concepts of international relations are based on race, such as anarchy or hierarchy, merely because these ideologies are rooted in favoritism of white dominated countries, referring to european and western countries (Zvobgo and Loken 2020). 

Why Race Matters in International Relations made me think of an article from The Atlantic I have read which acknowledges why there are so few black PH.D. students, particularly in the STEM fields. The article briefly discusses some incidences black scholars have encountered which can help explain why there may be so few black individuals in the world of higher education; for example, Thea Hunter who was a professor and scholar was question about weather the credentials of her doctoral degree were valid, and at another point ws also mistaken for a janitor (Harris, 2019). 

These issues go back to how black figures and race is studied in academic settings. To go back specifically to the study of international relations, the authors point out that constructivist theorists in the field of study are the most likely out of any other academics to discusses the issues of racism and race, yet this occurs on a very rare occasion. Other issues that may dissuade black individuals from working specifically in the international relations area is that this study enables the process of whitewashing historical description and analysis. In Why Race Matters in International Relations, Sankaran Krishan who is a international scholar claimed that the study is a “systematic politics of forgetting, a willful amnesia, on the question of race (Zvobgo and Loken 2020).” 



                    Work Cited: 

Harris, Adam. “The Disciplines Where No Black People Earn Ph.d.s.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 19 Apr. 2019, https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/04/lack-of-black-doctoral-students/587413/. 

Zvobgo, Kelebogile, and Meredith Loken. “Why Race Matters in International Relations.” Foreign Policy, 19 June 2020, https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/06/19/why-race-matters-international-relations-ir/. 

Comments

  1. Chris KFebruary 6, 2022 at 7:23 AM

    I think you make a really strong point about how politics, especially in the United States, are centered around race. Zvobgo and Loken argue how in order to understand politics you have to address race or else you are not completely understanding the issues taking place. I think that one thing people fall into the trap of is discussing racism as a surface level issue that takes place when one person discriminates another person instead of looking at racism as a deeply systemic issue that is present in all parts of politics. This also goes with the idea of questioning mainstream political theory and understanding, as you said, the Eurocentric bias in scholarly fields. As a society, we need to question why race is often ignored in politics and work to fix a deeply engrained issue.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kevin KlukowiczFebruary 8, 2022 at 8:06 PM

    Addressing systemic racism in American politics is very commendable considering the topic is not often addressed in all systems of government and civilian life. What I personally thought was very insightful was the information you provided about how the War on Drugs contained hidden racism in regards to the minorities directly affected. I also appreciated the contextualization you issued in regards to racism rooted in historical ideologies such as the hierarchical systems you spoke about. All in all, your blog post revealed and reminded me and our peers of the importance of addressing racism and how it can be masked throughout society in not just politics, but our daily livelihoods.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ICC articles

When it comes to the arguments on the International Crimes Court, I think the article presented by Daniel Abebe is the most convincing to me. After reading the article presented right before it, (the article by Anne Marie Gotez), it seemed that maybe the best way to fix the problems within the ICC would be to give them more funding and allow them to give more financial aid to the victims of these war crimes. Furthermore, she said that the funding for this program had been below a million and it was not enough for the ICC to function effectively. However, after reading the article presented by Abebe it stated that since 2002, the ICC has spent over a billion dollars. If in 20 years they were able to spend this mass amount of money, then there is no way that they are being underfunded. Moreover, Abebe states that the funding for the ICC is over 100 millions dollars a year, which is an incredible quantity of money for people to be asking for more money to be pumped into the system. Abeb...
Read more

Global Justice and Nationalism

  The Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy writes in brief the philosophical values and traditions regarding global justice, how it is defined by their standards, and how it is played out within other nation states. I will be focusing mainly on section 2.3, which discusses the duties of compatriots versus non-compatriots, and goes on to further understand the differences between the two, such as how state actors and non-state actors view one another and potentially interact. While most have viewed nationalism in a positive light, nationalism goes beyond respect for national sovereignty, this ideology can perpetuate negative attitudes towards other countries and sometimes even make one states citizens seem morally superior than another citizen who is belonging to another state (Gillian, 2015). There is a debate among egalitarian theorists discussing whether or not concerns with equality should be confined to state members or be granted to every individually globally (Gillian, 2015). ...
Read more

The United States and the World Trade Organization

     Recently there has been large debates regarding the implications regarding the possibility of the United States potentially pulling out of the World Trade Organization. While some politicians and economists supported this idea and have argued that it would be beneficial for the US to leave this organization, the US would have to face some serious consequences that would be hard to bounce back from, not only domestically, but globally since other countries could potentially be positively affected if this deal were to go into effect. The debate is still ongoing, but the consequences and risks of this action, especially during an economic crisis from the covid-19 pandemic, are too great to ignore and continue to be in pursuit of departing from the World Trade Organization.       There are several strong arguments that support my claims that leaving would present more bad than good. First, the US being involved in the world trade organization adds gre...
Read more