Inclusion and Exclusion
Peter Vale
Abstract
Peter Vale
Abstract
“ Physician, Heal Thyself ” Luke 4:23 The theme of this sixty-seventh Convention of the International Studies Association (ISA), “Global IR and Regional Worlds: A New Agenda for International Studies,” promises to open the field to a double-headed question that points at its very heart. Here is the question, “Who or what is IR for?” Although too seldom asked in the gleaming ballrooms where the ISA faithful gather, this question is often top of the agenda in the furthest corners of the world, where those skeptical of IR as a way to understand the world gather under the banner that another world is possible. The conceptual (and political) distance between these two understandings of the international suggests why the discipline’s good and great should heed this question and appreciate its full implications. If they do not and are not prepared to rethink IR, the hope for “A New Agenda for International Studies” will fail. This will return the field to business as usual instead.
OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
“ Physician, Heal Thyself ” Luke 4:23 The theme of this sixty-seventh Convention of the International Studies Association (ISA), “Global IR and Regional Worlds: A New Agenda for International Studies,” promises to open the field to a double-headed question that points at its very heart. Here is the question, “Who or what is IR for?” Although too seldom asked in the gleaming ballrooms where the ISA faithful gather, this question is often top of the agenda in the furthest corners of the world, where those skeptical of IR as a way to understand the world gather under the banner that another world is possible. The conceptual (and political) distance between these two understandings of the international suggests why the discipline’s good and great should heed this question and appreciate its full implications. If they do not and are not prepared to rethink IR, the hope for “A New Agenda for International Studies” will fail. This will return the field to business as usual instead.
Key concepts: Skepticism, Inclusion (mineral), Convention, Banner, Politics, Political science, Theme (computing), International relations