20251229 Stupid International Relations
Just happened to read this abstract from a research paper titled: Stupid International Relations.
This is so good. This is exactly I want to say about this field and I am solucky to encounter this article.
This article responds to a number of recent debates in the field of International Relations (ir) that have contributed to the image of ir as a post-racial and postcolonial discipline. As such, the present intervention asks how the politics of colonial racism continues to structure ir precisely at a time when this issue has been relegated to the discipline’s uncomfortable history. The key contention will be that the image of ir as a post-racial and post-colonial discipline is facilitated by an ideology of stupidity. The latter is defined as a regime of naturalising the contingency of ideas as well as the inability to transform them. As such, the stupidity of ir enhances its incapacity to address phenomena that escape the artificial boundaries of its disciplinary identity, in this case the politics of colonial racism. Specifically, this ideology of stupidity is characterised by two modalities. The first modality concerns a process of gentrification through which alternative forms of knowing that defy ir’s disciplinary identity have either been assimilated into a conception of ir that strips it of its more transformative potential or simply annihilated into non-existence. The latter constitutes a second modality of the ideology of stupidity as the destruction of alternative epistemological perspectives. However, as stupidity constitutes a transcendental structure of thought that can never be eliminated entirely, the article concludes that overcoming stupidity in ir requires constant vigilance towards its systemic institutionalisation, as it is the later that distributes its image of a post-racial and post-colonial discipline.
It is so good that I have to translae it into Chinese, not by AI, I translate it.
本篇文章回應於最近國際關係學界有關此領域是否為後種族與後殖民的辯論。在此，本文詢問，明明種族殖民政治可以精準的構成國際關係學說，但是此時代卻因為不想面對不舒服的歷史而自動降級。本文最主要的論點是，國際關係在當代被定位為後種族後殖民學說，是由一種白癡意識形態所造成。所謂的白痴意識形態，就是既然無法轉化也無法解釋、那乾脆正常化這一串概念。藉此，白癡讓自己更加無力說明當前的國際關係中的種族殖民政治，而這正是白癡自己手動排除這些本該被納入的重要課題。更精準的說，白癡意識形態展現出兩種趨勢，第一種是分類區隔過程，同化那些違抗國際關係領域主流的另類學習方法，並且也扼殺自己進行轉化的機會。第二種趨勢就是攻擊那些另類學習方法，直到任何他種知識論觀點都消失。白癡意識形態已經形成，他位在一個超越的思想結構地位，所以是無法挑戰、無從根除。本文結論，要克服這個白癡狀態，我們國際關係學者必須更警覺系統化制度化白癡的跡象，比如，硬是要說國際關係已經沒有種族與殖民主義的色彩，是白癡的。
Continue
to read Van Milders, I felt that he spoke what in my mind for years. I am happy
that I am not alone. This paragraph is too good, not only the meaning of it,
also the prose, wording and style. I was so regretful I read so much of New
York Times and Economist those shit for too long.
I
translate it.
“This
violence is facilitated through the hidden positionality of a Eurocentric
worldview. The coloniality of power namely involves a plethora of hierarchies
that are held together by an epistemic conjuncture that gradually erased or
concealed its locus of enunciation. The historicisation of racialised
colonialism in ir – and the way this is facilitated through the imposition of
disciplinarity and gentrification – therefore operates as bookends of a
particular development: the gradual erasure – or indeed amnesia – of Europe’s
locus of enunciation through the egocentric identification of European and
specifically white identity with universality, objectivity, and rationality.”
隱藏定位的歐洲中心論世界觀促進了暴力的普遍化。由暴力構成的殖民權力，藉由聚集知識融合的多層次等級結構，緩慢地抹煞、或者隱藏了他原本要表達的暴力軌跡。在國際關係中歷史化(遺忘或者翻頁)過往的種族殖民主義，藉由重整或者分割研究領域，由此定調了特定的發展歷程，這就是緩慢地抹煞、或者說其實就是失憶歐洲的暴力軌跡，並且替代以歐洲自我中心的認定，特定說來，就是白人之自我認同為普世、客觀、跟理性。