Unlearning modernity: A realist method for critical international relations?

Abstract

Recent re-readings of classical realism in International Relations have demonstrated that in their critique of modernity, mid-twentieth century realists put their focus on the development of a (self)critical and sceptical epistemology, a focus that often has been of little concern to other International Relations theories. So far, however, this debate on classical realism has not further elaborated realist methodologies, although this has the potential to make the current theoretical debate more accessible for empirical investigations. To this end, this article argues that mid-twentieth century realists pursued a method of unlearning. Unlearning is being understood as the critique and moving beyond the modern imaginary which preconditions everyday knowledge and intellectual thought in a dehumanizing way through a learning process based upon the study of classical texts. Examining the work of Hans Morgenthau, and the evocative if generally under-appreciated writings of the Japanese thinker Maruyama Masao, the article argues that unlearning is an important part of critical realist thinking.

The realist science of politics: the art of understanding political practice

“…However, Realism does not conserve the status quo. It rather seeks “to use classical thought to overcome [modernity’s] dehumanizing tendencies and encourage people to become life world-creating individuals who take responsibility for their actions” (Rösch, 2017: 86). In order to do so, Realism seeks to bridge the gap between theory and policy without becoming technocratic and accommodating itself “to the world as it actually is” (Bessner, 2019: 1110; Morgenthau, 1972a), exerting influence ignorant of the status quo (Karkour and Giese, 2020).…”

Peace without perfection: The intersections of realist and pacifist thought

“…‘Reflexive realism’, which is associated with the work of Michael Williams (Williams, 2005, 2007), Ned Lebow (Lebow, 2003), William Scheuerman (Scheuerman, 2007, 2011), and Vibeke Schou Tjalve (Tjalve, 2008; Tjalve and Williams, 2015), amongst others (Cozette, 2008a, 2008b; Molloy, 2006, 2010), is particularly valuable in this context, as it emerges out of sustained reflection on the interplay of ethics and politics that aims ‘to restore classical realist principles of agency, prudence and the recognition of limitations as part of an attempt to provide a practical-ethical view of international politics’ (Steele, 2007: 273). Classical realist ethics, as Felix Rösch argues, can in this context be deployed ‘for a revival of a democratic citizenship in global public spheres through the promotion of scepticism, (self)criticality and intellectual humility’ (Rösch, 2016: 82). Seán Molloy’s ‘rhizomatic reading of Realism’ is also relevant here, as it gestures toward a body of realist theory in International Relations which ‘despite the epic history with which it is often afflicted, does not remain stable over time; rather, it mutates, shifts in nature, stabilises and destabilises.…”