We were very lucky to have two of the biggest experts in the country for this talk, whose work has attracted a lot of attention in academic and media outlets over the last months. Dr Stephen Fisher (University of Oxford) has done pre-election forecasting at electionsetc.com and was part of the team for the BBC/ITN/SKY exit poll and BBC results based prediction.
Affect and emotion are key elements of our lived experience as human beings but currently play little role in how we theorize actorhood in international relations. We offer six amendments for integrating affective dynamics into existing conceptions of individual-level actorhood in IR. From these amendments emerge the theoretical micro-foundations upon which we build propositions concerning potential collective-level affective dynamics and political strategies. We illustrate the analytical payoff of our proposals by examining the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001.
This event, part of the Justice and Democracy beyond the Nation-State: Lessons From and For Europe seminar series, aimed to bring together people interested in legal and political philosophy with those interested in Europe for a discussion about where these two areas meet.
Speaker: Professor Philippe Van Parijs (Visiting Professor, Oxford)
Session Two: 15.00 to 15.45
Professor Iver Neumann (Montague Burton Professor of International Relations, LSE), Constructivism and the Turn to Practice. Discussant: Mr Quentin Bruneau (Oxford DPIR). Chair: Professor Todd Hall (University of Toronto).
This half-day workshop discussed the contributions of constructivism and what the future constructivist research agenda might look like. The Convenor was Professor Andrew Hurrell.
Session One: ‘The Role of Agency in Constructivism’
This book provides the first comprehensive overview of the history of democracy in Africa and explains why the continent's democratic experiments have so often failed, as well as how they could succeed. Nic Cheeseman grapples with some of the most important questions facing Africa and democracy today, including whether international actors should try and promote democracy abroad, how to design political systems that manage ethnic diversity, and why democratic governments often make bad policy decisions.
There is now a far more sophisticated understanding of the contested character of global order and of ‘non-western’ perspectives. Much work has been done to pluralize and relativize the study of IR, and to question a mainstream that is often unaware of the deeply western-centric character of its assumed historical narratives, its allegedly universal theoretical categories, and its political preoccupations. But where does this agenda go next?
There is now a far more sophisticated understanding of the contested character of global order and of ‘non-western’ perspectives. Much work has been done to pluralize and relativize the study of IR, and to question a mainstream that is often unaware of the deeply western-centric character of its assumed historical narratives, its allegedly universal theoretical categories, and its political preoccupations. But where does this agenda go next?
There is now a far more sophisticated understanding of the contested character of global order and of ‘non-western’ perspectives. Much work has been done to pluralize and relativize the study of IR, and to question a mainstream that is often unaware of the deeply western-centric character of its assumed historical narratives, its allegedly universal theoretical categories, and its political preoccupations. But where does this agenda go next?
There is now a far more sophisticated understanding of the contested character of global order and of ‘non-western’ perspectives. Much work has been done to pluralize and relativize the study of IR, and to question a mainstream that is often unaware of the deeply western-centric character of its assumed historical narratives, its allegedly universal theoretical categories, and its political preoccupations. But where does this agenda go next?
