Constructivism has failed to shift the IR agenda from that which older dominant schools determined. A discussion.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15549/jeecar.v3i1.108Keywords:
intersubjectively shared ideas, behavior, identities and interests of actors, normative and material structures, mutual constitution of agent and structures, shared knowledge, material resources, practices, norms, rules, articulation, interpellation, selfAbstract
Georgia Giannakarou
University of Cambridge, UK
ABSTRACT
Whether Constructivism is considered a solid paradigm or just an approach in International Relations (IR) Domain – a verdict which is quite too soon to be reached, I suppose, it is undoubtedly a well-promising school of thought in IR. And whether Constructivism has failed to shift the IR agenda from that which older dominant schools determined or not, it is more than evident that this constitutes a still open question in both research and academic areas.
In the first part of this essay, I refer to the rise and evolution of Constructivism from the 1980s up to date highlighting its origins and its core principles, while in the second part, more attention is been given to its dynamic dialogue with other dominant schools of IR and Political Science. The scope of this essay is to illuminate a great number of arguments already made both against and in favor of Constructivism, as presented in a certain variety of papers and works in the wider field of IR. Furthermore, this illumination is being held under the light of a dual source, provided by the prominent IR Theory and the International Security sub-field. A third part of this essay is devoted to the latter. I conclude that Constructivism’s power lies in its ‘weaknesses’, namely its interpretation of world politics through culture and identity, especially in the currently world instability caused by the global identity crisis and spreading ISIS radical fanaticism.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The JEECAR journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright and publishing rights of their own manuscript without restrictions.
This journal applies the Creative Attribution Common License to works we publish, and allows reuse and remixing of its content, in accordance with a CC-BY 4.0 license.
Authors are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions — The author may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
The JEECAR Journal is committed to the editorial principles of all aspects of publication ethics and publication malpractice as assigned by the Committee on Public Ethics.
