‘What is the difference between “Critical Theory” of international relations and “Postmodernism”?
Sociologically Thinking
‘What is the difference between “Critical Theory” of international relations and “Postmodernism”?
There is no such distinct entity as ‘critical theory’.
All sociological theory is, by definition, critical of something. So whether it is postmodernism, structural functionalism, neo-marxism, poststructuralism, labour process theory, conflict theory or any branch of feminist theory, criticality is the very essence, indeed purpose, of the theory.
When examining, for example, ‘international relations’ a sociologist would first have a theory by which to undertake such an examination and analysis. Indeed, I could use anyone of the theories mentioned above, and all would offer me a slightly different insight on the subject and topic.
As for postmodernism, that theory emerged in in the late 1980s and has remained around ever since.
Though bear in mind that postmodernism itself has several different theoretical emphases or branches, some of which are in slight conflict with each other.
But for the sake of brevity we can place postmodernist theory (of whatever hue) as a sort of cultural and intellectual postscript to modernism. In this regard I tend to find Lyotard’s definition must useful, in that he argues postmodernism signals the end of the modernist experiment with grand (meta)narratives, utopian religious discourses, dominant and unquestioned political ideologies, and the promise of a world where everything is known, understood, logically and rationally positioned, and working in some harmony for the greater good of humankind.
Postmodernism, if you like, heralds the chaos and uncertainty which humankind is currently experiencing, though this was forecast long before a nasty virus turned over globalisation.
We can also see the postmodern condition expressed and exemplified in the workings of the internet, social media, fake news, algorithms, multiple realities, culture wars, identity conflict, cyber-identities, celebrity culture, and the loss of trust which many millions feel in their governments, religions, and which are now challenging hitherto unquestioned assumptions about human progress.
Back to ‘international relations’, if you asked me to identify one distinct postmodern condition in current international relations, I would say it is the decline of any world order, maybe the possibility of any world order in the future.
For hundreds of years, and certainly through the age of Enlightenment and up to and including the brief period of the American Hegemony (1914–2001), there was a distinguishable World Order (for more on this read H. Kissinger ‘World Order’ Penguin, 2014).
That world order is no more.
What has replaced it? Right now, no one knows.
We have to allow the dust to settle over Covid-19 before we can perceive the outlines of the new settlement.
But don’t take this as a negative or depressing scenario.
On the contrary, postmodernism is the most hopeful of all theories simply because it completely does away with naivete, innocence and faith, thereby leaving us humans looking starkly at that which we always were, only no longer hiding behind ideologies which seduce us into believing we are more than we are or can be.
Since 2017, Dr Stephen Whitehead has answered over 10,500 Quora questions, mostly on relationships, education, sociology, life and living, and philosophy. To date, his answers have received approximately 3.2 million views increasing at the rate 60,000 views a month. He has nearly 1,000 followers.
Stephen’s latest book (International Schooling: The Teacher’s Guide) is available via: teachabroad.ac.