| Popis: |
The recent English School literature within the discipline of International Relations has been successful in renewing that tradition’s popularity, along with revising some of its core elements. This work have generated innovations in its theoretical framework, resulting in important differences in relation to the classic works of the British Committee. Despite such innovations, some of its limits remain in place, as it is still centred on an Eurocentric historical perspective. In this paper, I address two recent contributions to the body of English School literature: the new narrative of globalisation of the international society, and the turn to process sociology. By analysing these contributions, I argue that by not presenting a systematic conception of agency and historical change, history becomes relegated to a secondary role in their explanatory process: it is mobilised as a set of examples that either confirms or expands the theoretical conception of the international society or its expansion. This secondary role of history provides shelter for Eurocentrism in IR theory, since it allows for the incorporation of extra-European agencies and processes without challenging the theory that was produced in their absence. In return, I argue for a radically historicist conception of theory, drawing from a particular push for historicism in the tradition of Political Marxism. This radical historicism shifts the focus from overarching processes and their outcomes towards the many conflicting agencies who played a role in the transformations of international politics. |
