No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Discussion of Robert Vitalis’s White World Order, Black Power Politics: The Birth of American International Relations
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 December 2016
Abstract
In White World Order, Black Power Politics: The Birth of American International Relations, Robert Vitalis presents a critical disciplinary history of the field of international relations, and the discipline of political science more broadly. Vitalis argues that the interconnections between imperialism and racism were “constitutive” of international relations scholarship in the U.S. since the turn of the 20th century, and that the perspectives of a generation of African-American scholars that included W. E. B. Dubois, Alain Locke, and Ralph Bunche were equally constitutive of this scholarship—by virtue of the way the emerging discipline sought to marginalize these scholars. In developing this argument, Vitalis raises questions about the construction of knowledge and the racial foundations of American political development. These issues lie at the heart of U.S. political science, and so we have invited a range of political scientists to comment on the book and its implications for our discipline.
- Type
- Review Symposium: White World Order, Black Power Politics
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Political Science Association 2016
References
Acharya, Amitav. 2014. “Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds.” International Studies Quarterly 58(4): 647–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anievas, Alexander, Manchanda, Nivi, and Shilliam, Robbie. 2014. Race and Racism in International Relations: Confronting the Global Colour Line. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agathangelou, Anna M. and Ling, L. H. M.. 2004. “Power, Borders, Security, Wealth: Lessons of Violence and Desire from September 11.” International Studies Quarterly 48(3): 517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brigden, Noelle K. 2016. “Improvised Transnationalism: Clandestine Migration at the Border of Anthropology and International Relations.” International Studies Quarterly (forthcoming).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, Neta. 2002. Argument and Change in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, Kevin. 2003. Imagining the Congo: The International Relations of Identity. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemmer, Christopher J. and Katzenstein, Peter J.. 2002. “Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism.” International Organization 56(3): 575–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus. 2006. Civilizing the Enemy: German Reconstruction and the Invention of the West. Ann Arbor, MI, University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus and Nexon, Daniel. 2013. “International theory in a post-paradigmatic era: From substantive wagers to scientific ontologies.” European Journal of International Relations 19(3): 543–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabaratnam, Meera. 2013. “Avatars of Eurocentrism in the Critique of the Liberal Peace.” Security Dialogue 44.3: 259–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shilliam, Robbie, ed. 2010. International Relations and Non-Western Thought: Imperialism, Colonialism and Investigations of Global Modernity. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shilliam, Robbie. 2006. “What about Marcus Garvey? Race and the transformation of sovereignty debate.” Review of International Studies 32(03): 379–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vucetic, Srdjan. 2011. The Anglosphere: A Genealogy of a Racialized Identity in International Relations. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar