1

POL SCI 4KB3: NON-WESTERN PERSPECTIVES ON IR

McMaster University Department of Political Science

Winter 2017

Dr. Alina Sajed sajeda@mcmaster.ca

Seminars: Fridays (11.30-2.20) Location: UH/101 Office hours: Thursdays 3-4.30 (KTH 531) Course description This seminar challenges the assumptions found in the ‘canonical’ readings of IR Theory. It draws on a plethora of Non-Western thinkers such as Frantz Fanon, Aimé Césaire, Al-Afghani, Gandhi, Soekarno, Kwame Nkrumah, and Edward Said, among others; these authors will be read in parallel with some of the Western ‘classics’, such as, Woodrow Wilson, Simone de Beauvoir, and others. The course thus introduces students to several important political figures and concepts/issues from the non-Western world. It seeks to foster a sustained engagement with non-Western political views, voices and perspectives. It also aims to engage questions, such as: what would a non-Western IR theory look like? Or, to put it differently, what would a genuinely international theory look like, one that included a diversity of voices, histories, and worldviews? The course thus intends to offer an alternative framework for thinking about international politics that is more accurately ‘international.’ Content: In addition to various selected writings from the political thinkers mentioned above, we will also engage some of the collections/articles in IR that are representative of incipient attempts to think about a non-Western IR theory, e.g. Robbie Shilliam’s edited volume, International Relations and Non-Western Thought: Imperialism, Colonialism and Investigations of Global Modernity; S. Chan, P. Mandaville, and R. Bleiker (eds), The Zen of International Relations: IR Theory from East to West; A. Acharya and B. Buzan (eds), Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives on and Beyond Asia; and A. Anievas, N. Manchanda and R. Shilliam (eds) Race and Racism in International Relations: Confronting the Global Colour Line. Student evaluation:

Participation 40% Critical response paper 30% Take-home exam 30% (TBA)

POL SCI 4KB3: NON-WESTERN PERSPECTIVES ON IR

Due to the nature of the readings, we will have to make certain that our discussions are organized and focused well so that we understand the readings. For these reasons, I am proposing a particular approach to the discussions that put a special emphasis on student leadership of the seminar and on participation. Writing in the course will involve students writing one relatively short essay on a choice of themes addressed in the course. The course will be completed by a take-home examination. A. Participation (40%) Normally, the discussion of readings will be divided into two or three parts each week. A.1 Discussion of social science texts All students will be expected to come to class with one page document for each reading. Each page will have the following components: 1. List of key concepts and terms 2. Summary statement (four sentences maximum) of the author’s main argument. This statement should be written in your own words as far as possible. It should not be borrowed directly from the text of the reading. 3. Three or four issues or questions in the reading that are important and merit some discussion and that you would like to be addressed by class time permitting. Formulate these in the form of a question. Note that all three of these components should be focused on understanding the readings well, and not on criticizing them. Criticism should only follow in class when we have a good understanding of what the author is arguing. The leader of the discussion should use this principle in calling upon class members to speak:

General Note: given the relatively large size of the seminar and the short times available for discussing a reading, facilitators should ensure that every member of class wishing to make a statement is heard before a member who has already made a statement on the given topic is asked to speak again. Use this rule in each of the discussions of concepts, main argument, other questions, and strengths and weaknesses of the reading. The leader of the discussion should begin with the following questions: 1. These are the several key concepts and terms that I noticed in the reading such as . . . Are any of these unclear to any of you? Are there any other key concepts that you noted that need to be clarified? (If one or more are unclear) Can anyone help us clarify the meaning of <problematic concept(s)>. Advice: try to keep this part of the seminar to about 10 minutes. Use your discretion here. If a concept or term brought up is interesting but not central to the reading, then suggest that we come back to it if we have time. If a

3

concept is integral to the argument (see below), you can reserve its discussion for when we get to the next step. 2. Would any member of the class like to give us their statement on what the main argument of the author is? Would anyone like to add something to what <the first person> has said? Do you agree or disagree that we have captured the key aspects of the argument? Advice: Try to avoid starting off with your own statement of the argument. See if you can draw it out from members of the class first. You can add some of your own understanding as the argument proceeds. As you see the discussion being finished or beginning to get into key issues arising from the argument, move to the third step. 3. I would like now to identify some of the key issues that arise out of the reading and that we might discuss. One of these might be . . . Are there any others that we might take up? Advice: Your goal here is to get as many key issues discussed as is possible. Try to draw in members of the class who have not had a chance to speak. The aim here is to improve understanding of the reading, not to criticize it. If members move to critique, stop them and say we will do that soon. Keep an eye on your watch or the clock. You want to reserve time for a critical discussion of the reading. 4. With our understanding of the argument and the various issues related to the argument, we can now spend a few minutes to reflect critically on the reading. Are there any points that are particularly problematic in your understanding? Are there any points that are particularly useful or persuasive? Advice: It is important here to ensure that members of the seminar get a chance to comment on both the weaknesses and the strengths of the given reading. Don't just concentrate on the weaknesses. Allocation of the participation grade: a. Leading discussions 10% (For some thoughts on leading discussions, see Appendix B below) b. Participation in seminar discussions 20% (For some information on the difference between evaluating participation and evaluating knowledge and understanding, see Appendix A below). c. Handing in of summary statements 10%. These will be prepared for each of the substantive discussions of the readings, starting with week 3 (January 20), hence 10 in total. To receive credit, these summaries must be submitted electronically

POL SCI 4KB3: NON-WESTERN PERSPECTIVES ON IR

prior to the class (by Thursday midnight before class). Members of the class are permitted one ‘heavy burden’ week without losing points here. In taking a "heavy burden" week, students are not expected to hand in summaries. They should try, however, as best as possible, to do the readings and participate in the discussions. Students taking a ‘heavy burden’ week must inform me by the Monday preceding the class when they are taking the option. B. Critical Response Paper (30%) One relatively short analytical paper is required. The paper is to be 5 pages in length (Times New Roman, 12, double spaced, 1 inch margins), and must be written as a reaction/response to any of the weekly readings of the student’s choice. This entails that the students choose any of the weeks on which they wish to write. ONCE YOU HAVE SELECTED YOUR TOPIC YOU HAVE ONE WEEK TO COMPLETE THE PAPER (FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO WRITE A PAPER ON WEEK 3 (THE RACIAL CONSTITUTION OF IR), JANUARY 20, YOUR PAPER WILL BE DUE ONE WEEK AFTERWARDS, WHICH IS JANUARY 27. Late assignments will be subject to a penalty of 3 points out of a grade of 100 for every day they are late. C. Take-Home Examination (30%) TBA At the last class, a take-home examination composed of 7 questions will be handed out. Students will be asked to answer three of these seven questions. Each answer will be limited to 1500 words. Late submission of the exam will be subject to a penalty of 3 points out of a grade of 100 for every four hours it is late (to a maximum of 15 points). ACADEMIC DISHONESTY You are expected to exhibit honesty and use ethical behaviour in all aspects of the learning process. Academic credentials you earn are rooted in principles of honesty and academic integrity. Academic dishonesty is to knowingly act or fail to act in a way that results or could result in unearned academic credit or advantage. This behaviour can result in serious consequences, e.g. the grade of zero on an assignment, loss of credit with a notation on the transcript (notation reads: “Grade of F assigned for academic dishonesty”), and/or suspension or expulsion from the university. It is your responsibility to understand what constitutes academic dishonesty. For information on the various kinds of academic dishonesty please refer to the Academic Integrity Policy, specifically Appendix 3, located at http://www.mcmaster.ca/senate/academic/ac_integrity.htm The following illustrates only three forms of academic dishonesty:

5

1. Plagiarism, e.g. the submission of work that is not one’s own or for which other credit has been obtained. 2. Improper collaboration in group work. 3. Copying or using unauthorized aids in tests and examinations. _________________________________________________________________________________ The instructor and university reserve the right to modify elements of the course during the term. The university may change the dates and deadlines for any or all courses in extreme circumstances. If either type of modification becomes necessary, reasonable notice and communication with the students will be given with explanation and the opportunity to comment on changes. It is the responsibility of the student to check their McMaster email and course websites weekly during the term and to note any changes.

Academic Accommodation of Students with Disabilities: Students who require academic accommodation must contact Student Accessibility Services (SAS) to make arrangements with a Program Coordinator. Academic accommodations must be arranged for each term of study. Student Accessibility Services can be contacted by phone 905-525-9140, ext. 2865 or e-mail sas@mcmaster.ca. For further information, consult McMaster University’s Policy for Academic Accommodation of Students with Disabilities. Statement on Electronic Resources In this course we will be using AvenueToLearn. Students should be aware that, when they access the electronic components of this course, private information such as first and last names, user names for the McMaster e-mail accounts, and program affiliation may become apparent to all other students in the same course. The available information is dependent on the technology used. Continuation in this course will be deemed consent to this disclosure. If you have any questions or concerns about such disclosure please discuss this with the course instructor. Faculty of Social Sciences E-mail Communication Policy Effective September 1, 2010, it is the policy of the Faculty of Social Sciences that all e-mail communication sent from students to instructors (including TAs), and from students to staff, must originate from the student’s own McMaster University e-mail account. This policy protects confidentiality and confirms the identity of the student. It is the student’s responsibility to ensure that communication is sent to the university from a McMaster account. If an instructor becomes aware that a communication has come from an alternate address, the instructor may not reply at his or her discretion.

POL SCI 4KB3: NON-WESTERN PERSPECTIVES ON IR

Required and recommended readings: Week 1 (January 6): Introduction to the course (no readings assigned). Week 2 (January 13): What should a non-Western IR look like? Theoretical assumptions and challenges

Robert Vitalis, ‘Birth of a Discipline’ in D. Long and Brian C. Schmidt (eds), Imperialism and Internationalism in the Discipline of International Relations, SUNY Press, 2005.

Michel-Rolph Trouillot, “An Unthinkable History. The Haitian Revolution as a Non-Event” in Silencing the Past. Power and the Production of History, Beacon Press, 1995, pp. 70-107.

Recommended: L.H.M. Ling, The Dao of World Politics: Towards a Post-Westphalian, Worldist International Relations, Routledge, 2013. Robbie Shilliam, International Relations and Non-Western Thought: Imperialism, Colonialism and Investigations of Global Modernity, Routledge, 2011. Pierre Lizée, A Whole New World: Reinventing International Studies for the Post-Western World, Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. Amitav Acharya and Barry Buzan, “Why is there no Non-Western International Relations Theory: An Introduction” in A. Acharya and B. Buzan (eds), Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives on and Beyond Asia, Routledge, 2010. Anthony Anghie, Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law, Cambridge University Press, 2007. D. Long and Brian C. Schmidt (eds), Imperialism and Internationalism in the Discipline of International Relations, SUNY Press, 2005. Mark B. Salter, Barbarians and Civilization in International Relations, Pluto Press, 2002. Edward Keene, Beyond the Anarchical Society: Grotius, Colonialism and Order in World Politics, Cambridge University Press, 2002. S. Chan, P. Mandaville, and R. Bleiker (eds), The Zen of International Relations: IR Theory from East to West, Palgrave Macmillan, 2001. Barry Hindess, “Not At Home in the Empire”, Social Identities 7:3, 363-377. John Hobson, “Introduction: Constructing Eurocentrism and International Theory as Eurocentric Construct” in The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics: Western International Theory 1760-2010, Cambridge University Press, 2012. Siba Grovogui, Sovereigns, Quasi-Sovereigns, and Africans, University of Minneapolis, 1996. Week 3 (January 20): The racial constitution of IR

7

W.E.B. Du Bois, The World and Africa, Oxford University Press, 2007, ch. 2: “The White Masters of the World.”

Errol Henderson, “Hidden in Plain Sight: Racism in International Relations Theory”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs 26: 1 (2013), 71-92. (e-journal)

Ta-Nehisi Coates, “The Case for Reparations”, The Atlantic, May 21, 2014 (to be retrieved from: http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/05/the-case-for-reparations/361631/) (e-resource)

Recommended Forum on “Race and International Relations”. Postcolonial Studies (2016/2017) Srdjan Vucetic, The Anglosphere: A Genealogy of a Racialized Identity in International Relations, Stanford University Press, 2011. Robert Vitalis, “The graceful and generous liberal gesture: making racism invisible in American international relations” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 29: 3, 331-356. Persaud, Randolph and Walker, RBJ. 2001. “Apertura: race in international relations.” Alternatives, 26(4): 373–376. Naeem Inayatullah and David Blaney, International Relations and the Problem of Difference, Routledge, 2004. Alina Sajed, Postcolonial Encounters in International Relations: the Politics of Transgression in the Maghreb, Routledge, 2013. A. Anievas, N. Manchanda and R. Shilliam (eds) Race and Racism in International Relations: Confronting the Global Colour Line, Routledge, 2014. Week 4 (January 27): Liberal theory and the constitution of contemporary world order

Woodrow Wilson, “The Fourteen Points” (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/wilson14.asp)

John Hobson, “Racist and Eurocentric Imperialism: racist-realism, racist-liberalism, and ‘progressive’ Eurocentric liberalism/Fabianism, 1919-1945” in The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics: Western International Theory 1760-2010, Cambridge University Press, 2012.

Robbie Shilliam, “Liberalism and Fascism” (https://robbieshilliam.wordpress.com/2016/11/20/liberalism-and-fascism-nov-2016/)

Recommended: Nitobe Inazo, “What League of Nations has done and is doing: lecture at the International University, Bruxelles, 13th and 14th September, 1920”, Harrison, 1920. Albert Hourani, Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age 1798-1939, Cambridge University Press, 1983. Sankar Muthu, Enlightenment Against Empire, Princeton University Press, 2003. Margaret Macmillan, ‘Japan and Racial Equality’ in Paris 1919, Random House, 2003, 306-322 Jennifer Pitts, A Turn to Empire: The Rise of Imperial Liberalism in Britain and France, Princeton University Press, 2006.

POL SCI 4KB3: NON-WESTERN PERSPECTIVES ON IR

Ryoko Nakano, “Beyond Orientalism and “Reverse Orientalism”: Through the Looking Glass of Japanese Humanism” in R. Shilliam (ed.) International Relations and Non-Western Thought: Imperialism, Colonialism and Investigations of Global Modernity, Routledge, 2011. Uday Mehta Singh, ‘Introduction’, in Liberalism and Empire: A Study in Nineteenth-Century British Liberal Thought, University of Chicago, 1999. Week 5 (February 3): Nationalism and state-building

Soekarno, Nationalism, Islam and Marxism, pp. 35-62, Cornell Modern Indonesia Project, 1970.

Frantz Fanon, “On National Culture” in The Wretched of the Earth, Grove Press, 2004.

Recommended: Jawaharlal Nehru, The Discovery of India, Anchor Books, 1959. Sun Yat-Sen, The Teachings of Sun Yat-Sen: Selections From His Writings, The Sylvan Press, 1945. Partha Chatterjee, Nationalism and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse, United Nations University, 1986. Partha Chatterjee, The Nation and Its Fragments, Princeton University Press, 1993. Benedict Anderson, “Creole Pioneers” in Imagined Communities, Verso, 2006. Priya Chacko, “The Internationalist Nationalist: Pursuing an Ethical Modernity with Jawaharlal Nehru” in R. Shilliam (ed.) International Relations and Non-Western Thought: Imperialism, Colonialism and Investigations of Global Modernity, Routledge, 2011. Martin Munro and Robbie Shilliam, “Alternative Sources of Cosmopolitanism: Nationalism, Universalism and Créolité in Francophone Caribbean Thought” in in R. Shilliam (ed.) International Relations and Non-Western Thought: Imperialism, Colonialism and Investigations of Global Modernity, Routledge, 2011. Week 6 (February 10): Anti-colonialism/anti-imperialism in IR

Aimé Césaire, Discourse on Colonialism, pp. 29-78, Monthly Review Press, 2001.

Edward Said, ‘Introduction’ and ‘Knowing the Oriental’ in Orientalism, Vintage Books, 1979, 1-73.

Recommended: W.E.B. Dubois, The World and Africa, International Publishers, 1979. Kwame Nkrumah, Neocolonialism: the Last Stage of Imperialism, International Publishers, 1966. Hannah Arendt, “The Political Emancipation of the Bourgeoisie” in The Origins of Totalitarianism, A Harvest Book, 1985. V. I. Lenin, Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism, International Publishers, 2002. Albert Memmi, The Colonizer and the Colonized, Beacon Press, 1967. Frantz Fanon, Black Skin, White Masks, Grove Press, Revised Edition, 2008. Marcus Garvey, Selected Writings and Speeches, Dover Thrift, 2004.

9

Anibal Quijano, “Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism and Social Classification’ in M. Moraña, E. Dussel and C.A. Jáuregui (eds), Coloniality At Large: Latin America and the Postcolonial Debate, Duke University Press, 2008. Ho Chi Minh, Down with Colonialism, Verso, 2007. Anthony Bogues, “Radical Anti-Colonial Thought, Anti-Colonial Internationalism and the Politics of Human Solidarities” in R. Shilliam (ed.) International Relations and Non-Western Thought: Imperialism, Colonialism and Investigations of Global Modernity, Routledge, 2011. Branwen Gruffydd Jones, “Anti-Racism and Emancipation in the Thought and Practice of Cabral, Neto, Mondlane and Machel” in R. Shilliam (ed.) International Relations and Non-Western Thought: Imperialism, Colonialism and Investigations of Global Modernity, Routledge, 2011. Sankar Muthu (ed.), Empire and Modern Political Thought, Cambridge University Press, 2012. Week 7 (February 17): Revolution and Political Violence

Frantz Fanon, “On Violence” in The Wretched of the Earth, Grove Press, 2004. Mahatma Gandhi, “Non-Violence” and “National Independence is Not

Enough” in L. Fischer (ed.) The Essential Gandhi, Vintage Books, 2002. Sankaran Krishna, “A Postcolonial Racial/Spatial Order: Gandhi, Ambedkar

and the Construction of the International” in A. Anievas, N. Manchanda and R. Shilliam (eds) Race and Racism in International Relations: Confronting the Global Colour Line, Routledge, 2014.

Recommended: Amilcar Cabral. 1966. “The Weapon of Theory.” Address delivered to the first Tricontinental Conference of the Peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America held in Havana. Reprinted in Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings of Amilcar Cabral, London: Heinemann, 1980. Albert Camus, “Rebellion and Murder” in The Rebel, H. Hamilton, 1957, 246-260. Mahatma Gandhi, ‘Quit India’ speeches 1942. To be retrieved from: http://www.mkgandhi.org/speeches/qui.htm Hans Morgenthau, "We Are Deluding Ourselves in Vietnam," New York Times Magazine, 18 April 1965. (http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/vietnam/hans%27.htm) Che Guevara, “Vietnam must not stand alone” New Left Review 43: May-June 1967. C.L.R. James, The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution, Vintage, 1989. Robert H. Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World, Cambridge University Press, 1993. William Duiker, Sacred War: Nationalism and Revolution in a Divided Vietnam, McGraw-Hill, 1994. Mohammed Ayoob, The Third World Security Predicament: State Making, Regional Conflict, and the International System, Lynne Rienner, 1995. Eric Selbin, Modern Latin American Revolutions, Westview Press, 1999 (2nd edition). Fred Halliday, Revolution and World Politics. The Rise and Fall of the Sixth Great Power, Duke University Press, 1999.

POL SCI 4KB3: NON-WESTERN PERSPECTIVES ON IR

Robert E. Harkavy and Stephanie G. Neuman, Warfare and the Third World, Palgrave Macmillan, 2001. Mahmood Mamdani, When Victims Become Killers: Colonialism, Nativism, and the Genocide in Rwanda, Princeton University Press, 2002. Fred Halliday, Revolution and Foreign Policy: the Case of South Yemen 1967-1987, Cambridge University Press, 2002. Ayoob, Mohamed. 2002. “Subaltern Realism: International Relations Theory meets the Third World.” In Stephanie G. Neuman, ed., International Relations Theory and the Third World. London: Macmillan Press. Derek Gregory, The Colonial Present: Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq, Wiley-Blackwell, 2004. John Foran, Taking Power: On the Origins of Third World Revolutions, Cambridge University Press, 2005. Tarak Barkawi and Mark Laffey, “The Postcolonial Moment in Security Studies” Review of International Studies 32 (2006), 329-352. Ashis Nandy, The Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self Under Colonialism, Oxford India Paperbacks, 2010. Eric Selbin, Revolution, Rebellion, Resistance: The Power of Story, Zed Books, 2010. Ofelia Schutte, “Resistance to Colonialism: the Latina American Legacy of José Martí” in Jacob Levy (ed.), Colonialism and Its Legacies, Lexington Press, 2011. FEBRUARY 24 – READING WEEK! Week 8 (March 3): Poverty/Inequality in IR

Andre Gunder Frank (1969), “The Development of Underdevelopment.” Reprinted in Mitchell A. Seligson and John T. Passé-Smith (eds). Development and Underdevelopment (fourth edition), Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2008, pp. 257-268.

Arturo Escobar, “The Problematization of Poverty: The Tale of Three Worlds and Development” in Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World, Princeton University Press, 1994, pp. 21-54.

Recommended: Patrice Lumumba, Lumumba Speaks: The Speeches and Writings of Patrice Lumumba, 1958–1961, Little, Brown and Company, 1972. Kwame Nkrumah, “Introduction” in Neocolonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism, International Publishers, 1966. Frédérique Apffel-Marglin and Stephen A. Marglin (eds), Decolonizing knowledge: from development to dialogue, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996. Deepa Narayan, Robert Chambers, Meera K. Shah, Patti Petesch. Voices of the Poor: Crying Out for Change. Oxford University Press, 2000. Chapters 1–4. Theotonio Dos Santos (1970), “The Structure of Dependence.” Chapter 22 in Mitchell A. Seligson and John T Passé-Smith eds. 1998. Development and Underdevelopment. (second edition) Boulder: Lynne Rienner. Thomas Sankara, We Are the Heirs of the World's Revolutions: Speeches from the Burkina Faso Revolution 1983–87, Pathfinder Press, 2007.

11

Fernando Henrique Cardoso, “New Paths: Globalization in Historical Perspective” Studies in Comparative International Development, volume 44, number 4, December 2009. Special Edition, Dependency and Development in a Globalized World, 296-317. Naeem Inayatullah and David Blaney, Savage Economics: Wealth, Poverty and the Temporal Walls of Capitalism, Routledge, 2010. Ilan Kapoor, The Postcolonial Politics of Development, Routledge, 2008, pp. 19-38. Week 9 (March 10): Feminism and the condition of women

Simone de Beauvoir, “Introduction” in The Second Sex, Vintage Books, 1989. Maya Mikdashi, “How Not to Study Gender in the Middle East”, Jadaliyya,

March 21, 2012 (To be retrieved electronically from: http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/4775/how-not-to-study-gender-in-the-middle-east)

“Revolutionary Hope: Conversation between James Baldwin and Audre Lorde’, Essence Magazine, 1984 (to be retrieved from: http://mocada-museum.tumblr.com/post/73421979421/revolutionary-hope-a-conversation-between-james)

Recommended: Chandra Talpade Mohanty, “Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses”, Boundary 2, 3/13: 1 (1984). Fatima Mernissi, Beyond the Veil: Male-Female Dynamics in Modern Muslim Society, Indiana University Press, 1987. Thomas Sankara, Women's Liberation and the African Freedom Struggle, Pathfinder Press, 1990. Rey Chow, Woman and Chinese Modernity. The Politics of Reading Between West and East, University of Minnesota Press, 1991. Chandra Talpade Mohanty, Ann Russo, and Lourdes Torres (eds) Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism, Indiana University Press, 1991. Leila Ahmed, Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate, Yale University Press, 1993. Mahasweta Devi, “Douloti the Bountiful” in Imaginary Maps, Routledge, 1995. Cynthia Enloe, Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics, University of California Press, Updated Edition, 2000. Aihwa Ong, “Colonialism and Modernity: Feminist Re-presentations of Women in Non-Western Societies” in Kum-Kum Bhavnani (ed.) Feminism and “Race”, Oxford University Press, 2001. Marnia Lazreg, “Decolonizing Feminism” in Kum-Kum Bhavnani (ed.) Feminism and “Race”, Oxford University Press, 2001. Shu-mei Shih, “Towards an Ethics of Transnational Encounters, Or “When” Does a “Chinese” Woman Become a “Feminist”? In Marguerite Waller and Sylvia Marcos (eds) Dialogue and Difference: Feminisms Challenge Globalization, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. Audre Lorde, “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House” in Kum-Kum Bhavnani (ed.) Feminism and “Race”, Oxford University Press, 2001.

POL SCI 4KB3: NON-WESTERN PERSPECTIVES ON IR

Ien Ang, “I Am a Feminist But… “Other” Women and Postnational Feminism” in in Kum-Kum Bhavnani (ed.) Feminism and “Race”, Oxford University Press, 2001. Marguerite Waller and Sylvia Marcos (eds) Dialogue and Difference: Feminisms Challenge Globalization, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. Anna Agathangelou, The Global Political Economy of Sex: Desire, Violence, and Insecurity in Mediterranean Nation States, Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. Cynthia Enloe, The Curious Feminist: Searching for Women in The New Age of Empire, University of California Press, 2004. Sheila Nair, “Human Rights and Postcoloniality: Representing Burma” in Geeta Chowdhry and Sheila Nair (eds) Power, Postcolonialism and International Relations. Reading Race, Gender and Class, Routledge, 2004. Week 10 (March 17): Indigenous Voices

Taiaiake Alfred, “Wasáse: Indigenous Resurgences” in Jacob Levy (ed.), Colonialism and Its Legacies, Lexington Press, 2011.

Glen Sean Coulthard, ‘Introduction’ in Red Skins, White Masks: Resisting the Colonial Politics of Recognition, University of Minnesota Press, 2014.

Ravi de Costa, “Indigenous Diplomacies Before the Nation-State” in J. Marshall Beier (ed.), Indigenous Diplomacies, Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.

Recommended: Vine Deloria, Jr., Custer Died For Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto, University of Oklahoma Press, 1988. Neta C. Crawford, “A Security Regime Among Democracies: Cooperation Among Iroquois Nations,” International Organization, 48:3 (Summer 1994). David Bedford and Thom Workman, “The Great Law of Peace: Alternative Inter-Nation(al) Practices and the Iroquoian Confederacy,” Alternatives, 22:1 (Jan.-Mar. 1997). Karena Shaw, “Indigeneity and the International,” Millennium 31:1 (May 2002). Rigoberta Menchú, I, Rigoberta Menchú: An Indian Woman in Guatemala, Verso, 2009. Linda Tuhiwai Smith, Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples, Zed Books and University of Otago Press, 2004. Ronald Niezen, The Origins of Indigenism, Harvard University Press, 2003. Bonita Lawrence, "Real" Indians and Others: Mixed-Blood Urban Native Peoples and Indigenous Nationhood, University of Nebraska Press, 2004. Andrea Smith, Conquest: Sexual Violence and American Indian Genocide, South End Press, 2005. Roger Epp, “At the Wood’s Edge: Towards a Theoretical Clearing for Indigenous Diplomacies in International Relations,” in D. Jarvis and R. Crawford, eds., International Relations: Still and American Social Science? (Albany: SUNY Press, 2000). Paul Keal, European Conquest and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: The Moral Backwardness of International Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). Allaine Cerwonka, Native to the Nation: Disciplining Landscapes and Bodies in Australia (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2004).

13

J. Marshall Beier, International Relations in Uncommon Places: Indigeneity, Cosmology, and the Limits of International Theory, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. Robbie Shilliam, “Keskidee Aroha: Translation on the Colonial Stage”, Journal of Historical Sociology 24 (1) 2011, 80-99. Robbie Shilliam, "Civilization and the Poetics of Slavery", Thesis Eleven: Critical Theory and Historical Sociology, 108 (1) 2012, 97-116. Hayden King, http://biidwewidam.com. Personal blog (Anishinaabe writer, student, teacher, researcher at Ryerson and McMaster Universities & Gchi'mnissing (Beausoleil First Nation) Week 11 (March 24): Religion/Secularism in IR

Jamāl ad-Dīn al-Afghānī, “Answer of Jamāl ad-Dīn to Renan” in Nikkie Keddie, An Islamic Response to Imperialism, University of California Press, 1968.

Talal Asad, “Secularism, Nation-State, Religion” in Formations of the Secular. Christianity, Islam, Modernity, Stanford University Press, 2003.

Recommended: Albert Hourani, Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age 1798-1939, Cambridge University Press, 1983. John Locke, A Letter Concerning Toleration, Hackett Publishing, 1983. Ira Lapidus, A History of Islamic Societies, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, 2002. Sayyid Qutb, The Sayyid Qutb Reader: Selected Writings on Politics, Religion, and Society, Routledge, 2008. Sayyid Qutb, Milestones, American Trust, 1990. Mustapha Pasha, “Islam, ‘Soft’ Orientalism and Hegemony: A Gramscian Rereading,” Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 8 (2005): 543-558. Mustapha Pasha, “Globalisation, Islam and Resistance” in Globalisation and the Politics of Resistance, edited by Barry K. Gills (Macmillan, 2000), pp. 241-254. Peter G. Mandaville, Transnational Muslim Politics: Reimagining the Umma, Routledge, 2001. Elizabeth Shakman Hurd, “Political Islam” in The Politics of Secularism in International Relations, Princeton University Press, 2008. Giorgio Shani, Sikh Nationalism and Identity in a Global Age, Routledge, 2008. Nevzat Soguk, Globalization and Islamism: Beyond Fundamentalism, Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. Week 12 (March 31): Future directions for an alternative theory of global politics?

Enrique Dussel, “The “World-System”: Europe as “Center” and Its “Periphery” Beyond Eurocentrism” in Jacob Levy (ed.), Colonialism and Its Legacies, Lexington Press, 2011.

Arif Dirlik, “Culture in Contemporary IR Theory: the Chinese Provocation” in R. Shilliam (ed.) International Relations and Non-Western Thought: Imperialism, Colonialism and Investigations of Global Modernity, Routledge, 2011.

Recommended:

POL SCI 4KB3: NON-WESTERN PERSPECTIVES ON IR

Ibn Khaldun, “On dynasties, royal authority…” (pp. 246-261) in The Muqaddimah. An Introduction to History, Princeton University Press, 2005. John M. Hobson, “The Rise of the Oriental West: Identity/Agency, Global Structure and Contingency” in The Eastern Origins of Western Civilization, Cambridge University Press, 2004. Robert Cox, “Towards a Posthegemonic Conceptualization of World Order: Reflections on the Relevancy of Ibn Khaldun (1992)” in Robert Cox with Timothy Sinclair, Approaches to World Order, Cambridge University Press, 1996. Mustapha Pasha, “Ibn Khaldun and World Order” in Innovation and Transformation in International Relations Theory, edited by Stephen Gill and James H. Mittelman (Cambridge University Press, 1997). Randolph Persaud, “Frantz Fanon, Race, and World Order” in Innovation and Transformation in International Relations Theory, edited by Stephen Gill and James H. Mittelman (Cambridge University Press, 1997 Appendix A: Evaluation of Participation Part of the participation grade will come from an evaluation of how much a given class member contributed to the seminar. Remember that evaluation of participation is different from evaluation of knowledge or understanding of a set of given readings. My evaluation of your knowledge and understanding will come from the short paper and the final examination. If you wish to check out how well you are doing in your participation, you might ask yourself the following questions: Did I initiate a topic or question?

Did I provide some information when it was needed?

Did I give some positive opinions or reactions?

Did I give some negative opinions or reactions?

Did I ask for positive or negative opinions or reactions?

Did I confront someone whom you thought was wrong?

Did I try to restate what someone else had said to ensure I and others understood?

Did I ask someone else to restate what he or she had said?

Did I give examples when they were needed?

Did I ask others to provide some examples?

Did I try to synthesize or summarize a part of the discussion?

15

Did I ask if someone might synthesize or summarize a part of the discussion?

Did I sponsor, encourage, help or reward others in the group?

Did I relieve tension in the group by cracking a joke or calling for a break at an

appropriate time?

Appendix B: Leading a discussion The following suggestions are adapted from Gale Rhodes and Robert Schaible, A User’s Manual for Student-Led Discussions, available at: http://www.usm.maine.edu/~rhodes/StdLedDisc.html I liked the approach and it is consistent with what we are trying to achieve in the course. Preparing to lead a discussion, you must be familiar with the assigned material. "Familiar with" is just the right phrase. You need not have mastered the material; after all, a goal of discussion is to move everyone towards mastery, that is, to improve everyone's (even the leader's) understanding. To prepare for discussion (leadership or participation), first read and study the assignment, underlining the more important or interesting points, and making notes in the margins. Then think about and write down some of the main issues that the author raises and a few questions pertinent to the issues. Then go back over your notes and the text and note the key concepts or terms and then try to put the author’s argument into your own words. Getting Started Class has started and your name has been drawn from the hat. How do you begin? Simply clear your throat and begin with the questions everyone has been asked to address. Before you know it, the hard part -- getting started -- is done. One word of caution: Start out on a positive note. Avoid beginning with an apology for being poorly prepared or for finding the reading difficult. Treat the day's topic as having real value. Openers like "I didn't get much out of this" or "I don't agree with anything the author said" will stifle, rather then promote, discussion. Remember that a time for critical evaluation will come at the end, but only after the class has worked on its understanding of the author's arguments. If you treat the readings as worthwhile, your classmates will follow your lead, join you in examining the day's assignment, and thus make your job easier. Sustaining Discussion Discussions, like sleepy horses, need some urging to keep them moving. A discussion leader can often keep things moving with only modest prodding, giving the class its head when things are going well. Of course, if you can contribute something useful, do so; but other kinds of comments or actions on your part can sustain the discussion just as well as an injection of insight. Here are some suggestions: 1) Get students to talk to each other. Ask for a response to the most recent

POL SCI 4KB3: NON-WESTERN PERSPECTIVES ON IR

comments. (Anyone have a response to Clara's opinion?) Or ask a specific student to respond. (Clara, do you agree with Ralph?) 2) Get students to defend or explain their opinions. (Marvin why do you say that? What's your evidence or reasoning?) 3) Encourage an exploration of differing points of view. When you hear conflicting views, point them out and get the holders of those views to discuss their differences. Perhaps ask a third person to sum up the two positions. 4) Keep the class on the subject. If you are even halfway familiar with the material, you know when the discussion is no longer connected to it. Just say so. (We've gotten pretty far from the readings; let's get back on the subject.) Or simply consult your list of questions. Any sensible response to one of your questions is bound to be pertinent. 5) Try to give as many persons in the class as possible a chance to speak. Keep a list of who wishes to speak. Ensure that all those who have not spoken who are on your list get to speak first before a colleague gets a chance to speak an additional time. 6) Point to a particular passage in the text relevant to a comment made by one person, or to a discussion among several. This might be a passage that challenges, or sums up and confirms, the views being expressed. 7) Don't fill every silence with your own voice. Any discussion will lapse occasionally. It is not your job as leader to avoid all silence. Some quiet periods are productive. Students who are not so quick to speak will frequently get the chance they need when others are quiet. If the silence gets too heavy, take advantage of the other students' lists of questions. (Ginny, give us one of the questions you brought to class.) Remember, as discussion leader you do not have to be the brains for the class. You are not expected to know it all; the class is full of students who have read the same assignment that you have read. Your job is to give them a chance to talk about it and thus give others the benefits of their thinking. If any one student begins to do all the talking, gently correct this problem by bringing other students into the discussion. You are there to steer, to keep the class reasonably near the center of the path, by pulling a rein when needed, by loosening the reins when it keeps to the trail, by reining it in when it threatens to gallop away to greener subjects. If students are talking to each other about the reading material, things are going well; relax, listen, and contribute when you can.