Power and Exclusion in Discourse Approaches to International Relations

Abstract

Anyone interested in the use of discourse in IR will quickly come to realize that this area of social inquiry accommodates one of the liveliest inter- and trans-disciplinary dialogues in IR, a dialogue which comprises grand social theories like Habermas’ Theory of Communicative Action,¹ the critical historicism of Michel Foucault (Foucault, 1970; Foucault, 2003), the historical approach of Quentin Skinner and the Cambridge School (see for example: Tully, 1988), the power theories of Gramsci and Bourdieu, the complex neo-Gramscian discourse theory of Laclau and Mouffe (Laclau, 1981; Laclau, 1996; Laclau and Mouffe, 2000; Laclau and Mouffe, 2001) and the so-called Essex School (among others: Howarth et al., 2000). Last but not least is a — surprisingly often overlooked — huge sociolinguistic stock of more empirically oriented discourse literature.² The great variety of neighbouring disciplines that are interwoven with discourse-based approaches to IR contributes to the present heterogeneity of this field. However, it also encourages an opening up of the discipline towards debates and concepts from other areas of social inquiry.