Can concepts be violent (International Relations discipline)?.
You will discuss whether concepts can be violent? By mapping out the genealogy of liberalism in how liberalism is made and powered by relations of colonial violence and imperial dominance (1492 conquest, racial contract, neoliberal globalization) and also presenting in how the idea of liberalism has attained hegemonic knowledge position and that the concept of liberalism is inherently racist, exclusivist and violent because it entails bodies of knowledge and truth that only expresses eurocentric historical-experiences and knowledges that is used as a universal ‘empirical validated knowledge’ whereas the intellectual and cultural contributions of Africa and other parts of the “non-Western” world were subjugated. The peril of using concepts is that it subjugates and marginalizes (racism) other knowledges and thus have no representation in defining ‘others’ social world which is a form of epistemic violence. Using concepts in international relations can therefore be violent concepts and can potentially marginalize, invalidate, and make invisible others knowledges. Knowledges and truth is relative not universal.
Violent can be understood as epistemological injustices where other cultures, knowledge and believe systems lack or have no representation at all. It exists in oppressive relations (inferior/superior, center/periphery, knowledge/non knowledge)
Epistemology encompasses the issues of knowledge related to truth, belief and justification.
Can concepts be violent (International Relations discipline)?