Cultural Relativism And International Politics

Cultural relativism is a complex concept that has its intellectual roots in discussions about relativism in the philosophy of science and the philosophy of language. Relativism is typically viewed in contrast to realism, which is the idea that what is true and real exists independently of the mind. Cultural issues are central to a range of international debates, including those concerning nationalism, autonomy, identity politics, and democratic incentives. Such matters require a degree of cultural sensitivity, particularly when external organisations and governing bodies are brought into the equation. Cultural relativism is associated with a general tolerance and respect for difference, which refers to the idea that cultural context is critical to an understanding of peoples values, beliefs and practices. In international relations, cultural relativists determine whether an action is 'right' or 'wrong' by evaluating it according to the ethical standards of the society within which the action occurs. Cultural Relativism and International Politics presents studies in the field on whether value judgments can be made across cultures. The relativist approach has come to be taken for granted amongst anthropologists today, as an awareness of positionality and representation has greatly affected ethnography since the 1980s. Conceptually, Anthropology has a lot to contribute to International Relations, not least in its interest in what ties people together. With respect to international organisations, such as the UN and the EU, the incentives for membership are arguably not solely economic or political. The communitarian nature of these organisations forms a large part of their appeal for many people, and the international community is prominent in the rhetoric of global politics. A cross-cultural approach has many benefits in providing new perspectives on key issues, as well as prompting us to revaluate our assumptions and preconceptions.

"The political and academic worlds are fractured by two competing discourses: the universalism of human rights and cultural relativism. This fracture is represented by the deep separation of cultural analysis and theories of international politics. Derek Robbins in a brilliant interrogation of European thinkers from Montesquieu to Pierre Bourdieu seeks to replace cultural relativism with cultural relationism as a step towards reconciling Enlightenment universalism and anthropological insistence on cultural difference. Inter alia he reflects on the tensions between political and social science and takes up the challenge from Raymond Aron to construct a sociology of international relations. A dazzling achievement." - Bryan S. Turner, The Graduate Center, CUNY Through historical studies of some of the work of Montesquieu, Comte, Durkheim, Boas, Morgenthau, Aron and Bourdieu, Derek Robbins examines the changing and competing conceptualisations of the political and the social in the Western European intellectual tradition. He suggests that we are now experiencing a new ‘dissociation of sensibility’ in which political thought and its consequences in action have become divorced from social and cultural experience. Developing further the ideas of Bourdieu which he has presented in books and articles over the last twenty years, Robbins argues that we need to integrate the recognition of cultural difference with the practice of international politics by accepting that the ‘field’ of international political discourse is a social construct which is contingent on encounters between diverse cultures. ‘Everything is relative’ (Comte) and ‘everything is social’ (Bourdieu), not least international politics.

Part 1. Theory.

In this probing examination of the meaning and function of culture in contemporary society, Lawrence Cahoone argues that reason itself is cultural, but no less reasonable for it. While recent political and philosophical movements have recognized that cognition, the self, and politics are embedded in culture, most fail to appreciate the deep changes in rationalism and liberal theory this implies, others leap directly into relativism, and nearly all fail to define culture. Cultural Revolutions systematically defines culture, gauges the consequences of the ineradicably cultural nature of cognition and action, yet argues that none of this implies relativism. After showing where other &“new culturalists&” have gone wrong, Cahoone offers his own definition of culture as teleologically organized practices, artifacts, and narratives and analyzes the notion of cultural membership in relation to race, ethnicity, and &“primordialism.&” He provides a theory of culture&’s role in how we form our sense of reality and argues that the proper conception of culture dissolves &“the problem&” of cultural relativism. Applying this perspective to Islamic fundamentalism, Cahoone identifies its conflict with the West as representing the break between two of three historically distinctive forms of reason. Rather than being &“irrational,&” he shows, fundamentalism embodies a rationality only recently devalued&—but not entirely abandoned&—by the West. The persistence of plural forms of reason suggests that modernization in various world cultures is compatible with continued, even magnified, cultural differences.

The book presents a critical reflection on how the presence of «culture» in theory and practice of international relations is reflected in IR as a research field. The book consists of three parts: The culture in International Relations scholarship, culture in the practice of International Relations and culture in International Law.

Are universal rights bound to colonialism? Are they culturally imperialistic? By juxtaposing Morocco's practice of torture with its discourse of cultural relativism, this study links popular resistance to universal rights to a deliberate politics that delegitimizes those very same rights, requiring a new, more inclusive system of universalism.

This wide-ranging, historically informed study examines the career of the culture concept and related notions of context in comparative and international politics, tracing connections through the disciplines of anthropology and history as well as through issues in nationalism and democracy.