Bibtex export

 

@article{ Chu2022,
 title = {Whither Chinese IR? The Sinocentric subject and the paradox of Tianxia-ism},
 author = {Chu, Sinan},
 journal = {International theory : a journal of international politics, law and philosophy},
 number = {1},
 pages = {57-87},
 volume = {14},
 year = {2022},
 issn = {1752-9727},
 doi = {https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971920000214},
 urn = {https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-91530-2},
 abstract = {This essay critically assesses the Tianxia Theories, a line of indigenous International Relations (IR) theorizing in China organized around the concept of Tianxia ('all-under-heaven'). My goal is to tackle a seemingly prevalent issue among non-Western IR theories, that is, the indigenous scholars' subservience to state cues and often uncritical attitude toward their own ethnocentrism. To that end, I strategically target a recent contribution to this scholarship that explicitly seeks to articulate a non-ethnocentric theory: Xu Jilin's New Tianxia-ism (xin tianxia zhuyi). I first examine the main thesis of New Tianxia-ism to reveal its internal tensions. Then I examine what enables the formulation of New Tianxia-ism from a discursive perspective. I argue that a particular subject position, to which I refer as the 'Sinocentric Subject', plays an instrumental role in enabling contemporary Chinese intellectuals to think along the logics of New Tianxia-ism. The result, however, undermines the agenda to articulate an alternative theory that rectifies the ethnocentrism in IR. In conclusion, I suggest that Chinese indigenous scholarship ought to engage more critically the ideological inclination and the politics of knowledge within its own epistemic community.},
 keywords = {internationale Beziehungen; international relations; Theorie; theory; indigene Völker; indigenous peoples; Ethnozentrismus; ethnocentrism; Politikwissenschaft; political science; Kritik; criticism; China; China; politische Philosophie; political philosophy; Weltordnung; world order}}