I'm sure no one in the class is surprised to hear that I loved the Inayatullah reading. It was a challenging, fresh perspective from the Global South, a voice that we haven't heard from very often in the previous course readings. The contrast to the points made in the other readings was stark, and made me think about how diversity of theoretical perspectives is important in forming your own opinions. Reading Inayatullah last, I wished I had read it first and taken a more critical lens to the previous readings.
I was most compelled by the unique argument that we must view economics and politics through an historical* lens. Rather than taking the posture that the other readings took, of economic policy making happening in an a-historical vaccuum, Inayatullah challenges us to see the power differentials inherent in the system itself. The international community often disparages developing countries for their inability to exercise sovereignty "properly" while neglecting the fact that their sovereignty is limited and weak due to history and a system which privileges certain states. This is not to say, as Inayatullah begins with, that it is right for developing states to constrain human rights domestically and use sovereignty as a sheild against intervention. But, taking history and context into account is critical for a well rounded theoretial and political perspective. As a student of international relations, it was a good reminder to me about the critical approach we should take to international challenges and proposed policy solutions.
*I love saying "an" historical, very grad student
Hey Erica - thanks for sharing! I enjoyed the Inayatullah reading as well. I think you make a good argument that we must also remember the historical context that led to the sovereign nations that we see today. I often think about how many developed countries had "free reign" when going through their developing phase, where they exploited both people and resources from others. Now, when these developing countries are in their developing phase, they are placed with all kinds of limits from human rights to environmental. That's not to say that I don't think those are good things to have in place, but it definitely plays a part in the "sovereignty" of those countries and we must keep that in mind.
ReplyDeleteHi Erica,
ReplyDeleteYou make some good points in your post and I agree with you. It is so easy for the international community to point the finger at the developing countries to not exercise positive sovereignty and taking care of their citizens without asking the question why or without paying attention to history.
I also agree with Inayatullah, that it is important to not just focus on economics and politics but also take the historical background into account when critically analyzing the situations of the developing country and proposing solutions to their issues.
Erica, I echoed your enjoyment of the Inayatullah reading in my own blog. I agree that his perspective stuck out compared to a lot of the other theorists we have read in this class. With cliche phrases such as, 'history repeats itself' and 'recessions always occur every 7 years', it seems silly for anybody to disregard a historical perspective when affecting the future.
ReplyDelete