Category Archives: IPE

IPE, Podcast

Episode 31: Grimes, Fully Automated Communism, PMC Ideology, and Political Correctness in Science Fiction, with KMO

Leave a comment

Hello friends! Its been a while. Sorry about that. Its been a busy semester, teaching an overload class, and wrapping up some publishing projects (here and here). But we are back, and we have a ton of new shows coming your way this summer! Coming up in the next weeks, we have another episode with our Columbus OH friends, “Chairman Moe’s Magic Contradiction” on Adam Curtis’s new documentary, ”Can’t Get You Out of My Head.” We also have panels coming up, on Clyde Barrow’s new book on the Lumpenproletariat, Phil Cunliffe’s The New Twenty Years’ Crisis, and an interview with Christine Louis-Dit-Sully. 

For this 31st episode of Fully Automated, and to help us break the dry spell, our guest is none other than legendary podcast figure “KMO”! KMO is the host and producer of the C-Realm Podcast, a cartoonist and author of the book ‘Conversations on Collapse.’

On KMO’s bio, there’s a great quote from Doug Lain, creator of the Diet Soap podcast and now the Zero Books podcast (and previous guest of this show!):

KMO was once a winner in the capitalist game. He had high tech dreams and plenty of ambition, but somewhere along the line KMO dropped out, spent what he had, and started over in a simpler way. No longer rich and no longer so enamored with the technocratic fantasies of the prevailing order, he squeaks by in this world while seeking another. More than anything KMO is a broadcaster and interviewer who has a gentle and amiable way of challenging and inspiring interesting conversations with authors, artists, psychedelic gurus, sociologists, NASA scientists, economists, and more on his weekly podcast called the C-Realm.

Now, to be sure, KMO is not exactly what you might call a ‘typical guest’ for this podcast. Yet, as you’ll hear, he is a widely read reader on all things to do with the politics of technology, and science fiction.

I first met KMO a few weeks ago, in the Politics and Science Fiction room, on Clubhouse that I started earlier this year, with Giuseppe Porcaro, Jamie Chipperfield, Sarah Shoker, and Nicholas Barrett. It became clear we had some overlapping interests on the topics under discussion, so we stayed in touch and found out that we have a lot of mutual friends in the leftwing podcast universe.

KMO recently invited me on his show, the C-Realm, for a discussion of science fiction and the politics of technological change. And this episode of Fully Automated is kind of a Part 2 of that show, where KMO responds to my arguments.

In this episode, you’ll hear us discuss a wide range of topics: Clubhouse as a phenomena; recent remarks by the pop star Grimes on whether communists should be interested in Fully Automated Communism; the rise of PMC ideology, and why its so hard to discuss the topic of class on the left anymore; Thomas Frank’s recent claims about Wuhan lab leak theory, and its significance for the already tarnished reputation of mainstream media; and, finally, we chat about politics and science fiction — you’ll hear KMO talk about why and how science fiction is (and isn’t!) for him political!

For those interested, here are the links to the couple of items KMO mentioned in the show:

Rejoinder: Reading KMO’s published remarks on Patreon, he offers what I find to be a rather wild and somewhat bad faith interpretation of my views on Walmart and FALC:

“You invoked WalMart as an example of a very complicated system of production and supply chain management and then suggested that it needn’t be labor-intensive. You could just set it up and let it run for long periods and just check in on it from time to time. That’s not how WalMart works. WalMart’s operations require constant attention and tweaking by an army of highly-specialized, highly-trained and very-highly compensated individuals. They use a lot of what could loosely be described as “artificial intelligence” but it also involves constant human toil.”

Frankly, I am at a bit of a loss as to how KMO comes to this interpretation. To be clear, in my discussion with him, I never said that WalMart isn’t labor intensive. That wasn’t the point at all. Indeed, I re-listened to what I said, and it is very clear that what we were discussing was what is referred to sometimes as the Socialist Calculation Debate. Hence my referencing cybernetics, Stafford Beer, and the Chilean Cybersyn system. My discussion of WalMart was very obviously a reference to Leigh Phillips & Michal Rozworski’s book, The People’s Republic of WalMart. This is an important pillar of any discussion of FALC, because it shows how we might begin to overcome narrow assumptions about the limits of socialist economics, and ‘leap frog’ the pace of technological development to hasten the day when full automation displaces labor, and finally explodes the capitalist value system. Of course, we could equally just sit around and wait for the scenario Marx outlines in the Grundrisse (in the famous ‘Fragment on Machines’) to happen all by itself. But the question of socialist strategy was something that preoccupied Marx too, quite apart from his quest to grasp capitalist political economy. Clearly our arrival at capitalism’s point of ultimate contradiction was not something Marx was content simply to sit around and wait for. And neither should we! 

Final note: apologies, but the audio quality is a bit over-produced in this episode. I have been trying to up my game with Adobe Audition, and I think I added too much gain to my own track here. Hopefully I’ll be able to catch this the next time.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | Blubrry | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

IPE, Podcast, Strategy, Theory

Episode 26: Rise of the Dead Pundit, with Adam Proctor (Part I)

Leave a comment

Hey everyone! Welcome to Episode 26 of Fully Automated… or, at least, Episode 26, Part One!

This is a super long overdue episode with a guest I have wanted to have on the show for a long time: Adam Proctor, the host of Dead Pundit’s Society. Adam has been doing his show FULL TIME for the last four years, delivering not only on his commitment to evangelizing “socialism for ordinary ass’ed people” but to making an incredibly important (and often misunderstood) contribution to the critique of political economy.

In Part One of this episode, we discuss Adam’s background, and the story behind the Dead Pundit’s Society. DPS emerged as part of the 2016 leftist podcast wave. Some I suppose would associate Adam with the “dirtbag left,” and shows like Chapo Trap House. But the story is more complicated than that.

One of the interesting things about DPS is the niche it has always occupied, between audience accessibility and issues-driven programming, on the one hand, and a commitment to rigorous academic thought, on the other. There’s a certain public intellectual function to the show. So, in this episode, we discuss the role of the left intellectual. And the question of how to balance this sort of awkward relationship, of being neither an entertainer nor an academic, but something in between.

DPS covers a wide range of themes — everything from state theory through race essentialism. These are less controversial topics today, perhaps, but in 2016 Adam was taking huge risks by trying to mainstream them among an American left that was still largely committed to horizontalist or “occupy” style ideals. Four years into this project, it is clear that DPS has played a major role in articulating these ideas to a wider audience that one might have imagined possible, back in 2016.

In Part One, you’ll hear us address the early days of the show, and Adam’s notorious attempts to take on freedom of speech issues, cancel culture, and race essentialism. We also talk socialist strategy, and the application of work by Sam Ginden and Leo Pantich to the Grexit question. And as if these takes weren’t controversial enough, wait ’til you see what we get into in Part Two! (Coming later this week).

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | Blubrry | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

IPE

Episode 18: Science, Technology & Art in International Relations, with Anna Leander

Leave a comment

Hey everyone, and welcome to a very special episode of Fully Automated. Why so special? Well, because this is our first ever joint episode! We’ve teamed up with the Science Technology and Art in International Relations (or STAIR) section of ISA, for the first of what we hope will be a series of collaborations on the politics and economics of science and technology (and art!) in global affairs.

Joining me as a co-host on this episode is Stéphanie Perazzone, who graduated recently with a PhD in International Relations and Political Science at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva (IHEID). Stéphanie is a post-doctoral researcher at the Institute of Development Policy (IOB), the University of Antwerp. She is working on a Swiss National Science Foundation-funded research project entitled “Localizing International Security Sector Reform; A Micro-Sociology of Policing in Urban Congo.” She is also the Communications Officer for STAIR.

Our guest for this episode is Anna Leander, the winner of the 2018 STAIR ‘Transversal Acts’ Distinguished Scholar Award. Anna is Professor of International Relations at the Graduate Institute in Geneva, with part-time positions also at the Copenhagen Business School. She is known primarily for her contributions to the development of practice theoretical approaches to International Relations and for her work on the politics of commercializing military/security matters. According to her bio, she is “focused on the material politics of commercial security technologies with special emphasis on their aesthetic and affective dimensions.”

In the interview, Stéphanie and I invite Anna to reflect on a number of the topics she has taken on, in the course of her career. One question of interest is the influence of Pierre Bourdieu on her thinking, especially concerning the role of symbolic power in reproducing systems of political violence, and the political value of reflexivity as a precursor of resistance. We also ask her about her work on the increasingly overlapping relationship between the commercial and the technological, and her thoughts on methodology in relation to studying this and other recent trends and developments in the security world.

Listeners interested in following up on Anna’s work might want to check out some of the following articles, which all get discussed to some extent in the interview:

  • The Paradoxical Impunity of Private Military Companies: Authority and the Limits to Legal Accountability. Security Dialogue, 41(5), 467–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010610382108
  • Ethnographic Contributions to Method Development: “Strong Objectivity” in Security Studies, International Studies Perspectives, Volume 17, Issue 4, November 2016, Pages 462–475, https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/ekv021
  • The politics of whitelisting: Regulatory work and topologies in commercial security. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 34(1), 48–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263775815616971

Thanks for listening. As ever, if you have any feedback, you are welcome to connect with us on Twitter @occupyirtheory. And the STAIR section can be reached @STAIRISA

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | Blubrry | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

European Union, IPE, IR Theory, Podcast

Episode 16: What the Brexit? — LIVE at #ISA2019, Toronto (March 29)

1 Comment
Brexit & Beer, with Philip Cunliffe & Luke Ashworth

Welcome back, listeners, to what I hope you’ll agree is a very special episode of Fully Automated. As you know, the last two episodes have been focused on the Brexit debate, and whether or not the cause of the British left is best served by a departure from the European Union (EU), or by “remaining and rebelling” within the EU, in the hope of reforming it.

Two episodes ago, our guest was Lee Jones — an advocate of ’The Full Brexit.’ During the show, Jones advanced the idea that the ideals of the Left cannot be satisfied within the EU, whereas the most meaningful historic victories of the left have been achieved only by wielding the power of the state. Then, in our last episode, we heard a rebuttal of this idea from Luke Ashworth, who suggested that while the political entity we know as the modern state has played an important historical role for the Left, its time has been fleeting, and the forces of globalization are today of such power that any project of returning to sovereignty will prove inevitably fruitless.

Recorded late in the afternoon on Friday, March 29, in the lobby bar of the Toronto Sheraton, during the 60th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, this episode brings Jones and Ashworth back to the microphone, this time for a live, in person debate. To keep things cordial, we bought them a brace of beers. And they appreciated the gesture it would seem, as the exchange proved to be probably the most collegial airing of political grievances in podcast history.

But, as if that wasn’t exciting enough, this special “Showdown in the Sheraton” episode also brings together another famous Brexit rivalry — none other than Phil Cunliffe and Sean Molloy, both of the Department of Politics and International Relations, at the University of Kent. Well known for their epic public disagreements on Twitter, this episode is a rare opportunity to hear Cunliffe (whose voice listeners may also recognize from the Aufhebunga Bunga podcast) and Molloy pretending to be polite to each other.

A quick note for listeners: with the Parliamentary dynamics surrounding Brexit now in a state of rapid flux, we’ve here largely avoided the topic of whether or how Theresa May can at this stage secure her deal, and avoid a ‘drop out’ Brexit. That said, for listeners who are interested in a play-by-play analysis of what’s going on in the House of Commons, we can recommend staying tunes to Novara Media’s Tyske Sour. Today’s show featured Sienna Rodgers and Owen Jones, and looked at a number of important questions, including whether Theresa May is prepared to sacrifice the Conservative Party, in order to cede meaningful ground the Labour Party’s demands for a Common Market deal, and the various divisions within Labour on question of a second referendum.

Finally, the bar we were in was starting to get pretty noisy by the end of the session. We’ve done our best to clear up the sound, but we ask your patience all the same.

(PS: listeners coming to this page may be curious if Molloy has plans to release any t-shirts bearing his “Tortuga on Thames” slogan. He has not responded to our queries).

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | Blubrry | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

IPE, IR Theory, Podcast

Episode 12: Marxism in IR, with Maïa Pal

2 Comments

Our guest for Episode 12 of Fully Automated is Maïa Pal, Senior Lecturer in International Relations at Oxford Brookes University. Among other things, Maïa is a scholar of early modern European history, focusing on the colonial origins of the modern state. She is an editor for Historical Materialism. And she is currently working on a book project, entitled Jurisdictional Accumulation: an Early Modern History of Law, Empires, and Capital (forthcoming, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). You can find her on Twitter @maia_pal

This episode represents the third installment in our occasional series, on Marxism in International Relations. Previous guests in this series include Bryant Sculos (Episode 9), on the the topic of Marxist pedagogy, and Kevin Funk and Sebastian Sclofsky (Episode 10), about the sorry state of Marxism in IR, and in Political Science more generally. In this episode, however, Maia helps us begin to think about what it might mean to apply Marxism, in IR.

I invited Maïa on the show after I read her recent piece, Introducing Marxism in International Relations, in e-IR. In this piece, she argues that the contribution of Marxism in IR is to reveal what other, less critical approaches may contrive to hide. That is, how many concepts we normally take for granted in IR, like the international itself, can distract us from analyzing the social relations that comprise them, and the history of the material conditions that shape those relations, in turn.

As we discuss, some of even the most critical scholars in IR eschew Marxism because they fear it constitutes a kind of dogmatism. In the interview, however, you’ll hear Maia refer to a letter that Karl Marx wrote, to Arnold Ruge, in which he states:

“But if the designing of the future and the proclamation of ready-made solutions for all time is not our affair, then we realize all the more clearly what we have to accomplish in the present—I am speaking of a ruthless criticism of everything existing, ruthless in two senses: The criticism must not be afraid of its own conclusions, nor of conflict with the powers that be.”

So, in this spirit, Pal outlines for us what we might perhaps want to call a relentless Marxism — one unafraid to examine itself, and its own suppositions about the world.

As Maia says in the interview, the function of Marxism in IR is to challenge and destabilize many of the concepts it cherishes, and which might appear otherwise stable to the scholar: not just the division between the national and the international, but that of the political and the economic. Marxism, Maia suggests, shatters the “linear progressive narrative of the history of international relations,” as a discipline, and opens us up to the possibility of a much more messy and brutal history; a history of empire, and imperial conquest!

We covered A LOT of ground in this interview, and the result is a slightly longer episode than usual. But I hope you’ll stick with us to the end. Later in the show, you’re going to hear us talk about some of the implications of Maia’s work for the left today: whether or in what respects can we say the state in globalization still has political capacity, and how might the left conceive of this capacity as it grapples with the question of anti-capitalist strategy; and how debates about xenophobia among the working class and so-called ‘deplorables’ can overlook not only the nuances of working-class electoral preferences, but can distract us from thinking about the ‘normal’ racism of the state as it works to categorize migrant populations as undeserving of access to wealthy zones and spaces, within globalization.

Towards the end, we’ll also chat about what its like to be an editor with a left-academic journal like Historical Materialism, and get a little bit into the rationale behind the journal’s latest issue, on identity politics. Finally, we get into Maia’s current book project, and why she believes that Marxists need to pay more attention to the significance of ‘jurisdictional accumulation’, both in the pre-history of capitalist globalization, and as a specific condition shaping the play of global capitalist dynamics today.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | Blubrry | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

IPE, Podcast

Episode 8: Colin Coulter on Ireland, Austerity’s “Model Pupil”?

Leave a comment

Coulter & Nagle, Eds.

On today’s episode, we are joined by Colin Coulter, of the National University of Ireland, Maynooth. Colin is a Lecturer in Sociology, and he has an article out recently in Critical Sociology, co-authored with Francisco Arqueros-Fernández and Angela Nagle, entitled Austerity’s Model Pupil: The Ideological Uses of Ireland during the Eurozone Crisis.

As some listeners may know, I have myself been working on a book about the role of culture in Irish austerity. And I’ve always found Colin to be a really great writer on this subject. He has a real knack for seamlessly blending together both analysis of the material dynamics of the Irish financial crisis, with a critique of the role of culture as force sustaining the legitimacy of austerity as the necessary solution. This cultural project is one being carried out by government institutions, to be sure, but also by a number of other cultural agencies that exist within Irish society, as they seek to orient Irish people better to understand their responsibility in causing the crisis.

But Colin also has an analysis of how certain strains within the Irish academic left have perhaps enabled this process — namely by overlooking questions to do with the production of capitalist culture. Colin explains the role of capitalist culture in Ireland in a really accessible manner, so its great to have him on the show. I think you’ll really enjoy the interview.

You can find a copy of Colin’s article on my Dropbox. Remember, if you like what you hear, please leave us a positive review on iTunes. As ever, if you have any feedback, you can reach us on Twitter @occupyirtheory. Enjoy the show!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | Blubrry | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

IPE, IR Theory, Podcast, Strategy

Episode 3: Book Club – Peter Frase’s ‘Four Futures’

1 Comment

Four Futures

This episode is the first in an occasional ‘book club’ series of podcasts we will be doing, in an around the topic of fully automated luxury communism. This episode’s book is Four Futures, by Peter Frase (which is part of the Jacobin series, from Verso Books).

My guests on the show are Laura Horn and Phil Davis. Laura is a political economist working at the University of Roskilde, just outside of Copenhagen in Denmark. While her own research has mainly focused on dimensions of capitalist restructuring in the European Union, she has a strong political and personal interest in the nexus between political economy and science fiction. Four Futures is one of the texts she uses in her course ‘Repoliticising Capitalism: Contradictions, critique and alternatives’.

Phil Davis is a molecular biologist working in the Biodefense sector in the Washington DC area. He’s currently working towards a master’s degree in Bioinformatics from University of Maryland University College. Four Futures sits at the intersection of his enthusiasm for both left-wing politics and futurology. His hobbies also include music.

If you have any questions or comments, please send us a tweet @occupyirtheory

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | Android | Blubrry | Email | TuneIn | RSS | More

Academic Commentary, IPE

Reply, ‘Always Already Podcast’ on Martijn Konings’s ‘Emotional Logic of Capitalism’

1 Comment

It was my pleasure recently to be invited by the ‘Always Already Podcast’ team to put in a guest appearance on their show, and respond to their recent episode on Martijn Konings’s fascinating book, The Emotional Logic of Capitalism. They offered me a 10-minute slot, and ran it in Episode 19 of their Epistemic Unruliness series. Below, you can find a slightly edited and extended version of my remarks, which were provoked by their own engagement with Konings’s book, but also by my own, continuing work on austerity and recession in Ireland. For ease of reading’s sake, I have added in some material from remarks I made at another talk I gave on February 17, this year, at Ohio State’s ‘Research in International Politics’ (RIP) group, entitled Austerity as Tragedy? From Neoliberal Governmentality to the Critique of Late Capitalist Control:

Continue reading Reply, ‘Always Already Podcast’ on Martijn Konings’s ‘Emotional Logic of Capitalism’ →

IPE

Debating Austerity with Dan O’Brien

Leave a comment

UPDATE: the letter below was subsequently printed, and can be read here (with some alterations made by the paper’s editor, it seems)…

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/nothing-to-fear-about-prospect-of-a-socialistled-government-34157028.html

This is my letter to the Irish Independent (I know, I know, why bother…), about Dan O’Brien’s piece today:

To Whom It May Concern,

Dan O’Brien (29/10) claims that because there are no self-described neoliberals, it is not possible to engage with their ideas. But surely he would not deny the historical existence of self-described free market radicals, like Milton Friedman and Gary Becker, or the historic influence of their ideas on government policymakers, like Paul Volker and Margaret Thatcher.

Neoliberalism, quite simply, is a theory that advocates applying the laws of the market to as many domains of human existence as possible, as intensely as possible. Neoliberals take up the ideas of early liberals, like Adam Smith and David Ricardo. Those thinkers had faith in the virtue of market-based competition as a mechanism for optimizing the distribution goods and services. Moreover, they believed the experience of buying and selling in the marketplace was a moral corrective, producing over time a class of responsible and capable citizens, named ‘entrepreneurs’.

Continue reading Debating Austerity with Dan O’Brien →

IPE, IR Theory

#RubySeries List for #ISA2015

4 Comments

Following Cynthia Weber’s recent post over at Duck of Minerva, there has been a lot of debate about the International Studies Association’s planned ‘Saphire Series’ for the upcoming annual conference in New Orleans. Some of that debate has been taking place at the #occupyirtheory/ipe Facebook group. With now over 175 comments, there have been a wide ranging set of proposals and ideas about the issues raised by the Series, and how to respond to them. Many will be using the #Ruby hashtag on Twitter to maintain communications on these issues as the conference proceeds. Another idea has been for people to list any panels they feel might offer the possibility of institutionally balancing the dominant ‘white, male and tenured’ voices the Series is showcasing. Interested readers can also follow the Twitter hashtag #RubySeries for updates on these panels.

Disclaimer: this list is based on suggestions made in context of an open and ongoing discussion at the OccupyIR group on Facebook, among other places, about ISA’s Sapphire Series. It is not intended as a way of ‘promoting’ select panels. It is merely a way for people to link their panels together in an expression of solidarity in response to the perceived elitism of the Sapphire series. If you are part of a panel that you do want listed, let me know. Similarly, if you do not want your panel listed, I am happy to remove it for you.

Ruby Series: Celebrating Multiple Voices in Conversation

Current as of  02/17/15 — 71 Panels!

Wednesday

  1. WA10: Presidential Theme Panel: Advancing Global IR (I): Challenges And Prospects
  2. WA11: Rethinking Silence, Voice and Agency in Feminist Approaches to Security
  3. WA21: Local Actors and the Diffusion of Gender Norms in Developing Regions
  4. WA41: Decolonizing Methods: New Tools for Global IR
  5. WA52: Anti-Colonial Poetics and the Lived Experience of Politics
  6. WA 56: Presidential Theme Panel – Indigenous Peoples, Values And Sovereignty, In The Study Of Global Politics
  7. WB30: Presidential Theme Panel: Bandung+60: Legacies and Contradictions
  8. WB31: Postcolonialism, Feminism And Global International Relations: Remembering The Legacy Of Geeta Chowdhry
  9. WB78: Women’s Activism in Revolutions and Crises
  10. WC18: Embodiment, Experience and War: Methodological Challenges and Reflections
  11. WC19: Do We Know Gender in Peacebuilding? (I) Gender Mainstreaming and UNSCR 1325
  12. WC40: Girls, Gender and the Post-2015 Global Development Agenda
  13. WC60: Women in Conflict: Perspectives
  14. WD02: FTGS Eminent Scholar Panel Honoring Shirin M. Rai
  15. WD08: New Thinking on Religions and Civilizations in World Politics
  16. WD52: Representation and Practice: Bodies, Borders and Orders of Security
  17. WD58: Living Globalisation: Female Academics at Home and Abroad

Thursday

  1. TA10: What’s Wrong with a Singular World?
  2. TA11: Gendering International Organisations
  3. TA 22: Race And International Relaons: A Debate Around John Hobson’s “The Eurocentric Conception Of World Politics”
  4. TA30: Borders and Belonging: Gender, Nation, Ethnicity in Transnational Relations
  5. TA29: roundtable on “(Everyday) Sexism in the Academy: Stories & Strategies”
  6. TA38: roundtable: Does Russell Brand Have A Point, Or Does Being Cheeky Count As Revolution?
  7. TA50: The End of Militarized Masculinity? Global Perspectives on Gender and Traveling Concepts
  8. TA51: Is the Personal-National Globally Political? Theorizing the International Diffusion of LGBTQ Rights
  9. TA69 Claiming a Voice: Politics in a World of Inequality.
  10. TB30 Presidential Theme Panel – Feminist International Relations Today: A Discipline Transformed?
  11. TB50: Global Feminist IR
  12. TC02 Race and Racism in International Relations
  13. TC06: Presidential Theme Panel – How The Search For ‘Non-Western IR’ Led To A Reflection Of The ‘Self’: (Un)Learning IR In And Beyond The Classroom
  14. TC07: Globalizing International Studies Pedagogies
  15. TC16: Gender and Human Rights, 1:45pm
  16. TC21: Art as Subject, Art as Method
  17. TC56: Decolonial Methodologies: Critiques and Experiences from the Fieldwork
  18. TC72: Critical Friends and De(Con)Structure Critics: How Should Feminist Academics Engage with Global Institutions?
  19. TD09: IR’s Eurocentric Limitations TD21: roundtable on “After Deepwater Horizon: Rebuilding Indigenous Communities After the BP Gulf Oil Disaster”
  20. TD14: Colonial Legacies and Decolonizing Trajectories
  21. TD33: Making Sense of Emotions, Politics and War
  22. TD52: Global Human Trafficking and Gender
  23. TD57: Global Masculinities in a Transnational World

Friday

  1. FA13: Conceptualising the Use of Sexual Violence and Rape in War
  2. FA22: Do Something: Activism, Responsibility and the Politics of ‘Helping’
  3. FA47: Gendering the Global Political Economy
  4. FB10: Presidential Theme Panel: Decolonizing the Western Academy: Postcolonial Challenges to Global IR
  5. FB27: LGBT Issues and Diffusion
  6. FB34: Queering/Querying Global Political Economy
  7. FC01: Angela Davis honored as IPE section’s 2015 Outstanding Activist Scholar in New Orleans. (co-chaired by J. Ann Tickner and Hasmet M. Uluorta. More information will be coming shortly. If you have any questions please contact Hasmet — huluorta@trentu.ca )
  8. FC19: Deconstructing Silence and Agency in Sites of Insecurity
  9. FC26: Political Engagement and Political Alternatives in The Age of Austerity In Europe
  10. FC27: Queering Global Politics: Destabilization or Disciplinarity
  11. FC39 Presidential Theme Panel: Three Decades of Worlding IR: A roundtable Retrospective
  12. FC55: Addressing Gender-Based Violence: Issues and Responses
  13. FC57: Presidential Theme Panel “Postcolonialism, Race And IR: War, Capitalism, Segregation, Tribes, Literature”
  14. FC72: Women in Conflict: Agency and Human Security
  15. FC74: Sex Gender Violence Desire?
  16. FD36: Queering IR Theory
  17. FD37 Presidential Theme Panel/Global Development Distinguished Scholar Panel in Honors of Prof. Pal Ahluwalia
  18. FD56: Presidential Theme Panel – W.E.B. Du Bois: The Global Color Line And North American IR
  19. FD57: Making Bodies International
  20. FD59: Gender-Based Violence in ‘War’ and ‘Peace’

Saturday

  1. SA07: Regional Institution Building In Comparative Perspective
  2. SA25: The Global Dead (II): Mourning, Suffering, Witnessing
  3. SA31: Economic Development and Women’s (Dis)Empowerment
  4. SA41: Art Matters: On the Aesthetics of Violence, Death and Memory
  5. SA61: Queer Theory and the International
  6. SA72: International Relations as the Crossroads of the Global and the Local
  7. SB17: Beyond Biopolitics and Risk in Post 9/11 Critical Scholarship: The Affective Politics of the War on Terror and Beyond
  8. SB47: Masculinities, Militarism and Feminist Security Studies
  9. SB43: Bodies In/And/Of/For Global Health
  10. SB54: Sexualised Violence, Surveillance and New Security Technologies
  11. SB57: Presidential Theme Panel – 34 Ways To Say “International Relations”: The Teaching, Research And Interna