Postmodern
Postmodern has significantly impacted on today’s identity in the social construction of the political climate. The idea has birthed the concept of nation that comprises of a community united together by common descent. Modernity has an arbitrary nature that frees people from ignorance, superstitions, and set institutional ideas that determine destiny. Particularly, modernism captures the changing nature of international relations in pursuit of progress to create order in the cultural, social political and economic chaos. Modernism has allowed the extraction of elements that are dominant for development through dismissing potentially harmful policies. For example, the approach has eliminated negative icons preventing various nations from transacting businesses. Leaders and political movements have been compelled to adhere to the compelling line of argument about development by interpreting and admitting their failures. According to modernism external pressures can be controlled through effective international communication. Modernization among nations can be promoted through eliminating careless spending, corruption, natural disinclination towards progress, and communist incursion.
However, in the recent past modernism approaches to international affairs have been under attack from various political analysts. The approach criticizes the dominant understanding of international relations as a world of sovereign states with the identity of difference. Specifically, they challenge the notion of dichotomies and sovereignty that is regulated by power mechanisms that limit political interference. It is argued that modernization has made an insignificant contribution to the theorization of international relations as it relies on knowledge to reinforce the existing power relations. However, the analysis of the international affairs varies as it comprises of various disciplines with various historical accounts on the formation of states and society as a whole. Modernism in itself does not incorporate the multiplicity of perceptions behind wars and undermines the ideological underpinnings. Although postmodernism is a critical tool in analyzing the international affairs to various international relations challenges, it does not offer solutions to existing problems. Postmodernization has been described to be synonymous with the moral relativism that contributes to deviant behaviour. The culturally conservative activists argue that the theory is created by a specific culture and only exists in that culture. Hence, the implementation of the system ends up dominating other cultures. On the other hand, Marxist depicts that our perception is a reflection of the existing material world that paints a picture of the disappointed revolutionary generation. Marxist argues that society and culture cannot be fully understood through separating the society’s economic base. However, he agrees that there is a certain portion of social construction that is shaped by the relations of economic exchange. Marxist critics the role of postmodern theory in international relations stating that it perceives power as dispersed other than centralized within institutions. Postmodernism cuts off the political struggles and groupings, with respect to collaboration and communication. The political institution is predisposed to change the bias in favour of a modernist framework that is likely to raise more problems. Postmodernism without check results in fundamentalism and oppression that inhibits the formation of commonalities between people. The post-modern worldview fails to condemn evil such as rape, genocide, abuse and slavery, and hence, it is termed as disempowering approach. The majority of the postmodernism strains tend to relate values such as ethical standards such as not harming others. Another strong critique against the post modernism arises in the oppression of developing countries by developed countries. While some practices may vary between cultures is important to have core standards that protect the fundamentals of human dignity.
Post-modernism has been criticized for ignoring the truth through causing human suffering while condemning the bureaucratic methods used in institutions to solve them. The approach over-determines the importance of text and erases the context and subjectivity of the individual that spoke the text. Modernism has trapped the international relation in language games that robs reformers the ability for constructive change. The theory takes the reformers toolbox in creating rights, protection for human dignity, at the expense of establishing justice. Postmodernism subscribes to the notion that the present arrangements are created by people and are conceived by the truth. Hence, the knowledge and truth depend on human perception, which condemns the mainstream international relations because of the underlying nature of assumptions. Modernism tends to create their bases of international relations on observable facts and ignores the unobservable ones, for example, the socially built cross-border structures. Constructivism is equally opposed to modernism because it gives a limited view of international relations that is determined by norms and practices.
Modernism has a significant effect today especially the idea of identity as a social construction in the political climate. However, communities involved in citizenry are concerned on policy-making and their interests, and hence, pose problems to the authorities that are sensitive to public protest. Additionally, the postmodern approach may not be acceptable in all nations as the implementation relies heavily on the head of state who might be opposed to the idea. That is, postmodernism can result in fragmentation, which explains the long post-World War II. During the period the economic expansion collapsed during the Fordist regime that was caused by capital accumulation.
Undoubtedly, modernism is a critical tool in analyzing international affairs and has a strong basis of argument foundation. However, it fails to consider their writings are constituting ignored thoughts that lack sensitivity to the importance of consensus and values. Postmodernism in international relations is founded on the definition of its mission and production of new world-textual interpretations. Additionally, modernism creates ambiguity about the historically constructed aspects. Notably, post-modernism combines the diplomatic and historical elements of international relations to have a common ground. Modernization is intended to have the interest that is the driving force for economic, political, and social events to serve the general welfare. However, by nature interest is exclusive and hence, some people enjoy political privilege within the larger collectivity. For interest results to be attained two conditions are necessary, which are the capacity to organize people to actual tasks of securing the privilege. Another condition is that the state should have the ability to defend the interest. It is argued that modernization has made an insignificant contribution to the theorization of international relations as it relies on knowledge to reinforce the existing power relations. However, the analysis of the international affairs varies as it comprises of various disciplines with various historical accounts on the formation of states and society as a whole. Hence, the main strength in attaining modernism in international relations is through avoidance of negative manipulation and propaganda that can trigger anarchy in the international system that can often result in the conspiracy. Postmodernism entails the positive rethinking of history to develop a society founded on ethics, interest, and truth.