LECTURE 1: WHY STUDY GLOBAL HISTORY IN AN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS DEGREE?
II. Frequently Asked Questions
• FAQ#1: Why study the past rather than try to analyse the present or predict the future?
o “The owl of Minerva spread its wings only with the falling of dusk.”
o Knowledge can only come once it’s already gone or fading; then we can look back and learn lessons from the past
• FAQ#2: I want to theorize about the present, I want to be a theorist rather than a historian, do I really need to study histo ry? Will
I ever use it for theory-building?
o History as a ‘closet of facts’.
o Good theory comes from good history.
• FAQ#3: What is good enough history for students who are not future historians but future international relations specialists?
o There has always been a lot of history in IR, but there isn’t always much reflection on what it means to use history
properly.
• Approaches to history in IR: A spectrum
o From Closet of facts
(Especially neorealism)
Past: Just lots of facts to test theories about the present
History as monochrome flatland — always the same
Emphasis on continuities
o Middle-way approaches (used in this course!)
(Constructivism, the English School, historical sociology, conceptual history)
Use history in some detail (not just closet of facts)
Try to establish patterns (not just a random list)
Leopold von Ranke
o To shopping list
(Especially poststructuralism)
Past: List of minor events/accidents that have huge impact
No discernible patterns in history — always different
Emphasis on discontinuities
There is no structure in history
People use different instances from history and make it relevant
All that really matters is chance, an accumulation of chance
Focault
In this course: Crucial continuities and discontinuities of modern international relations and what they mean for our contemporary world.
III. What are the essential conceptual tools for studying history?
• History
o History is:
The general study of the past
A nonfictional account of the past
A craft
o History aspires to:
Construct and tell stories about the discovered evidence of the past
Understand and explain past events by interpreting their meaning
o A historian develops a specific argument, which s/he believes is accurate on the basis of the existing evidence
Why and how did events happen?
What caused an event?
Which individuals play important roles?
What is the meaning of the events studied, in terms of the past and of the present? Why do they matter?
• Metahistory
o Emphasizes patterns and regularities
o Seeks to establish what are the great drivers of historical development
o Seeks to establish the larger meaning of history
About big ideas
o Popular in C19, bad reputation in C20, now making a comeback
o Key term associated with metahistory: The longue duree (Fernand Braudel)
Take long view of history to identify long-term trends/patterns and distinguish the contingent from the
permanent
• Antihistory
o The idea that when we speak of history, fiction and non-fiction are identical
o Particularly relevant concept in age of ‘fake news’ and ‘post truth'
o Use the tools given by comparative literature
o Examples: The Holocaust never happened; Barack Obama was not born in the US, the moon landing was a hoax
o Related to relativism
Relativism: There is no truth out there and all narratives are equal
Extreme relativists turn to what they find the most useful fictions for their own purposes
Antihistory is fiction and speculation!!! — not history proper
,IV. What is Global History?
> There’s big history, universal history, world history, global history, transnational history
• Big history vs. global history
o Big history
Also called ‘universal history’ and sometimes ‘world history'
Concerned with the history of the world since the big band
Integrates natural sciences (cosmology, geology, biology)
Big history is not an academic discipline; it's people trying to understand history on different temporal
space
o Universal history
Not the same as big history!
Sometimes also called world history
Global history is the story of connections within the global human community
Global history only exists once we have globalization
Look beyond single country/region and into development of connected whole
• Global history and IR
o The human world comprises a multiplicity of co-existing societies
o Five implications of multiplicity:
Co-existence
Difference
Interaction
Combination
Dialectical change
Taking something and making it your own, e.g. sushi made in L.A.
o Francis Bacon: “printing (the press), gunpowder, and the nautical compass have altered the face and state of the
world: first, in literary matters; second, in warfare; third, in navigation
Karl Marx: The three inventions that ushered in burgeois society (gunpowder, the compass, and the
printing press) were probably all invented in China
LECTURE 2: THE RISE AND FALL OF EUROPEAN EMPIRES
I. INTROUDCTION
• European empires have a big influence on IR and how the world looks today
o Their legacy can be negative: slavery, suffering, violence
• Legacies of the Dutch Empire
o New York flag: Resembles the flag of William of Orange
o South African apartheid: Deep Dutch colonial legacy, Dutch used to rule South Africa as a colony, system of slavery
later manifested itself in the Apartheid regime
o Jakarta: Architecture influenced by Dutch architecture
• Imperial expansion, defining features
o 1) Process of destruction
This destruction happens on two levels:
a) Physical (symbolic) and material destruction
The destruction of cultural goods to manifest own sovereignty and as a punishment to the
colonised
e.g. British India: Whenever there was an uprising against the British, they would destroy cultural
goods as a form of punishment and as a way of manifesting their own sovereignty — in order to
assert themselves, the British would destroy and build something else
b) Psychological destruction/colonization of the mind
Destruction of cultural rituals that happen in the mind
Native traditions and goods are being pushed back, replaced by the traditions of the colonizers
— portions of identity removed
e.g. Replacing Persian and Hindustani as languages of trade and governance and bringing in
their own language, English
o 2) Process of creation
Where the empire spreads to, it always tries to set rules in the local structure
When it destroys something, it tries to replace it with something of its own creation e.g. British building
railways in India — created by the British or the local population; they were the workforce?
Unprecedented amount of violence and destruction
We have to look at elements of creation and destruction in an impartial way
Howe: Imperialism/empire used to be a positive word, today it is portrayed as evil — new meanings of
words throughout history
o 3) Major consequences to this day
Colonial legacy: Many people in India (and The Netherlands) speak English; Constitution of Pakistan is
read in English, also language of litigation; fighting a case in India is done in English
II. THE IMPORTANCE OF EUROPEAN EMPIRES IN MODERN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
1. The geographical scope of European empires
, o Dutch empire: In absolute terms, one of the smallest European empires
o British empire: Huge empire,
2. The chronological scope of European empires
o European imperialism begins: 1492
Beginning of the modern period; when European started to sail around the world to conquer
Starts process of settler colonialism; process of discovery
o Decolonization: mostly 1950s-1970s (various exceptions, e.g. Latin America in early 1800s)
3. Broadening the focus of IR
o IR studies how sovereign entities interact and what kind of system there is — Anarchical? Can there be a world
government?
o Basic unit in IR: the state — if we look back a few hundred years, we see IR played out with a system of empires; not
just between empires (trade), but within those empires (cultural exchange, economic exchange)
Most nation-states were created through nationalism, trying to portray a specific homogenous cultural
entity that claims nationhood
o But modern international relations (~1400-now) mostly world of empires
Relationships between empires instead of between states
Relationships between societies within empires
o Conceptual issues: e.g. international anarchy or international hierarchy?
World under imperial rule: Anarchical system of a lot of independent sovereign states never really
measured up to that
New construction we made to understand the past 50-60 years
Not useful if we want to go further back
If we look back at the past 500 years, there was always some sort of government that was ruling over a
broad empire
Key order that has existed in the world has been a hierarchy, where you place a specific imperial
government at the top and then you have other forms in the periphery that are hierarchically
below
o European empires experienced moments of spread and moments of contraction; simply by retreating to national
shores, the implications and impact on other countries does not go away
III. WHAT IS AN EMPIRE?
1. Empire: definition
o An empire is: a large, composite, multi-ethnic or multinational political unit, usually created by conquest, and divided
between a dominant center and subordinate, sometimes far distant, peripheries
o A large political body rules from a specifid center and has probably conquered other parts
Center ruled by national group that asserts its dominance over the other parts
2. Empire: six core characteristics
o 1) Direct (centralized) and indirect (rule)
Direct rule means the central government rules directly over the affairs of the colonized land
Indirect rule: e.g. Princely states (India had over 500 princely states)
British East India Company originally went out to establish trading posts in the 18th century
Established trade relationships with local rulers: Used local elite for indirect rule in order to push
through their own agenda in princely states
Local government could retain the day to day affairs but they had to pay tribute to the British to
protect the local elite’s wishes — local rulers allowed to retain their sovereignty, if they promised
to pay and to not revolt
For some time after the British had declared sovereignty over parts of India, it wasn’t ruled
directly by the Queen — they used intermediaries, in the form of indirect rule
Benefit of working with local elites
A process of cultural translation
Power is not asserted in the same way all over the world
Overtaking certain aspects of another societies' culture (in this case the
periphery (elite) starting to live and dress like the core elite)
British not held to the same standard for atrocities committed by the princes as they
would be in the local press if anything went wrong in British India
Direct rule: e.g. Colonies (British India)
Queen appointing someone as governor general of a colony and ruling through them directly
Moral restraint preventing the British from doing whatever they want in the colonies; this moral
restraint did not apply to indirect rule in the princely states — hostile press in London (ideas of
Liberalism spreading)
o 2) Established and maintained by violence
Violence/force can take two forms:
1) Material: Establishes itself in the military takeover of a specific territory
Usually in the form of a conquest; establishes its material superiority through a system
of laws (rebellion considered a crime; people in prison are mainly freedom fighters)
2) Psychological: Tries to destroy specific cultural markers that could potentially threaten the
empire
o 3) Dominant ‘core’ economically exploiting the ‘periphery'
Disproportionate relationship between the flow of goods
, People in the core want something they don't have in their own national boundaries try to get
those goods in the periphery and ship them back to the core
One of the main reasons people establish empires is to obtain things they don’t have
Empires always have an element of economic exploitation
Economic exploitation is 1) material goods, and 2) cheap labor
e.g. Cotton harvested in India, exported to industrial centers in the UK, then sent back to India
and sold at a huge profit
“We must find new lands from which we can easily obtain raw materials and at the same time exploit the
cheap slave labour that is available from the natives of the colonies” – Cecil Rhodes
o 4) Cultural difference between people at core and periphery; belief in superiority of culture by people at core
Was the civilizational mission that specific European empires adopted just an excuse to economically
exploit people, or was there an element in which people geniunly believed they had the mission to go out
and civilize?
Early years of empires, there was a lot of idealism: difficult to convince people to enslave other people —
always good to have a legitimizing narrative, a higher purpose, not only for money but something greater,
bringing something to these ‘Barbaric’ people who 'don’t have morality or rule of law’
o 5) European empires (specifically) associated with racial hierarchies and racist beliefs
Cultural hierarchy: Only possible to argue for a civilizational mission if you believe you are at the peak of
civilization — belief of superiority, racial beliefs
Shift from civilizational mission, which indicated a specific cultural hierarchy (Europeans believed
themselves to be the peak of modern civilisation)
Belief that at the core, all human beings are the same; if you believe them to be inherently
barbaric, the civilisation mission has no point (e.g. early colonialists wore more native
(aristocratic) attire than the natives themselves)
Belief in superiority?
Civilisational mission was always racially tinted and tainted, a far away dream never to be
realised
There was an element of not yet: no matter how much the colonised adapted to the
British culture, they would always be not ready to take affairs in own hand
You can only be ready when you belong to the 'right' race; Europeans are inherently
better (white supremacy)
To colonialism (believe in non-equality of ppl)
With the rise of princely states, that were not necessarily following British culture and norms,
people stopped believing that one could re-educate someone to think like the modern European
No purpose to try and bring these people into the same system, since not everyone is able to
appreciate European supremacy and civilisation that is 'inherently better’ — basic ethnic
difference
Once they departed from the view that all humans could be educated into the same European
ideal, racism kicked in — ’not everyone has the intellectual capacity to think like Europeans’ e.g.
intermarrying with the local population was not considered proper because of racial beliefs;
started living outside of the cities, segregating themselves from the local population)
Foreign Affairs Journal's ancestor was the Journal of Race Development (explored attempts to develop
people in a specific way — When is a race ready to govern themselves?
Development as a concept now (economic) vs. development then (moral and political
development of a race)
Writings of Rudyard Kipling, The White Man's Burden (Jungle Book: Mowgli's salvation from the
jungle): There is something burdening white people and they have to go out and do this
civilizational mission; fate has chosen them, they're doing it by divine right — legitimated the
US's overtake of the Philippines in 1899
o 6) Mass movement of people, through both voluntary migration (e.g. settler colonialism) and forced migration (e.g.
slave trade)
Voluntary migration: People move to the periphery to settle, settler colonialism e.g. US, Canada
Forced migration
1) Slave trade, people were transported involuntarily
2) Buying and selling of Indian land in the US: settler colonialism, white people settling and
pushing out the locals, forcing them to leave
IV. EMPIRE, IMPERIALISM, COLONIALISM
1. Empire
o A large, composite, multi-ethnic or multinational political unit, usually created by conquest, and divided between a
dominant center and subordinate, sometimes far distant, peripheries
One entity that rules directly (centralised) and indirectly (decentralised)
Established and maintained by violence
Dominant core that economically exploits the periphery
Belief of superiority of one group over the other: (in European empires in particular) these beliefs can have
strong racial connotations; leads to building racial hierarchies to maintain an imperial structure
2. Imperialism
o The actions and attitudes which create or uphold such big political units, or less obvious kinds of control/domination
o e.g. trade relationship between a dominant country and economically weaker state, imbalance of power
