International Political Sociology (IPS) stands as an interdisciplinary field at the crossroads of international relations (IR), sociology, and political theory. Rooted in the critique of traditional IR paradigms, IPS seeks to bridge gaps between domestic, transnational, and global dynamics, focusing on how social processes shape and are shaped by politics at multiple levels. This article traces the evolution of IPS through nine pivotal theories that have significantly influenced its development.
1. Realism and Its Sociological Limitations
Realism, particularly dominant during the mid-20th century, is often seen as a precursor to IPS because of the challenges it inadvertently posed for sociological inquiry. Rooted in the belief that international politics operates in an anarchic system where states pursue power and security, realism largely ignored social forces and non-state actors. While classical realists such as Hans Morgenthau acknowledged human nature’s role, structural realists like Kenneth Waltz focused solely on systemic constraints.
The sociological critique emerged from this omission, questioning how domestic social structures, cultural contexts, and transnational relationships inform state behavior. IPS grew partly as a reaction to realism’s narrow focus, seeking to incorporate broader societal forces into its analysis.
2. Liberalism and the Role of Transnational Actors
Liberalism countered realism by emphasizing the role of cooperation, international institutions, and non-state actors in fostering global peace. The liberal theory introduced the concept of transnational networks, including corporations, NGOs, and epistemic communities, which influenced global governance and policy-making.
IPS drew from liberalism by highlighting how social interactions among these actors create norms, identities, and practices that transcend borders. The sociological turn in liberal thought underscored the role of individuals and collective actors in shaping political outcomes, a cornerstone of IPS.
3. Constructivism: The Social Fabric of International Politics
Constructivism, championed by scholars like Alexander Wendt, marked a significant shift by emphasizing the socially constructed nature of international politics. Unlike realism and liberalism, which viewed the international system as a given, constructivism argued that state interests, identities, and norms are products of social interactions.
IPS expanded on constructivist insights, delving deeper into how power and discourse shape these interactions. The field investigates not only the construction of state identities but also how global hierarchies and local practices intersect, producing complex political and social outcomes.
4. Postcolonial Theory: Unearthing Power Dynamics
Postcolonial theory challenges Eurocentric narratives in international relations by foregrounding the histories and experiences of colonized peoples. Thinkers like Edward Said and Gayatri Spivak revealed how colonial legacies persist in contemporary global politics through power imbalances and cultural domination.
IPS integrates postcolonial insights to explore how global inequalities are reproduced and resisted. By examining issues such as migration, border politics, and racialized hierarchies, IPS emphasizes the role of marginalized voices in reshaping international politics.
5. Feminist Theory: Gendering Global Politics
Feminist theory introduced a critical lens to understand how gender shapes international relations. Scholars like Cynthia Enloe highlighted the often-overlooked contributions of women in global politics, from their roles in war economies to their activism in peace movements.
IPS builds on feminist critiques by analyzing how gender intersects with race, class, and nationality in global contexts. The focus on micro-level practices, such as the everyday lives of migrants or the gendered impacts of security policies, reflects the field’s commitment to nuanced, intersectional analysis.
6. Foucauldian Perspectives: Power, Discourse, and Governance
Michel Foucault’s theories of power and discourse profoundly influenced IPS. Foucault shifted the focus from state-centric power to the diffuse, everyday practices through which power operates. His concept of “governmentality” — the art of governing beyond the state — provided a framework for understanding global governance as a network of practices involving states, institutions, and individuals.
In IPS, Foucauldian approaches examine how security, development, and migration policies are shaped by specific discourses and practices. For instance, the securitization of borders reflects not just state interests but broader societal anxieties and normative frameworks.
7. Theories of Globalization: Interconnected Realities
The rise of globalization theories in the late 20th century offered new ways to conceptualize the interconnectedness of the world. Scholars like Anthony Giddens and Manuel Castells examined how technological advancements, economic integration, and cultural exchanges reshape social and political life.
IPS incorporates globalization theories to study how local and global processes interact. For example, it explores how global financial markets influence domestic policies or how diasporic communities maintain transnational ties while navigating local identities.
8. Critical Security Studies: Rethinking Security
Critical security studies (CSS) emerged as a direct challenge to traditional security paradigms that prioritized state-centric, military-focused approaches. Drawing from constructivist and poststructuralist insights, CSS redefines security as a social construct, encompassing issues like human security, environmental threats, and cybersecurity.
IPS aligns closely with CSS, emphasizing the role of societal actors in defining and contesting security policies. By examining how security discourses shape identities and practices, IPS reveals the underlying power dynamics in seemingly neutral policies.
9. The Anthropological Turn: Everyday Practices in Global Politics
The anthropological turn in IPS focuses on the micro-level practices that constitute global politics. Drawing from ethnography and cultural anthropology, this approach examines how ordinary people experience and influence international phenomena, such as migration, trade, or conflict.
This perspective challenges top-down analyses by highlighting the agency of marginalized groups and the significance of local knowledge. For instance, studying refugee communities’ coping mechanisms reveals how global migration policies are negotiated and resisted on the ground.
Conclusion
International Political Sociology represents a dynamic field that bridges the theoretical and practical, the global and local, and the structural and individual. Its evolution reflects a growing recognition of the complexity of international relations and the inadequacy of traditional paradigms in capturing this complexity. By integrating insights from realism, liberalism, constructivism, postcolonial and feminist theories, Foucauldian perspectives, globalization studies, critical security studies, and anthropology, IPS offers a comprehensive framework for understanding the social dimensions of global politics.
As the field continues to grow, it remains committed to interrogating power, amplifying marginalized voices, and fostering interdisciplinary dialogue. The theories discussed here underscore IPS’s central premise: that the political is inherently social, and the global cannot be understood without the local.