Roger D. Spegele – författare

International relations theory is witnessing a veritable explosion of works within the areas of modernism and postmodernism, yet there has been no attempt to compare these theories and their sources according to a common criterion or logical form. This author argues that while these pioneering, imaginative and exciting theoretical works are disparate, they also share a common thread that seeks to express emancipatory goals for international relations.This book provides an in-depth critical study of this genre of theorizing that he names ‘Emancipatory International Relations’. Spegele develops a framework to help the reader understand both the differences and commonalities in modernist and postmodernist emancipatory thinking in International Relations. He critically analyzes modernist theories, discourses, narratives and postmodernist theory and practice, feminist emancipatory discourses and postmodernist international discourse and concludes by examining the coherence, viability and plausibility of emancipatory discourses in international relations whether modernist or postmodernist.This challenging and innovative volume will be of interest to students and researchers of international relations.

In this 1996 book Roger Spegele argues that in the past international theorists have failed to recognise that there is not one conception of international relations, subdivided into different theories and approaches, but at least three wholly different conceptions of the subject. Though scholars are increasingly prepared to accept this, there is still no consensus about what to call these conceptions, how to describe them, and why they should be studied. This book attempts to fill this gap. The author first examines two conceptions of IR - positivism-empiricism and emancipatory international relations - which challenge political realism. He then defends a revised version of realism, called 'evaluative political realism', from challenges arising from its rivals, with the aim of defining a conception of political realism which is coherent, viable, and attractive.

In this 1996 book Roger Spegele argues that in the past international theorists have failed to recognise that there is not one conception of international relations, subdivided into different theories and approaches, but at least three wholly different conceptions of the subject. Though scholars are increasingly prepared to accept this, there is still no consensus about what to call these conceptions, how to describe them, and why they should be studied. This book attempts to fill this gap. The author first examines two conceptions of IR - positivism-empiricism and emancipatory international relations - which challenge political realism. He then defends a revised version of realism, called 'evaluative political realism', from challenges arising from its rivals, with the aim of defining a conception of political realism which is coherent, viable, and attractive.