Kameron Schreffler first blog

 


Kameron Schreffler

02/01/2021



"Why Race Matters in International Relations" by Kelebogile Zvobgo and Meredith Loken can be connected to another article I read in another class titled "Color-Blindness is Counterproductive" by Aida Harvey Wingfield. Wingsfields article can add another perspective regarding race in regards to International Relations. Wingfield says, "moving away from colorblindness can serve as a pathway towards anti-racism." (Wingfield, 2015). Later going on to say, "as whites came to understand themselves as members of a racial group which enjoyed unearned privileges and benefits, this compelled them to forge a different sense of white identity built on anti-racism rather than simply supporting the status quo." (Wingfield, 2015).

We can connect this to Zvobgo and Loken's article regarding International Relations by taking an anti-racist approach explained by Wingfield. As Zvobgo and Loken's said, "mainstream IR does not take race or racism seriously; it also does not take diversity and inclusion in the profession seriously" (Zvobgo and Lokens, 2020). When implementing the Wingfield approach into International Relations, we can understand ourselves along with our privilege.

Zvobgo and Loken's article says, "Core concepts, like anarchy and hierarchy, are raced: They are rooted in discourses that center and favor Europe and the West. These concepts implicitly and explicitly pit "developed" against "undeveloped," "modern" against "primitive," "civilized" against "uncivilized." And their use is racist: These invented binaries are used to explain subjugation and exploitation around the globe." (Zvobgo and Loken, 2020). Using Wingfields thinking instead of a "developed" vs. "undeveloped" world, privileged parts of the world will no longer look down on unprivileged parts, and truly understanding the problems of undeveloped countries will only benefit both parties. 

Wingfield's take on Color-Blindness can add another dimension to International Relations regarding race. With an outlook that neglects the typical "I do not see color" approach, we can truly understand the privileges that certain races have, giving us a better understanding of unprivileged places and how we can help solve their problems. Racism in International Relations has also caused wars and is a significant problem in world stereotypes that shape people's behavior. Eliminating and educating people will only create a more holistic, anti-racist world, developing racism domestically and internationally.

We can apply this thinking directly to immigration. People risk their lives to come to the United States due to horrible conditions in their countries, and people will risk their lives to have a slight chance of actually making it to the United States. Using a Wingfield approach, we understand the conditions people live in and why open borders in the United States is a great thing that will save lives.




Citations


Wingfield, A. H. (2015). Color-Blindness is Counter-Productive. Hypothesis. Retrieved February 3, 2022, from https://lms.hypothes.is/lti_launches 

Comments

  1. Grant VoytovichFebruary 3, 2022 at 12:32 PM

    Do you think that the more globalized our world is, the less racism there will be? I feel like the more people travel and spread their ideas, cultures, and customs, the more we will be able to understand one another.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kameron SchrefflerFebruary 9, 2022 at 8:15 AM

      I agree that the more globalized the world in the less racism there will be. The more interaction with different cultures will open up our perspectives.

      Delete
  2. Brooke WallaceFebruary 8, 2022 at 5:56 PM

    I agree that it is very important to bring race into IR in order to better understand the modern world around us and the hardships that certain underrepresented minority groups face. Relating to my own post, we must change the way in which we talk about race and gender in politics. I think the root of the problem regarding the gender/racial hierarchy lies in IR education; We can only fix it if we grow our critical perspective of IR theory in order to better understand marginalized groups of people. From the Loken and Ticker readings, I can deduce that mainstream IR is almost gender and race-blind because Hans Morgenthau's Six Principles of Political Realism are focused on the domination of 'man over man' and exclude women and non-white ethnic minority groups.

    ReplyDelete
  3. CiaraFebruary 9, 2022 at 3:29 PM

    I think that recognizing privilege is such a basic step that we need to take to be able to see things more clearly from an IR perspective. I agree with you that the systematic racism engraved into our society is what drives people to trust that European and Western cultures are ideal. “Underdeveloped” countries are talked about in a degrading light as if they are not as good because they have not been “modernized” to the standards of the west. I think race is a feature of international relations that needs to be recognized in order to point out the deep rooted racist customs that have yet to be addressed. I think your connection to immigration is also important to recognize as foreign immigrants entering the US illegally vs. legally is a very talked about political debate. Although people are able to point out that others are struggling and risking so much to come to the US, should they be able to? That question remains unanswered and is different for so many people.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kevin YinFebruary 9, 2022 at 6:05 PM

    Thank you. It reminds me of another class "Multiculturalism and Education", which highly focuses on antiracism. Yes, racial problems usually have impact on international relationship or even the relationship among several areas in a not obvious way. It is quite common for a vulnerable group to be treated "specially", which often get marginalized. I have to say that the importance of equity should be rooted in more and more people's mind. I also agree with the reply you wrote to Grant: globalization is quite beneficial, it is pretty tough, though. No "space racism" should be allowed anymore.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Currency Manipulation of the 21st Century: China and the US

                           Currency Manipulation of the 21st Century: China and the US Now more than ever, countries feel tempted to engage in a ‘currency war’ and go back and forth trying to devalue their currency in efforts to encourage exports. The two largest economies, China and the United States, seem to be in a long, bitter trade dispute as the trade relationship is significantly imbalanced. From tariffs to currency, trade tensions are clearly escalating with both sides slapping substantial tariffs on each other’s goods. Currency manipulation (arguably the world’s most protectionist international economic policy) refers to the concept of countries artificially lowering the value of their currency to achieve an unfair competitive advantage (Forbes). The U.S. Dollar is the most popular reserve, and everyone wants a stake in our economy. Unlike many other countries, China does not ha...
Read more

Kevin Yin's Blog #5

  To be honest, it has been a long time for me – a Chinese social media and news reader, not hearing any information about the follow-up of the Ukraine and Russia crisis on Chinese websites. Yes, you can’t find a lot of information about the invasion on Chinese news websites. If you do, then the news may be connected with the following reaction of European countries towards Russia, like the sanctions and changes in foreign policies. Some of the news writers did actually defame some of Ukrainian Defiance for some bad activities. It is quite clear for other people to understand the attitude of China towards the crisis. How about other Asian countries? Although I don’t want to be mean at this point, I have to indicate that the attitudes of many “second-tier power” countries are not that genuine. If we rationally consider the situation and the nature of politics, we must admit that it is not clever to think in either only a humanitarian angle or only a political angle. We need to comb...
Read more

Ciara: blog post #5

  The fear of an action might be powerful enough to scare off another party, or cause them to fear the lengths others are willing to go. As Kenneth Waltz argues in “Why Iran Should Get the Bomb: Nuclear Balancing Would Mean Stability” allowing more countries to obtain nuclear defense would put international relations at a general deterrence from the nuclear wars that could start. Deterrence is a strategy that can be used in order to prevent another party from undertaking an action through coercion. Many times this works as a method to keep two parties from destroying each other, or to allow a smaller army to scare off a larger one to show the lengths they would go. Nuclear deterrence can be the ultimate way of scaring off other parties as it is the strongest weapon that could potentially cause complete destruction. Even if a nuclear power is relatively small and compared to other nuclear powers would seem less threatening, once they cross the threshold they are using deterrence (Wa...
Read more