Search

Recent years have seen a growing contestation of the liberal international information order and an increasingly aggressive pushback by Global North governments. The pushback has been accompanied by burgeoning research on the contentious politics of international political communication. Reviewing this research, I find and critique that it fails to embed the Global North's war against disinformation in the global matrix of the coloniality of knowledge. I elaborate Mignolo's conceptual couplet dewesternisation/rewesternisation in relation to political epistemology to develop the claim that braided into the Global North's counter-disinformation campaigns are discursive practices that entrench international epistemic privilege anchored to the global geopolitical hierarchy of knowledges. To substantiate my argument, I zoom in on the European Union's counter-disinformation campaign against Russia. I end by reflecting on the broader take-away of my paper for decolonial thought and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyses Chinese migration policies through historical and comparative lenses in an attempt to cross conceptual divides in existing literature on migration policies. The first part of the article offers an empirically grounded overview of developments in Chinese migration policies in the two decades after the regime changes of 1949 and 1978. A second analytical section brings together literature on the Global North, Global South, and Asian and Chinese migrations and migration policies. The article posits the following three main points. First, literature on the Global South is valuable for theorising Chinese migration policies in that it highlights emigration and development rather than immigration as in Hollifield's 'migration state'. However, in prioritising economic objectives, it fails to consider Chinese migration policies in relation to identity formation and nation-building under the influence of wars and decolonisation processes – what Adamson and Tsourapas have called 'nationalising' policies. Second, the article notes the significance of ethnic return migration in Chinese policies, which is overlooked in literature on the Global South, but examined in literature on Asian migrations. Finally, the article posits that the nexus between internal and external migration in a Chinese context offers critical insights for theorising migration policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Asymmetries of power are not only a characteristic feature of today's world order but also manifest in knowledge production in the discipline of international relations (IR). Even the use of the 'Global South' concept, which highlights one set of hierarchies in international politics, sometimes perpetuates them latently, instead of offering solutions to overcome them. From a critical pedagogy perspective, I explore whether engaging in a dialogue on the 'Global South' can facilitate an understanding of the structures and processes of knowledge production and the perpetuation of hierarchies in the discipline. The paper argues that such knowledge can be created with reference to Paolo Freire's concept of dialogic encounters by using research designs deriving from participatory action research. The goal of this article is to contribute to making IR as a discipline more inclusive through the co-production of knowledge that incorporates marginalised voices across the Global North and the Global South. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Post-Development has reproduced the ‘development gaze’ by focusing on interventions and struggles in the South. This paper draws attention to the German version of degrowth, Postwachstum, as a possible Post-Development approach in the North. It thus contributes to the Post-Development agenda by including the North as a ‘development’ problem and by overcoming the view of the North as a homogeneous neo-liberal, capitalist, Eurocentric bloc. The paper examines key Postwachstum contributions with regard to their correspondence to insights of and gaps in the Post-Development debate. It argues that Postwachstum needs to include a postcolonial perspective on global inequalities and question the ‘development’–modernity–coloniality nexus more profoundly in order to provide a valuable contribution to the Post-Development agenda. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]