Through a critical evaluation of the works of Norman Angell and David Mitrany, this book explores the liberal roots of the academic discipline of International Relations (IR). Ashworth argues that, far from being the product of timeless realist truths, IR's origins are rooted in liberal attempts to reform international affairs. Norman Angell's work represents the first attempt to develop a comprehensive 'new liberal' approach to the problem of global governance, while David Mitrany's exploration of the problems of international life led him to apply the left-liberal idea of functional government to global governance. Both writers demonstrated the extent to which early twentieth century liberal writers on international affairs had answered the critics of earlier nineteenth century liberal internationalists. The penultimate chapter argues that the realist-idealist 'Great Debate' never happened, and that liberal scholars such as Angell and Mitrany have been unfairly dismissed as 'idealists.' The final chapter evaluates the writings of Angell and Mitrany and claims that the works of both authors can be criticised for theoretical weaknesses common to the liberal paradigm.

Through a critical evaluation of the works of Norman Angell and David Mitrany, this book explores the liberal roots of the academic discipline of International Relations (IR). Ashworth argues that, far from being the product of timeless realist truths, IR's origins are rooted in liberal attempts to reform international affairs. Norman Angell's work represents the first attempt to develop a comprehensive 'new liberal' approach to the problem of global governance, while David Mitrany's exploration of the problems of international life led him to apply the left-liberal idea of functional government to global governance. Both writers demonstrated the extent to which early twentieth century liberal writers on international affairs had answered the critics of earlier nineteenth century liberal internationalists. The penultimate chapter argues that the realist-idealist 'Great Debate' never happened, and that liberal scholars such as Angell and Mitrany have been unfairly dismissed as 'idealists.' The final chapter evaluates the writings of Angell and Mitrany and claims that the works of both authors can be criticised for theoretical weaknesses common to the liberal paradigm.

Postcolonialism and Political Theory explores the intersection between the political and the postcolonial through an engagement with, critique of, and challenge to some of the prevalent, restrictive tenets and frameworks of Western political and social thought. It is a response to the call by postcolonial studies, as well as to the urgent need within world politics, to turn towards a multiplicity_largely excluded from globally dominant discourses of community, subjectivity, power and prosperity_constituted by otherness, radical alterity, or subordination to the newly reconsolidated West. The book offers a diverse range of essays that re-examine and open the boundaries of political and cultural modernity's historical domain; that look at how the racialized and gendered and cultured subject visualizes the social from elsewhere; that critique the limits of postcolonial theory and its claim to celebrate diversity; and that complicate the notion of postcolonial politics within settler societies that continue to practice exile of the indigenous. Postcolonialism and Political Theory is an ideal book for graduate and advanced undergraduate level study and for those working both disciplinarily and interdisciplinarily, both inside and outside academia.