Critics at the edge? Decolonizing methodologies in International Relations

This article reviews three recent books that challenge conventional ways of doing International Relations. The rich arguments deployed in these books provide different yet complementary perspectives that can help us to rethink International Relations. They share a concern over what they regard as International Relations' entrenched coloniality and disciplinary straitjacket. They challenge what they identify as the hegemonic practices of conventional knowledge production that exclude alternative ways of knowing the international. They explore how International Relations is produced in the non-core and how personal narratives are embedded in theory-making, and question the claims to science of conventional methodologies. Yet, if all three books contribute to a praiseworthy attempt to trespass disciplinary boundaries, they also perpetuate hegemonic silences by failing adequately to engage with gender and indigenous perspectives.