For and against post-critique

My latest article The Public, its problems, and post-critique is now available at International Politics Reviews. The article is a response to critiques of my work on critical international relations, specifically those by Philip Conway, Martina Tazzioli, and Daniele Lorenzini.

The article makes three main claims ‘in defense’ of post critique. First: post-critique is ultimately about amplifying the aesthetic resonance of critical scholarship, connecting it more closely to global publics who risk being alienated from the predominant style in which it is articulated.

Second: I stress the radical political potential for transformation within post-critique, drawing on the example of Foucault’s work on prison abolition, which contained substantive – often reformist and non-judgmental – nuance.

Third: I argue that post-critique is about an embrace of the impurity of politics and the necessity of navigating the ‘social’ in all its contradictions, something that sometimes requires saying different things to different people.

In all of the above, I actually argue that post-critique does not exist per se. Its ultimate goal is to defend the value of critical inquiry, but to do so by re-tooling its capacities in the face of radical changes in the contours of world politics.

The article can be read below or downloaded via this link.