Explore the vast range of titles available.

In 2015, students at the University of Cape Town demanded the removal of a statue of Cecil Rhodes, the imperialist, racist business magnate, from their campus. The battle cry '#RhodesMustFall' sparked an international movement calling for the decolonisation of the world's universities. Today, as this movement grows, how will it radically transform the terms upon which universities exist? In this book, students, activists and scholars discuss the possibilities and the pitfalls of doing decolonial work in the home of the coloniser, in the heart of the establishment. Subverting curricula, enforcing diversity, and destroying old boundaries, this is a radical call for a new era of education. Offering resources for students and academics to challenge and resist coloniality inside and outside the classroom, Decolonising the University provides the tools for radical pedagogical, disciplinary and institutional change.

Traditional explanations of the “rise of the West” have located the sources of Western supremacy in structural or long-term developmental factors internal to Europe. By contrast, revisionist accounts have emphasized the conjunctural and contingent aspects of Europe's ascendancy, while highlighting intersocietal conditions that shaped this trajectory to global dominance. While sharing the revisionist focus on the non-Western sources of European development, we challenge their conjunctural explanation, which denies differences between “West” and “East” and within Europe. We do so by deploying the idea of uneven and combined development (UCD), which redresses the shortcomings found on both sides of the debate: the traditional Eurocentric focus on the structural and immanent characteristics of European development and the revisionists’ emphasis on contingency and the homogeneity of Eurasian societies. UCD resolves these problems by integrating structural and contingent factors into a unified explanation: unevenness makes sense of the sociological differences that revisionists miss, while combination captures the aleatory processes of interactive and multilinear development overlooked by Eurocentric approaches. From this perspective, the article examines the sociologically generative interactions between European and Asian societies’ development over the longue durée and traces how the breakdown of feudalism and the rise of capitalism in Europe were fundamentally rooted in and conditioned by extra-European structures and agents. This then sets up our conjunctural analysis of a central yet underappreciated factor explaining Europe rise to global dominance: the disintegration of the Mughal Empire and Britain's colonization of India.

In 2015, students at the University of Cape Town demanded the removal of a statue of Cecil Rhodes, the imperialist, racist business magnate, from their campus. The battle cry '#RhodesMustFall' sparked an international movement calling for the decolonisation of the world's universities. Today, as this movement grows, how will it radically transform the terms upon which universities exist? In this book, students, activists and scholars discuss the possibilities and the pitfalls of doing decolonial work in the home of the coloniser, in the heart of the establishment. Subverting curricula, enforcing diversity, and destroying old boundaries, this is a radical call for a new era of education. Offering resources for students and academics to challenge and resist coloniality inside and outside the classroom, Decolonising the University provides the tools for radical pedagogical, disciplinary and institutional change.

Mainstream historical accounts of the development of capitalism describe a process which is fundamentally European - a system that was born in the mills and factories of England or under the guillotines of the French Revolution. In this groundbreaking book, a very different story is told. The book offers a unique interdisciplinary and international historical account of the origins of capitalism. It argues that contrary to the dominant wisdom, capitalism’s origins should not be understood as a development confined to the geographically and culturally sealed borders of Europe, but the outcome of a wider array of global processes in which non-European societies played a decisive role. Through an outline of the uneven histories of Mongolian expansion, New World discoveries, Ottoman-Habsburg rivalry, the development of the Asian colonies and bourgeois revolutions, the authors provide an account of how these diverse events and processes came together to produce capitalism.

The history of capitalism's origins is unmistakably Eurocentric, placing sixteenth-century developments in politics, economy, culture, and ideology squarely within the unique context of Europe. And while the disciplinary remit of International Relations (IR) should offer a way out of such European provincialism, it too has been built on largely Eurocentric assumptions. In Eurocentric approaches, the Ottoman Empire has been absent, passive, or merely a comparative foil against which the specificity and superiority of Europe has been defined. And yet, the Ottoman Empire was arguably the most powerful actor in the Early Modern period. In this article, I argue that any history of capitalism's origins must therefore account for the historical importance of the Ottomans. In doing so, this article seeks to address the non-European blind-spot, both in theorisations of capitalism's origins and in IR theory, by reincorporating the material significance of the Ottoman Empire in historical processes, which led to the transition to capitalism. I do so by utilising the theory of Uneven and Combined Development, and in the process seek to defend its credentials as a non-Eurocentric social theory on the one hand and as a sociologically and historically sensitive theory of international relations on the other.

Este Simpósio 'Ensinando RI Globalmente' se engaja e contribui para o debate atual sobre análises alternativas e nao ocidentais e a questäo da inevitabilidade da perspectiva no campo da RI e do estudo da política global. Este Simpósio é único, pois aborda específicamente nao como realizar pesquisas efetivas sobre ou em RI global, mas como ensinar RI globalmente para estudantes nos níveis de graduaçao e pós-gradua ao. Neste grupo de contribuiçöes, Meera Sabaratnam e Kerem Nişancıoǧlu apresentam um plano de estudos que desafia os estudantes do último ano a vincular a história racial das Relaçöes Internacionais, a onda de descolonizaçöes políticas na Ásia e África no século XX e as atuais lutas de descolonizaçao na teoria e prática. Em uma apresentaçao de um curso básico para um mestrado internacional, Martin Weber mostra como trabalhar com e contra os 'isismos' que geralmente organizam o campo das RI, colocando justaposiçöes temáticas de clássicos familiares com textos geralmente relegados a abrangente categoria de 'outras abordagens.'

The call to decolonise universities across the global North has gained particular traction in recent years, from Rhodes Must Fall Oxford’s (RMFO) campaign for a public reckoning with its colonial legacies, to recent attempts by Georgetown University, Washington DC, to atone for its past ties with slavery.¹ The UK’s National Union of Students (NUS) has been running ‘Why is My Curriculum White?’ and #LiberateMyDegree as two of their flagship campaigns since 2015. Both campaigns seek to challenge ‘Eurocentric domination and lack of diversity’ in curricula across UK universities.2 These dissenting interventions take their inspiration from and build on similar campaigns

This thesis challenges the Eurocentric division of international history into distinct 'Western' and 'Eastern' strands by demonstrating the intensive historical interactivity between the Ottoman Empire and Europe. Addressing Weberian, Marxian and postcolonial inspired historiography, it seeks to overcome a series of interconnected binaries- East versus West, tradition versus modernity and inside versus outside- that characterise the one-sidedness of these approaches. This thesis argues that Uneven and Combined Development (U&CD) is a theoretical framework primed to overcoming precisely such partialities, and can therefore make an original contribution to Ottoman historiography. More specifically the thesis tackles problems in Ottoman historiography across three key junctures. Through a treatment of the origins of the Empire, I demonstrate that the Ottoman tributary state was a product of international determinations- a form of combined development. Analysing the Ottoman apogee of the sixteenth century, I argue that Ottoman geopolitical pressure on Europe created sociological conditions for that emergence of capitalism. Finally, I show that Ottoman decline was inextricable from the uneven and combined development of capitalism over the course of the long nineteenth century. These historical analyses offer distinct contributions to historical sociological debates around the 'tributary mode of production', the 'Rise of the West' and 'modernisation' respectively. Theoretically, I show that any historical study from a singular spatial vantage point will always tend to be partial. Instead, multiple vantage points derived from multiple spatio-temporal origins better capture the complexity of concrete historical processes. In presenting this argument, this thesis offers a theoretical reconstruction of U&CD as the articulation of spatio-temporal multiplicity in mode of production analysis, which overcomes the fissure between international relations and historical sociology. It thus extends the theory of U&CD onto the terrain of 'big questions' surrounding pre-capitalist social relations and capitalist modernity.

The time has come to ‘combine’ or ‘draw together’ the ‘separate steps’⁴ of the preceding argument. Beginning with the Eurasian steppe in the Long 13th Century, we saw how the Mongolian Empire was fundamental to the formation of a number of geopolitical and economic linkages across the Eurasian landmass. This had the effect of plugging European actors into an interconnected ‘world system’ of intersocietal relations. The immediate consequence of European engagements in thePax Mongolicawas an increased exposure to the technical developments and ideas pioneered in the more scientifically advanced Asia. While these contributed to an array of developments