This article argues that Critical IR theory’s (CIRT) claims to reflexivity, its engagement with “difference,” and its emancipatory stance are compromised by its enduringly Eurocentric gaze. While CIRT is certainly critical of the West, nevertheless its tendency toward “Eurofetishism”—by which Western agency is reified at the expense of non-Western agency—leads it into a “critical Eurocentrism.” While this Eurofetishism plays out differently across the spectrum of CIRT, nevertheless all too often the West is treated as distinct from the non-West such that a fully relational conception of the West—one in which the non-West shapes, tracks, and inflects the West as much as vice versa—is either downplayed or dismissed altogether. Our antidote to this problem is to advance such a relational approach that brings non-Western agency back in while simultaneously recognizing that such agency is usually subjected to structural constraints. This gives rise to two core objectives: first, that non-Western agency needs to be taken seriously as an ontologically significant process in world politics, and second, that it needs to be explored in its complex, manifold dimensions. Here we seek to move beyond the colonial binaries of non-Western “silence vs. defiance” and an “all-powerful West vs. powerless non-West.” For between these polarities lies a spectrum of instantiations of non-Western agency, running from the refusal to be known and categorized by colonial epistemes to mundane moments of everyday agency to the embrace of indigenous cosmologies through to modes of developmental and global agency. Sometimes these speak back to the West, and at other times they occur for reasons Other-wise. Ultimately we call for a relational sociology of global interconnectivities that problematizes CIRT’s Eurofetishization of the West as a separate, self-generating, self-directed, and hyper-autonomous entity.

中文翻译：

---

超越批判性 IR 理论的欧洲恋物癖前沿：探索非西方机构的复杂景观

本文认为，批判性国际关系理论 (CIRT) 的自反性、其与“差异”的参与及其解放立场因其持久的以欧洲为中心的凝视而受到损害。虽然 CIRT 肯定对西方持批评态度，但它趋向于“欧洲拜物教”的倾向——即西方机构以牺牲非西方机构为代价而被具体化——导致它进入“批判的欧洲中心主义”。虽然这种欧洲拜物教在 CIRT 的范围内表现出不同的表现，但西方经常被视为与非西方不同，以至于西方的完全关系概念——非西方在其中塑造、追踪和影响西方和反之亦然——要么被轻描淡写，要么完全被忽视。我们对这个问题的解药是推进这样一种关系方法，将非西方机构带回来，同时承认这种机构通常受到结构性约束。这产生了两个核心目标：首先，需要认真对待非西方机构作为世界政治中具有本体论意义的过程，其次，需要对其复杂、多方面的维度进行探索。在这里，我们寻求超越非西方的“沉默与反抗”和“全能的西方与无能为力的非西方”的殖民二元对立。因为在这些极性之间存在着一系列非西方机构的实例化，从拒绝被殖民认识和归类到日常代理的平凡时刻，再到对本土宇宙学的拥抱，再到发展和全球代理的模式。有时这些会回击西方，有时它们会因其他原因而发生。最终，我们呼吁建立一种全球互连的关系社会学，将 CIRT 将西方的欧洲拜物教化为一个独立的、自我生成的、自我导向的和高度自治的实体。