Abstract:
A particular iteration of liberal theory is commonplace in international law and related discussions. As Vasuki Nesiah recounts in a forthcoming chapter in the Oxford Handbook on Women and International Law, this iteration is a theory of individualized, disembodied political subjects who experience ever-improving conditions alongside the development of international law. Critical scholars of various stripes have challenged this paradigm, and Nesiah’s thoughtful chapter features critical feminist and queer scholars who reject this version of liberalism while remaining committed to internationalism.
Another, perhaps even richer, conversation is available between contemporary critics of the liberal tradition and one of that tradition’s forerunners—Thomas Hobbes. The so-called “Monster of Malmesbury” has been derided as a “patriarchal theorist” and as a pernicious force in international law, so he may seem an unlikely interlocutor. Yet to the extent Hobbes counts as a founder of liberalism, commonplace liberal theory in international law has come unmoored from his foundations. Certain strands of his thought are strikingly harmonious with some feminist internationalist critiques, and others provide fruitful ground for disagreement.
Invited contribution to the Temple Law Symposium on Feminism and the Theory of International Law (January 2025).