I will be the first to admit that I signed up for POLI 367 with no expectations and even less of an idea of what I was going to be studying. As someone going on the fifth year of their four-year plan, any course that got me closer to graduation was an attractive option. While admittedly less vague than “Topics in Comparative Politics”, the title of “International Relations Theory in the International System” left me with a few questions – all mainly revolving around “which theory”? After POLI 260 in my second year, POLI100 in my fourth, and a mix of 300 and 100 level POLI courses sprinkled in between, it is safe to say that my path to this course was somewhat unconventional.

Yet none of that has mattered so far. Within the first three weeks, Dr. Crawford had set the ground for what is poised to be an engaging semester. Explaining the multiple “births” of IR following both World Wars, as well as the slow shifting in dominant ideologies in the wake of the Cold War and, more recently, the 9/11 attacks. From the decline to Marxism to the shift away from traditional realism, IR has been almost constantly evolving.

However, one must wonder when the next shift is coming. Today’s lecture, centered on the framing and leveraging of different theories against each opens the door to some thought. Will we see a departure from positivistic IR (prominent at least at UBC), or perhaps a relapse to an updated version of older frames.