Ideas All the Way Down: From the Practice Turn to the Theory of Contestation
Ideas All the Way Down: From the Practice Turn to the Theory of Contestation

Summary/Abstract: One of the most interesting outcomes of the rationalist vs. reflexivist debate in the theory of International Relations has been the so-called practice turn which dates to the first decade of the XXI century and seems to be in full swing today. This already mature research programme is mostly an attempt to shift focus from the static, structural theorising characteristic of the previous debate towards more processual approach. The programme itself involves vast body of literature, multiple themes and diverse claims, transcending established boundaries within IR theory – providing a fertile ground for both brilliant insights and troubling contradictions.My aim in this paper is to explore the placement of A. Wiener’s conceptualisation of contestation in the theory of international relations. To achieve this, I explore the genealogy of related concepts, especially the practice turn in IR theory and the concept of Communities of Practice, which both consider work on contestation as part of their research programmes. Although the paper is primarily explorative and descriptive, it employs the tool developed for theoretical analysis, rooted in the recent work of Gałganek (2022), where philosophical positions that he identified in the field I have connected with existing paradigms (with his approval) for theoretical closure. To this, I also add Wendt’s (1999) division of existing paradigms into materialist and idealist ontology. The provocative title is meant to reflect a materialist critique of both the programme and contestation theory, while at the same time recognising the growing interest in IR ontology in contemporary IR theorising – a shift away from epistemology-heavy approaches of the late twentieth century.The main argument of the paper is that the scientific programme resulting from the practice turn in IR theory provided a much-needed processual and practical ontology. It is, however, paired with an interpretive and normative epistemology, which leaves it without tangible foundation. Contestation, as a product of the programme, inherits the same problem and would benefit from adopting a materialist ontology. In doing so, it could be reconciled with other materialist approaches, which would ground it and potentially allow contestation to be recognised as an organising principle not only in global governance, but in international relations as a whole.

• Details
• Contents