Over the last few years, the idea that we live in a globalized world has significantly gained ground. Across various disciplines, this had led to severe critiques not only of methodological nationalism, but also of methodological Eurocentrism. But what does it mean to leave Eurocentrism behind? What kind of theorizing can and should we engage in when we attempt to provincialize, decenter, or even decolonize our thinking? This article distinguishes, presents, and critically discusses four trajectories beyond Eurocentrism in political and (...) social theory: enlarging the canon, inter-contextual dialogue, taking the impacts of European colonialism and imperialism into account, as well as shifts in theoretical agenda setting. It argues that if political and social theory truly attempts to transcend methodological Eurocentrism, it must not only bring in non-Western thought, but must also critically address both discursive and institutional aspects of global power relations. (shrink)

Over the last few years, intersectionality has become not only one of the most prominent topics of feminist theory in Europe, but also one of its most serious challenges, pressing us to acknowledge that European nations are not homogeneous entities and calling for more complex accounts of gender relations and forms of gender injustice. Currently, many scholars embrace intersectionality as a concept, but there is no consensus about what adequate theoretical accounts of intersectionality with regard to European contexts should look (...) like. Drawing on theoretical positions that have been put forward within the current intersectionality debate in German-speaking countries, this article addresses two questions that are currently at stake: the what-question of intersectionality, asking what it is, which forms of inequality we focus on as intersecting; and the how-question of intersectionality, focusing on how we should conceptualize what is happening when forms of inequality intersect. (shrink)

In this contribution, Andrew Arato and Jean Cohen’s Populism and Civil Society is confronted with current gender studies research on populism. This research mainly focuses on right-wing populism and highlights strong links between right-wing populists and the religious right, which are to a large degree organized by “anti-gender,” a stance both against social constructivist notions of gender and against basic gender rights, especially in the fields of reproduction and of LGBTIQ concerns. Against the backdrop of this literature, I argue that (...) in Populism and Civil Society, right-wing populist anti-gender politics are not addressed in a way that takes account of their full complexity; and that these politics furthermore suggest to treat right-wing populism and left-wing populism as phenomena that do not only differ in content, but also in form. (shrink)