ABSTRACT
Exclusion is often a root cause of violent insecurity. Being included in all activities and groups that are personally meaningful enhances one’s feelings of security. In this chapter, I explain this root cause of insecurity through scrutinizing the harm of polarization;1 in particular, the harm of the either/or, them/us and excluded/included mentality. Such a mentality is always present in some form where there is violent conflict. Violence often begins because of the notions of the ‘other’, the ‘traitor’ the ‘enemy’, the ‘infidel’. These terms are part of dualistic thinking and practice and I begin by explaining their moral harm. In particular, I explain the ramifications of prevailing dichotomies within IR in terms of othering, its impact on ethnic hatred and the exclusion that results. I then defend feminist ethics as a way to overcome the harm of polarization. Feminist ethics incorporates both a universalistic defence of personhood, justice, equality and rights, and a particularized practice of care that is directed toward meeting the specific needs of individuals – in this case, those who are seeking to build peace or recover from war trauma. My intention is to demonstrate that it is possible for IR theory to move beyond seemingly irreconcilable, optional or contradictory dualisms that presuppose either/or decisions. My reason for doing so is that such decisions limit the possibilities of Lederach’s (2005) ‘moral imagination’ outlined in the Introduction and the quotation above. This imagination enables us to think creatively and move outside of polarized logic to embrace complex relationships. My aim is to demonstrate the positive benefits of inclusionary politics that counter the harm of dualism through valuing differences, incorporating principles of justice and practising care.
