Jahn, Beate. "One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: Critical theory as the latest edition of liberal idealism". Millennium, Vol.27, No.3 (1998): 613-641.

Jahn, Beate. "One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: Critical theory as the latest edition of liberal idealism". Millennium, Vol.27, No.3 (1998): 613-641.

• Since the idea of critical theory is vague, the author specific addresses the school of critical theory organized around Andrew Linklater, Mark Neufeld, Mervyn Frost, Mark Hoffman, Robert Cox, Juergen Habermas, and Max Horkheimer. This school of critical theory objects to postivist epistemology, and proposes an alternative epistemology that recognizes the degree to which assumptions and 'facts' are constructed and influenced by societal expectations. Critical theory holds that all theories exist to advance the interests of some group by constructing evidence in a particular way, and seeks to both make the interests behind theories explicit and construct new theories to serve different, more beneficial, interests (615-617).
• This approach to political theory can be summed up as emphasizing totality, historicity, and reflexivity. This is because it looks at how single institutions or theories affect all social relations, how theories develop and exist within a historical context, and how theories construct facts to serve particular interests and perspectives (618).
• Critical theory has its roots in the philosophy of Immanuel Kant, who believed that the root of 'unfreedom' was attachment to false beliefs peddled as exclusive truths. The philosophy of Georg Hegel is also seen as contributing, by arguing that reasoning could and should be used to fully emancipate all humans, a goal critical theory claims to share. Critical theory also borrows the philosophy of Karl Marx, drawing on his belief that, since ideas are structured by material conditions, any critique of ideas must also involve engagement with material circumstances in society (618-619).
• The founders of the modern school of critical theory were Max Horkheimer and Juergen Habermas. Dr. Horkheimer was a Marxist, but he rejected beliefs in a proletariat revolution or benefits of technology, instead arguing that capitalism's power came from influence over assumptions in politics and life, and that these beliefs must be critiqued and subverted. Dr. Habermas extends this critique of capitalism to a critique of contemporary theories and ideologies (619).
• Juergen Habermas represents the birth of critical theory as school of thought separate from Marxism because he explicitly rejects the claim that Marxist analysis of class divisions is fundamentally true. The main contribution to critical theory from Marxism is instead the goal of realizing a full emancipation of humanity (620).
• Critical IR theory diverges from the historical pattern of other parts of critical theory by rejecting the ideological legacies of Karl Marx and Max Horkheimer. Its foundational principles are that emancipation should be the goal of theory and that change is possible. Whereas most critical theory is based on material conditions, critical IR theory argues against this idea (620).
• This belief that studies of material conditions are unnecessary for the development of theory has been harmful to critical theory, causing it to become idealistic and detached from both actual problems and actual possible solutions. As a result, the field is full of work of bad methodology (620-621).
• Much contemporary critical theory fails to uphold the three principles of good theory, in that it is not reflexive, not historical, and not total (622).
• The author provides the example of the work of Mark Neufeld. Dr. Neufeld takes the ancient Greek concept of polis as an ideal form of political governance, then critiques the problems of the contemporary world as stemming from a lack of polis, calling for the creation of a new 'global polis'. This theory fails on multiple levels: it does not critically examine the issues of the modern world nor demonstrate how the polis is a suitable solution; it fails to examine or understand the historic notion of the 'polis', an idea that arose from a patriarchal and slaveholding society; and it does explain why this idea could provide emancipation considering its conceptual origins (622).
• The work of Andrew Linklater is also referenced. Dr. Linklater attempts to divide the history of human society into three periods: tribalism, when moral rules only applied within political groups; states, with some sense of common morality; and a ideal world of common morality. This categories are not historical, but ideal types to be used to measure societal advance towards an ideal of emancipation. Dr. Linklater does not, however, compare these ideal types to any actual historical societies, undermining any purpose his work might have served (628-629). He does, however, use this framework to claim that Europe is morally superior, on the basis of the ideological foundation of the EU fitting his ahistorical and untested framework of ideal types (634).
• The philosophical figures employed by Dr. Linklater in his work are also removed from their historical context. The political motives of Francisco de Vitoria and other historical figures is not addressed or explored (630-631, 634). The influences of other cultures and ideas about European writers is also not discussed, completing the un-reflexive use of their ideas devoid of historical context (633).
• Dr. Linklater's uncritical use of European philosophy devoid of historical context or contemporary discourses ends up justifying Eurocentrism and the domination of other peoples. This is because the ideas of a universal and emancipated society based on reason were developed by historical figures with prejudicial views. By ignoring how Hegel, Marx, and Kant created theories that supported European supremacy, Dr. Linklater furthers these claims (635).
• Critical IR theorists must demonstrate their use and effect within the discipline, evidenced through the graduate increase of emancipatory ideals and aims among IR theorists. To create this effect, critical IR theorists have cherrypicked evidence from IR theory scholarship and purposefully ignored IR before the 1980s -- when positivism became intellectually dominant -- to bolster a false narrative of the constantly expanding influence of critical theory (625-626).
• Critical IR theory has become dependent upon the empirical work of other IR theories, with many of its leading theorists reducing themselves to roles as mediators between different schools of IR theory. Rather than doing their own research based on an emancipatory research agenda, critical IR theorists have chosen to be useless and unproductive (626).
• Contemporary critical IR theory does not include enough historical analysis of theories or concepts. Critical IR theorists have justified this by either claiming that the end of the Cold War means that normative theory is necessary -- without explaining why or addressing the implicit claim that the Cold War did justify realist IR theory -- or that globalization justifies critical theory, again without explaining why (627).
• The author claims that critical IR theory is substance-less propaganda designed to further a particular emancipatory viewpoint without evidence or proper methodology. Rather than viewing critical theory as a chance to expose the false premises of other theories, critical IR theorists have knowingly built their own incorrect theories on bad premises to further political viewpoints. This is both not the original purpose of critical theory and plain bad scholarship. Because no actually historical and reflexive research is done, critical IR theories do not provide meaningful solutions and are unable to justify their proposals (637).

(Good article that tears the shit out of the Critical Theory school of IR. It shows that multiple authors essentially use 'being critical' as an excuse to turn out bullshit theories based on bad data -- esp. referencing historical figures without understand why they said the things they said. Generally, critical theorists are somehow even less engaged from the real world than other IR theorists, amplifying the problems that exist in other areas of the field).