Authenticity, Performativity and Profilicity in International Relations: Beyond Autocratic Mimicry

Contrary to the predictions of many liberal theorists, after the end of the Cold War, autocratic regimes not only endured but they learned adeptly to navigate the complexities of the LIO (Liberal International Order) (Ambrosio, 2020). The cause of this failed prediction has been at the centre of several debates in political science (Kneuer, Demmelhuber, 2019). Many have attributed this resilience to the mimicry capacity of authoritarian regimes (Kendall-Taylor, Frantz, 2014, Debre, 2020). In analyzing the long-term consequences of the phenomenon, however, its importance is often dismissed because deemed only as an imitative effort, fundamentally "inauthentic" and driven mainly by the hegemonic influence of liberal principles within the LIO. This paper challenges the prevailing notion of mimicry as inauthentic, contending that the authenticity argument overlooks the underlying dynamics shaping the reconfiguration of the social dimension on the international stage today. I will start with a critique of the concept of authenticity in liberal theory. I will then propose an alternative paradigm of analysis. In order to do that I will employ three interconnected sociological notions that so far have found only very limited application in international studies: prolificity, network and performativity (Moeller, D’ambrosio, 2019, Latour, 2003, Luhmann 2013). These ideas challenge the modern concept of individuality, authenticity and individual agency embedded within classical modern liberal theory. My analysis will be instead based instead on a neo-functionalist and radically constructionist theoretical narrative. I will describe how states profile their ideantity and how this self-profiling determines relational newrok structures, which define the social space of a system. I will describe how states iteratively decide exclusionary boundaries and normative legitimacy marginalizing members that are not compliant with the system (Bayesian learning). The core message of my analysis is that states do not lack authenticity because they are mischievous and cunning but because the pursuit of authenticity for authenticity's sake would make them unable to operate within a certain social context (Moeller, D’ambrosio, 2019), resulting eventually in the breakdown of an entire social system and the function it serves among the participants. In the paper, I will concentrate on Russia and China as ongoing case studies for analysis. The choice depends on the fact that these countries are prominent autocratic actors and pivotal players in IR. I will work on their policies and strategies as authocratic countries per se but I will also analyze deeply their relation with democracies and liberal noramtivity within the frame of the LIO.