When asked to discuss the most high-stake struggles facing the ISA community, I had to first ask myself—what is the ISA community? In very general terms, it is a community of scholars and teachers who study and teach around international relations, and—on occasion—they meet at conferences and workshops (especially the annual convention of the International Studies Association held in North America) and collaborate with each other. As diverse as the members of this community are, the truth of the matter is that those of us who have participated in ISA organized events are really just familiar with those whose work we have read and shared panels with. Although this may cause some (if not most of us) to fall into a niche trap in what I like to call “the silos of Homo Academicus” (cf. Bourdieu 1988), I personally do not have much of an issue with this. What we read, write, and cite is highly influenced by our research interests. So, when pondering what the ISA community is, the challenge to me does not lie in whether or not the ISA community is an open and inclusive community for all international relations (IR) scholars. Rather, I am concerned about the fact that such participation is full of exclusions and marginalization that can delegitimize certain knowledge over others. In other words, the challenge of cooperation, contention, and (lack of) creativity from within the ISA community lies in how the elite nature of the community can cause its members to (re)produce knowledge that perpetuates epistemic violence.