1. 1 Chapter 10 Marxist theories of international relations Presented by Wu Hao Major: Int’l Finance

2. 2 Overview Introduction: the continuing relevance of Marxism The essential elements of Marxist theories of world politics World-system theory Gramscianism Critical theory New Marxism Conclusion: Marxist theories of international relations and globalization

3. 3 Introduction: the continuing relevance of Marxism With the end of cold war, the collapse of Communist Party rule in Russia and throughout Eastern Europe, and the global triumph of ‘free market’ capitalism, it became commonplace to assume that the ideas of Marx, and his numerous disciples, could be safely consigned to the dustbin of history. Therefore, it would appear to be that Marxist thought leads only to a historical dead end. The future is liberal and capitalist. Is that true? Yet despite this, Marxism still retains its relevance and appears to be something of renaissance. And there are probably two reasons why this renaissance is occurring.

4. 4 First, for many Marxists the communist experiment in the Soviet Union and in the East European client states, had become a major embarrassment. Some Marxists were openly critical of the Soviet Union. Others just kept quiet and hoped that the situation, and the human rights record, would improve

5. 5 Second, and perhaps more significantly, Marx’s social theory still retains formidable analytical purchase on the world we are Marx’s forensic examination of both the extraordinary dynamism and the inherent contradictions of capitalism is even more relevant now than in his own time. Marxist analyses of international relations aim to reveal the hidden workings of global capitalism. These hidden workings provide the context in which international events occur. Marxist theory argue that the effects of global capitalism are to ensure that the powerful and the wealthy continue to prosper at the expense of the powerless and the poor.

6. 6 The essential elements of Marxist theories of world politics Marx himself did write copiously about international affairs. However, most of his writing was journalistic in nature. He provided little in terms of a theoretical analysis of international relations. Marx’s ideas have been interpreted and appropriated in a number of different and contradictory ways, resulting in a number of competing schools of Marxism.

7. 7 Underlying these different schools are several common elements that can be traced back to Marx’s writings. First, all these different schools share with Mark the view that the social world should be analyzed as a totality. That means the world should be studied as a whole. Another key element of Marxist thought is the materialist conception of history. This element serves further to underline this concern with inter-connection and context. The central contention here is that processes of historical change are ultimately a reflection of the economic development of society. Base-superstructure model( see Fig 1. next slide)

8. 8 Base-superstructure model as the means of production develop, previous relations of production become outmoded, and indeed become fetters restricting the most effective utilization of the new productive capacity. Base : Means of production + Relations of production Superstructure: Political system, legal system, cultural institutions and practices of a given society Development in the economic base act as a catalyst for the broader transformation of society as a whole.

9. 9 The third key element is the role of Class. In the Communist Manifesto, it is argued that “ the history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggle”. The bourgeoisie (the capitalist) The proletariat (the workers)

10. 10 Emancipation is also one of essential elements of Marxist theories. Marx did not think it either possible or desirable for the analyst to remain a detached or neutral observer of this great clash between capital and labor. Here, emancipation means a situation in which wage labor and private property are abolished and social relations transformed. However, Marx was not interested in developing an understanding of the dynamics of capitalist society. Therefore his commitment to the cause of emancipation is emphatically not a justification for the uncritical acceptance of some party line, or an excuse dogmatically to ignore facts which cast doubt on some long-cherished belief.

11. 11 World-system theory 1.The origins of world-system theory World-system theory can be seen as a direct development of Lenin’s work on imperialism and the Latin American Dependency School. Lenin’s work on imperialism, the highest stage of Capitalism. Lenin argued that the character of capitalism had changed and entered a new stage-the highest and final stage- “monopoly capitalism”. Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924)

12. 12 Monopoly Capitalism Under monopoly capitalism, a two-tier structure had developed within the world-economy with a dominant core exploiting a less-developed periphery. With the development of a core and periphery, there was no longer an automatic harmony of interest between all workers. The bourgeoisie in the core countries could use profits derived from exploiting the periphery to improve the lot of their own proletariat.

13. 13 Latin American Dependency School, the writers of which developed the notion of core and periphery in greater depth. 2.The key features of Wallerstein's world-system theory Immanuel Wallerstein. For him, the dominant form of social organizations is “world-system”. Two types of world-system. Immanuel Wallerstein (born 1930, a US sociologist)

14. 14 Two types of world system a.World-empires : a centralized political system uses its power to redistribute resources from periphery areas to the central core area. Like the form of payment of “tributes” in the Roman empire. b.World-economies : there is no single centre of political authority, but rather we can find multiple competing centers of power. Resources are distributed through the media of market not by central decree.

15. 15 The modern world-system is an example of world economy. It has features which can be described in terms of space and time. a.The spatial dimension focuses on the differing economic roles played by different regions within the world-economy. To the core- periphery distinction, Wallerstein has added another economic zone in his description of the world-economy, an intermediate semi- periphery, which has an intermediate role within the world-system displaying certain features characteristic of the core and other characteristics of the periphery. For example, although penetrated by core economic interests, the semi-periphery has its own relative vibrant indigenously owned industrial base. ( see Fig. next slide) Because of this hybrid nature, the semi-periphery plays important economic and political roles within the modern world-system. Also, it plays a vital role in stabilizing the political structure of the world-system.

16. 16 Periphery Non-democratic governments Export: Raw materials Import: Manufactures Below subsistence wages No welfare services Core Democratic government High wages Import: raw materials Export: manufactures High investment Welfare services Semi-periphery Authoritarian governments Export: ‘Mature’ manufactures Raw materials Import: Manufactures Raw materials Low wages Low welfare services

17. 17 b.The temporal dimension. In order to understand the dynamics of interactions over time among the core, semi-periphery and periphery, we must turn our attention to the temporal dimensions of Wallerstein’s description of the world-economy. These are cyclical rhythms, secular trends, contradictions, and crisis. When combined with the spatial dimensions, these determine the historical trajectory of the system.

18. 18 3.Recent developments in world-system theory Wallerstein’s work has been developed by a number of other writers who have built on his initial foundational work. Christopher Chase-Dunn lays much more emphasis on the role of the inter-state system than Wallerstein. Andre Gunder Frank (one of the most significant Dependency School writers) has launched a significant critique of Wallerstein’s work, and of Western social theory in general. Frank argues that the source of the capitalist world-economy was not in Europe, rather, the rise of Europe occurred within the context of an existing world- system.

19. 19 Gramscianism 1.Antonio Gramsci Gramsci used the concept of hegemony to answer a key question: why had it proven to be so difficult to promote revolution in Western Europe? Gramsci’s use of hegemony is also related to his understanding of power: a mixture of coercion and consent. Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) An Italian writer, politician, leader, and theorist of socialism, Communism, and Anti-Fascism

20. 20 Consent Consent, on Gramsci’s reading, is created and recreated by the hegemony of the ruling stratum in society. It is the hegemony that allows the moral, political, and cultural values of the dominant group to become widely dispersed throughout society and to be accepted by subordinate groups and classes as their own. Indeed, according to Gramsci’s analysis, dominant ideologies become sedimented in society to the extent that they take on the status of unquestioned ‘common sense’. All this takes place through the institutions of civil society.

21. 21 Several important implications. a.First is that Marxist theory needs to take superstructure phenomena seriously. Marx’s Base-superstructure model is that the change in the economic base ultimately leads to the change in the superstructure. It neglects that the nature of relations in the superstructure are great relevant in determining how susceptible that the society is to change and transformation. Gramsci took the term of historic bloc to describe the mutually reinforcing and reciprocal relationships between the socio- economic relations (the base) and political and cultural practices (superstructure) that together underpin a given order. b.Another implication is for political practice. This entails a counter-hegemonic struggle in civil society, in which the prevailing hegemony is undermined, allowing an alternative historic bloc to be constructed

22. 22 2.Robert Cox - the analysis of ‘world order’ ‘Theory is always for some one, and for some purpose’. It expresses a worldview that follows logically from the Gramscian, and broader Marxist position. All knowledge (of the social world at least) must reflect a certain context, a certain time, a certain space. In other words, knowledge, cannot be objective and timeless in the sense that some contemporary Realists would like to claim. Thinkers such as Robert W. Cox have attempted to ‘internationalize’ Gramsci’s thought by transposing several of his key concepts, most notably hegemony to the global context.

23. 23 Critical theory Critical theory has its roots in the work of the Frankfurt School, a group of thinkers including Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, and Jürgen Habermas. Emancipation is key concern of critical theorists, and, in particular, the human capacities and capabilities appealed to in calls for emancipatory action. Max Horkheimer (front left), Theodor Adorno (front right), and Jürgen Habermas in the background, right, in 1965 at Heidelberg

24. 24 Several different understandings of emancipation have emerged from the critical theory tradition. 1.Reconciliation with nature. The first generation ( Horkheimer, Adorno and Marcuse) of the Frankfurt School equated emancipation with a reconciliation with nature. This formulation is in stark contrast with more traditional Marxist approaches which have equated emancipation with the process of humanity gaining over greater mastery over nature. 2.Radical democracy. (Habermas)

25. 25 Radical democracy In contrast to classical Marxists who locate the potential for emancipation in the economic base of society – the realm of production – Habermas argues that the promise of a better society lies in the realm of communication. That is a system in which the widest possible participation is encouraged not only in word but also by actively identifying barriers to participation. Namely, radical democracy is the way in which that potential can be unlocked. Andrew Linklater has used some of the key principles and precepts developed in Habermas’s work in order to argue that emancipation in the realm of international relations should be understood in terms of the expansion of the moral boundaries of a political community.

26. 26 Comparison between Most of Marxists and Frankfurt School Most of other Marxists They have been much interested in the further development of analysis of the economic base of society. The proletariat does embody the potential for emancipatory transformation. Frankfurt School They instead concentrated on questions relating to culture, bureaucracy, the social basis, the structure of family, etc. The working class has simply been absorbed by the system and no longer represents a threat to it.

27. 27 New Marxism New Marxism is characterized by a direct appropriation of the concepts and categories developed by Marx. Warren deploys Marx’s analysis of capitalism and colonialism to criticize some of the central ideas of dependency and world-system theorists. Rosenberg uses Marx’s ideas to criticize Realist theories of international relations, and globalization theory. He seeks to develop an alternative approach which understands historical change in world politics as a reflection of transformations in the prevailing relations of production.

28. 28 1.Bill Warren – imperialism and the rise of third world capitalism Imperialism Lenin thought imperialism represented the phase where capitalism definitively ceased to play any progressive function – imperialism was both ‘the highest stage of capitalism’ and its final stage. This view became the standard Marxist and neo-Marxist position through much of the 20th century. Bill Warren rejected Lenin’s view and argued that Capitalism was fulfilling its historic role in the periphery by rapidly developing the means of production and, crucially for a future transition to socialism, facilitating the emergence of an urban working class. Imperialism should therefore been seen as ‘the pioneer of capitalism’ rather than its ‘highest stage’.

29. 29 Warren examined in depth the development of capitalism in a range of Third World countries in order to back up his view against Lenin’s. Warren argues that we should not be anti- capitalist in those situations where capitalist development is increasing levels of productivity and making material improvement to living standards – these are part of capitalism’s historic mission as precursor to a transition to socialism.

30. 30 2.Justin Rosenberg – capitalism and global social relations Rosenberg’s analysis focuses on the character of the international system and its relationship to the changing character of social relations. He argues that two of the core concepts in Realist theorizing, sovereignty and anarchy can fruitfully be reevaluated according to Marx’s idea. And for him, both sovereignty and anarchy reflect particular features of the capitalist era.

31. 31 Sovereignty Sovereignty reflects the way in which the states has become separated from the production process under capitalism, with its role becoming purely ‘political’. Although states are involved in the regulation of production, they tend not to be directly embroiled in the process of surplus extraction. In all previous eras, by contrast, states were involved directly in production, but with the separation of sovereign territorial governance and production, capitalist enterprises are now able to operate internationally with much greater autonomy from state control. Anarchy Rosenberg draws a conclusion that anarchy is a condition of capitalist relations and not a set of circumstances confined to international relations. It is inherent in social relations within the capitalist mode of production rather than a trans- historical features of relations between states. Justin Rosenberg Rosenberg’s analysis of sovereignty and anarchy

32. 32 Conclusion: Marxist theories of international relations and globalization Marxists are rather skeptical about the emphasis currently being placed on the notion of globalization. They see the recent manifestations of globalization as not a recent phenomenon but part of long-term trends in the development of capitalism. Furthermore the notion of globalization is increasingly being used as an ideological tool to justify reductions in workers’ rights and welfare provision.

33. 33 More Information Useful Web sites www.oup.com/uk/booksites/politics Related readings See textbook Page 248

34. 34 CHAPTER 11 Social Constructivism

35. 35 Overview Introduction In the beginning… The rise of Constructivism ( Presented by me ) Constructivism Constructivism and global change Conclusion ( Presented by my partner )

36. 36 Introduction Constructivism is a success story. It rose very quickly from rather humble beginnings to become one of the leading schools in International Relations. Constructivism’s birth and development also was shaped by an American context. By emphasizing the American context, we can see how the struggle for acceptance in the American disciplinary context shaped Constructivism’s conceptual contours and its research agenda.

37. 37 In the beginning Constructivism’s origins can be traced back to the 1980s when neo- realism and neo-liberal Institutionalism dominated American international relations theory. Both theories ascribed to materialism and individualism. Individualism: the view that actors have a set of innate interests that are fixed and that the structure which constrains their behavior derives from the aggregation of the properties of the actors. Besides neo-realism and neo-liberal institutionalism, there is a growing interest in social theory. Social theory: that is, how to conceptualize the structure and its organizing principles, the actors and the rules that regulate their relations, and the relationship between the structure and the actors.

38. 38 Various scholars critical of neo-realism and neo- liberalism drew from critical and sociological theory to demonstrate the effect of normative structures on world politics. John Ruggie argued that to understand international change and transformation required a consideration of the growing density of interactions among actors located at the inter-states, transnational, and domestic levels. Richard Ashley ‘s devastating critique of neo-realism revealed not only its limitations but also the power of post-structural and critical theory.

39. 39 Alexander Wendt introduced international relations scholars to the agent-structure problems and its relationship to international politics. Friedrich Kratochwil offered one of the first systematic treatments of rules and norms in international relations. He introduced international relations scholars to the distinction between regulative and constitutive rules a. Regulative rules: those rules regulating already existing activities. For example, rules for the road determine how to drive. b. Constructive rules: not only regulate but in fact create the very possibility for these activities.

40. 40 The mainstream responded coolly to these challenges, demanding that critics demonstrate the superiority of these alternative claims through empirical research. Can you give me some reasons?

41. 41 The rise of Constructivism The are four background factors sponsored Constructivism’s meteoric rise in the 1990s. 1.The end of the cold war meant there was a new intellectual space for scholars to challenge existing theories of international politics. 2.Constructivists convinced the mainstream in the US that they were committed to ‘science’. 3.Constructivism’s reliance on sociological theory also furthered its rise to respectability. 4.Ultimately, Constructivism’s success derived from it ability to further empirical analysis in matters of central concern to neo- realism and neo-liberal institutionalism.

42. 42 To be continued…