Marxist Theories of International Relations PDF

Chapter 7 Marxist theories of international relations stephen hobden ∙ richard w yn jones Framing Questions Is the analysis of ‘class’ just as important as the analysis of ‘state’ for our understanding of global politics? Is globalization a new phenomenon or a long-standing feature of ca...

Chapter 7 Marxist theories of international relations stephen hobden ∙ richard w yn jones Framing Questions Is the analysis of ‘class’ just as important as the analysis of ‘state’ for our understanding of global politics? Is globalization a new phenomenon or a long-standing feature of capitalist development? Is ‘crisis’ an inevitable feature of capitalism, and if so, does this mean that capitalism contains the seeds of its own destruction? Reader’s Guide Marxist analysis, and, more recently, how new (or orthodox) Marxists have sought a more profound This chapter introduces, outlines, and assesses the re-­engagement with Marx’s original writings. The Marxist contribution to the study of international chapter argues that no analysis of globalization is relations. It first identifies a number of core fea- complete without an input from Marxist theory. tures common to Marxist approaches and then Indeed, Marx was arguably the first theorist of glo- discusses how Marx’s ideas were internationalized balization, and from the perspective of Marxism, by Lenin and subsequently by writers in the world- the features often pointed to as evidence of glo- system framework. It then examines how Frankfurt balization are hardly novel, but are rather the mod- School critical theory, and Gramsci and his various ern manifestations of long-term tendencies in the followers, introduced an analysis of culture into development of capitalism. 116 stephen hobden ∙ richard wyn jones Introduction When the cold war ended in the late 1980s with the utterly defeated, the problems of capitalism have per- defeat of communism and the victory of global ‘free sisted. Not only do the regular crises that characterize market capitalism’, it became commonplace to assume capitalism continue to wreak havoc, but the ever- that the ideas of Karl Marx and his numerous disciples deepening crisis that is humanity’s relationship with could be safely consigned to the dustbin of history. the natural world raises fundamental concerns about Even if communist parties retained power in China, the sustainability of our current patterns of produc- Vietnam, and Cuba, they no longer constituted a threat tion and consumption. Of ever increasing concern, to the hegemony of the global capitalist system. Indeed, also, are the ethics of a world in which massive global the way that these parties had been forced to adapt them- corporations harvest information about the most selves to capitalism in order to retain power only served intimate habits and behaviours of private individu- to underline the sense that, as far as the market was con- als as part of their ingenious efforts to persuade the cerned, resistance was futile. The future was liberal and already sated to buy more of what they do not really capitalist. Marxism had proven to be a dead end. need. This when even the most basic needs of many That was then. A generation later, things appear hundreds of millions of our fellow humans remain very different. Even if its mortal enemy appeared unfulfilled (see Case Study 7.1). Case Study 7.1 The Naxalite Rebellion in India predominantly on the rural peasantry rather than the urban pro- letariat, the classic subject of Marxist agitation. The rebellion has gone through several waves or cycles, with periods of growth and enhanced activity by Naxalites prompting severe and invariably brutal clampdowns by the Indian security forces. Naxalites view India as a semi-colonial and semi-feudal state, and in parts of the so-called ‘red corridor’ traversing some of the states of eastern India, they have sought to establish their own ‘liberated areas’ where landlords have been driven out, people’s courts created, and programmes initiated to empower and mobi- lize the rural poor. These programmes have been accompanied by equally brutal purges of so-called ‘class enemies’ including landlords, rich peasants, government employees, and suspected informers. Supporters of Naxalite group, People's War In 2004, two of the main revolutionary groups combined to © PRAKASH SINGH / AFP / Getty Images create the Communist Party of India (Maoist). A party state- ment describes its aim as ‘to accomplish the New Democratic India is one of the fastest growing economies in the world and a Revolution in India by overthrowing imperialism, feudalism and member of the BRICS organization. Yet it also remains the site of comprador bureaucratic capitalism... through the Protracted one of the world’s longest-running peasant rebellions, strongly People’s War’. However, since 2006 when the then Indian Prime influenced by Marxist ideology. The term ‘Naxalite’ originates Minister Manmohan Singh described Naxalism as ‘the greatest from the village of Naxalbari in Western Bengal. In 1967, a peas- internal security threat to our country’, the number of areas of ant uprising erupted in which landlords were attacked, land activity of the Naxalites appears to have decreased significantly. occupied, records burnt, and old debts cancelled. This uprising Given, however, that the Naxalites have been pushed back in was a source of inspiration to revolutionaries across India, and the past only to reappear, it seems likely that any setback will in particular to students in the urban areas. Since then the term be temporary, particularly given the desperate levels of depriva- ‘Naxalite’ has been used to describe a variety of groups active tion in many of those areas in which they have previously been mainly in rural India that draw inspiration from Marx and, in par- most active, as well as the persistence of caste differences and ticular, the example of Mao and the Chinese Communist Party. discrimination against so-called ‘tribal’ populations. Ideologically, the Naxalite rebellion can be traced to splits in the Communist Party of India (CPI). In 1964, the Communist Party Question 1: What is the Naxalite movement and why did it emerge? of India (Marxist) emerged from the CPI as a more radical off- shoot determinedly committed to fighting the kind of protracted Question 2: How does the Naxalite analysis differ from a tradi- ‘people’s war’ advocated by Mao; a revolutionary struggle based tional Marxist approach?  Chapter 7 Marxist theories of international relations 117 Not only that, but resistance to capitalism has con- transformation (for Marx’s life and times, see Liedman tinued and even taken on new forms. In many states, 2018). More fundamentally, Marx’s forensic examina- traditional ‘moderate’ left-centre political parties have tion of both the extraordinary dynamism and inher- either been radicalized in their opposition to the capi- ent contradictions of capitalism has arguably never talist system (for example, the British Labour Party been improved upon. Its great strength is that it allows under Jeremy Corbyn) or have been partially or wholly us to see how so many apparently different crises and displaced by newer more radical parties (for example, instances of resistance, from the global to the most per- Greece; see Case Study 7.2), many of which stress their sonal and local, link together. Thus, even if Marx and green credentials. New social movements emerge with Marxism failed to supply a prescription that would almost dizzying regularity. All the while, countless guarantee progressive social change, as a diagnosis of millions attempt to modify their own behaviour in what ails us, they remain essential tools for those who order to try to take a stand against the relentless waste continue to strive for that goal. and commodification of daily life. Compared to liberalism and realism (see Chs 6 Against this background, Marx is back as an intel- and 8), Marxist thought presents a rather unfamiliar lectual force to be reckoned with. This is not only view of international relations. While the former por- because there are some uncanny parallels between his tray world politics in ways that resonate with those pre- own times and our own—both periods of huge tech- sented in the foreign news pages of our newspapers and nological, socio-economic, and political turmoil and magazines, Marxist theories aim to expose a deeper, Case Study 7.2 Greece and the disciplining power of capitalism the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as the price for continu- ing to support the financing of the country. As a result of austerity measures, wages in Greece fell by more than a third, pensions were cut by nearly a half, the country’s gross domestic product fell by a quarter, and unemployment rose to 26 per cent. The resulting crisis led to a fracturing of the traditional party system, eventually propelling the ‘far left’ Syriza to power in January 2015. Syriza came to power on an anti-austerity mandate that rejected the bailout conditions that had been imposed by the European Union. After the election, the Syriza government held further negotiations with the so-called ‘troika’ (the European Commission, European Central Bank, and the IMF). Following these negotiations, the terms demanded by the troika were put to the Greek people in a referendum on 5 July 2015. Sixty-one © Kostas Koutsaftikis / Shutterstock.com per cent of the voters rejected the package. This vote and the actions of the Syriza government appeared to be a beacon for A core conclusion of Marx’s analysis of capitalism was that it anti-austerity movements globally, and evidence of active resist- would be subject to recurrent crises. Such a crisis has engulfed ance to global capitalism. Yet just five days after the referendum, the world economy since 2008. The impact of the crisis on the Syriza government proposed a package of austerity measures Greece has been particularly severe, imposing serious hardship identical to the ones that the outcome of the referendum had on the most vulnerable members of society. Events in Greece rejected. Why had this happened? The troika made it clear that also provide a glaring example of the power of global capitalism failure to implement the austerity package would be incompat- to achieve its ends, or what Stephen Gill has described as ‘disci- ible with continued membership of the Euro and the European plinary neoliberalism’ (S. Gill 1995). David Harvey (2010: 10) has Union itself. Faced with the choice of implementing the neolib- nicely summarized this process as ‘privatise profits and socialise eral discipline of the eurozone or possible economic collapse risks; save the banks and put the screws on the people’. outside the single European currency, Syriza chose the former. The experience of Greece, even when following the election While Marxist-inspired critiques of capitalism abound, viable of a supposedly radical government, underscores the practical alternatives are seemingly in much shorter supply. difficulty—perhaps even impossibility—of posing a frontal chal- lenge to the prevailing order. There, a heavily indebted govern- Question 1: What was the background to the election of Syriza in ment was put under extreme pressure by its fellow eurozone Greece in January 2015? members to slash public spending. Predictably, this in turn led to dramatic cuts in wages and levels of social protection, as well Question 2: What explains the decision of Syriza to proceed with as extremely high levels of unemployment. Greece experienced austerity measures even after they had been decisively rejected in several years of austerity imposed by the European Union and a referendum of the Greek people? 118 stephen hobden ∙ richard wyn jones underlying—indeed hidden—truth. This is that the Ch. 26). Marxist theorists argue that the relative pros- familiar events of world politics—wars, treaties, inter- perity of the few is dependent on the destitution of the national aid operations—all occur within structures many. In Marx’s own words, ‘Accumulation of wealth that have an enormous influence on those events. These at one pole is, therefore, at the same time accumulation are the structures of a global capitalist system. Any of misery, agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutality at attempt to understand world politics must be based on the opposite pole.’ a broader understanding of the processes operating in The next section outlines some of the central features global capitalism. of the Marxist approach—or historical materialism, as In addition to presenting an unfamiliar view of it is often known. Following from this, subsequent sec- world politics, Marxist theories are also discomfiting, tions will explore some of the most important strands for they argue that the effects of global capitalism are in contemporary Marx-inspired thinking about world to ensure that the powerful and wealthy prosper at politics. Given, however, the richness and variety of the expense of the powerless and the poor. We are all Marxist thinking about world politics, the account that aware that there is gross inequality in the world, and follows is inevitably destined to be partial and to some that the gap between the richest and poorest is expand- extent arbitrary. Our aim is to provide a route map that ing at an accelerating rate (Oxfam 2018). Statistics con- we hope will encourage readers to explore further the cerning the human costs of poverty are numbing in work of Marx and of those who have built on the foun- their awfulness (global poverty is further discussed in dations he laid. The essential elements of Marxist theories of world politics In his inaugural address to the Working Men’s world into different areas of enquiry—history, philoso- International Association in London in 1864, Karl Marx phy, economics, political science, sociology, interna- told his audience that history had ‘taught the working tional relations, etc.—is both arbitrary and unhelpful. classes the duty to master [for] themselves the myster- None can be understood without knowledge of the ies of international politics’. However, despite the fact others: the social world has to be studied as a whole. that Marx himself wrote copiously about international Given the scale and complexity of the social world, this affairs (see K. Anderson 2010), most of this writing was exhortation clearly makes great demands of the ana- journalistic in character. He did not incorporate the lyst. Nonetheless, for Marxist theorists, the disciplinary international dimension into his theoretical mapping boundaries that characterize the contemporary social of the contours of capitalism. This ‘omission’ should sciences need to be transcended if we are to generate a perhaps not surprise us. The staggering ambition of the proper understanding of the dynamics of world politics. theoretical enterprise in which he was engaged, as well Another key element of Marxist thought is the mate- as the nature of his own methodology, inevitably meant rialist conception of history. The central contention that Marx’s work would be contingent and unfinished. here is that processes of historical change are ultimately Marx was an enormously prolific writer, and his a reflection of the economic development of society. ideas developed and changed over time. Hence it is not That is, economic development is effectively the motor surprising that his legacy has been open to numerous of history. The central dynamic that Marx identifies is interpretations. In addition, real-world developments tension between the means of production and relations have also led to the revision of his ideas in the light of of production that together form the economic base of experience. Various schools of thought have emerged a given society. As the means of production develop, that claim Marx as a direct inspiration, or whose work for example through technological advancement, pre- can be linked to Marx’s legacy. Before discussing what vious relations of production become outmoded, and is distinctive about these approaches, it is impor- indeed become fetters restricting the most effective tant to examine the essential common elements that utilization of the new productive capacity. This in turn connect them. leads to a process of social change whereby relations of First, all the theorists discussed in this chapter share production are transformed in order to better accom- with Marx the view that the social world should be ana- modate the new configuration of means. Developments lysed as a totality. The academic division of the social in the economic base act as a catalyst for the broader  Chapter 7 Marxist theories of international relations 119 was committed to the cause of emancipation. He was not interested in developing an understanding of the Base Superstructure dynamics of capitalist society simply for the sake of it. Rather, he expected such an understanding to make it easier to overthrow the prevailing order and replace it Means of production Political system, legal system, relations of production culture, etc. with a communist society—a society in which wage labour and private property are abolished and social Figure 7.1 The base–superstructure model relations transformed. transformation of society as a whole. This is because, as It is important to emphasize that the essential ele- Marx argues in the Preface to his Contribution to the ments of Marxist thought, all too briefly discussed in Critique of Political Economy, ‘the mode of production this section, are also fundamentally contested. That is, of material life conditions the social, political and intel- they are subject to much discussion and disagreement lectual life process in general’ (Marx 1970 : 20–1). even among contemporary writers who have been influ- Thus the legal, political, and cultural institutions and enced by Marxist writings. There is disagreement as to practices of a given society reflect and reinforce—in a how these ideas and concepts should be interpreted more or less mediated form—the pattern of power and and how they should be put into operation. Analysts control in the economy. It follows logically, therefore, also differ over which elements of Marxist thought are that change in the economic base ultimately leads to most relevant, which have been proven to be mistaken, change in the ‘legal and political superstructure’. (For a and which should now be considered as outmoded or diagrammatical representation of the base–superstruc- in need of radical overhaul. Moreover, they diverge ture model, see Fig. 7.1.) The relationship between the substantially in terms of their attitudes to the legacy of base and superstructure is one of the key areas of discus- Marx’s ideas. The work of the new Marxists, for exam- sion in Marxism, and for critics of Marxist approaches. ple, draws more directly on Marx’s original ideas than Class plays a key role in Marxist analysis. In con- does the work of the critical theorists. trast to liberals, who believe that there is an essential harmony of interest between various social groups, Marxists hold that society is systematically prone to Key Points class conflict. Indeed, in the Communist Manifesto, which Marx co-authored with Engels, it is argued Marx himself provided little in terms of a theoretical analysis of international relations. that ‘the history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggle’ (Marx and Engels 1967 Marx’s ideas have been interpreted and appropriated in a number of different and contradictory ways, resulting in a ). In capitalist society, the main axis of conflict number of competing schools of Marxism. is between the bourgeoisie (the capitalists) and the proletariat (the workers). Underlying these different schools are several common elements that can be traced back to Marx’s writings: a Despite his commitment to rigorous scholarship, commitment to analysis of the social world as a totality, a Marx did not think it either possible or desirable for materialist conception of history, and a focus on class and class struggle. the analyst to remain a detached or neutral observer of this great clash between capital and labour. He argued For Marx and Marxists, scholarship is not a disinterested activity: the ultimate aim is to assist in a process of human that ‘philosophers have only interpreted the world in emancipation. various ways; the point, however, is to change it’. Marx Marx internationalized: from imperialism to world-systems theory Although Marx was clearly aware of the international the implications of capitalism’s transborder charac- and expansive character of capitalism, his key work, teristics, in particular imperialism (see Brewer 1990). Capital, focuses on the development and characteris- Rosa Luxemburg was a major contributor to these tics of nineteenth-century British capitalism. At the debates. Her 1913 book, The Accumulation of Capital start of the twentieth century a number of writers took (Luxemburg 2003 ), argued that by analysing on the task of developing analyses that incorporated capitalism as a closed system, Marx had overlooked 120 stephen hobden ∙ richard wyn jones the central role played by the colonies. In order to appropriation of this profit on the basis of individual survive, Luxemburg argued, capitalism constantly or collective ownership’. In the context of this system, needed to expand into non-capitalist areas. A 1917 all the institutions of the social world are continually pamphlet by Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of being created and recreated. Furthermore, and cru- Capitalism, made similar arguments. Lenin accepted cially, it is not only the elements within the system that much of Marx’s basic thesis, but argued that the char- change. The system itself is historically bounded. It had acter of capitalism had changed since Marx published a beginning, has a middle, and will have an end. the first volume of Capital in 1867 (Marx 1992 ). In terms of the geography of the modern world Capitalism had entered a new stage—its highest and system, in addition to a core–periphery distinction, final stage—with the development of monopoly capital- Wallerstein added an intermediate semi-periphery, ism. Under monopoly capitalism, a two-tier structure which displays certain features characteristic of had developed in the world economy, with a domi- the core and others characteristic of the periphery. nant core exploiting a less-developed periphery. With Although dominated by core economic interests, the the development of a core and periphery, there was no semi-periphery has its own relatively vibrant indig- longer an automatic harmony of interests between all enously owned industrial base (see Fig. 7.2). Because workers as posited by Marx. The bourgeoisie in the core of this hybrid nature, the semi-periphery plays impor- countries could use profits derived from exploiting the tant economic and political roles in the modern world periphery to improve the lot of their own proletariat. system. In particular, it provides a source of labour In other words, the capitalists of the core could pacify that counteracts any upward pressure on wages in the their own working class through the further exploita- core. It also offers a new home for those industries that tion of the periphery. can no longer function profitably in the core (e.g. car Lenin’s views were taken up by the Latin American assembly and textiles). The semi-periphery also plays Dependency School, adherents of which developed a vital role in stabilizing the political structure of the the notion of core and periphery in greater depth. In world system. particular, Raúl Prebisch (1949) argued that countries According to world-systems theorists, the three in the periphery were suffering as a result of what he zones of the world economy are linked together in an called ‘the declining terms of trade’. He suggested that exploitative relationship in which wealth is drained the price of manufactured goods increased more rap- away from the periphery to the core. As a consequence, idly than that of raw materials. So, for example, year by the relative positions of the zones become ever more year it requires more tons of coffee to pay for a refrig- erator. As a result of their economies’ reliance on raw material production, countries of the periphery become Core Democratic government poorer relative to the core. Other writers such as André High wages Gunder Frank (1967) and Henrique Fernando Cardoso Import: Raw materials (who was President of Brazil from 1995 to 2003), devel- Export: Manufactures oped this analysis further to show how the development High investment of less industrialized countries was directly ‘dependent’ Welfare services Semi-periphery on the more advanced capitalist societies. It is from the Authoritarian governments Export: framework developed by such writers that contempo- ‘Mature’ manufactures rary world-systems theory emerged. Raw materials Import: World-systems theory is particularly associated with Manufactures Raw materials the work of Immanuel Wallerstein. For Wallerstein, Low wage global history has been marked by the rise and demise Low welfare services of a series of world systems. The modern world system Periphery Non-democratic governments emerged in Europe at around the turn of the sixteenth Export: century. It subsequently expanded to encompass the Raw materials Import: entire globe. The driving force behind this seemingly Manufactures Below subsistence wages relentless process of expansion and incorporation has No welfare services been capitalism, defined by Wallerstein (1979: 66) as ‘a system of production for sale in a market for profit and Figure 7.2 Interrelationships in the world economy  Chapter 7 Marxist theories of international relations 121 deeply entrenched: the rich get richer while the poor for the reproduction of capitalism. For example, Maria become poorer. Mies (1998 ) argued that women play a central Together, the core, semi-periphery, and periphery role in the maintenance of capitalist relations. There make up the geographic dimension of the world econ- is, she argues, a sexual (or one could say gendered) omy. However, described in isolation they provide a division of labour: first, women in the developed rather static portrayal of the world system. A key com- world working as housewives, whose labour is unpaid ponent of Wallerstein’s analysis has been to describe but vital in maintaining and reproducing the labour how world systems have a distinctive life cycle: a begin- force; and second, women in the developing world as a ning, a middle, and an end. In this sense, the capital- source of cheap labour. Women, she later argued, were ist world system is no different from any other system the ‘last colony’ (Mies, Bennholdt-Thomsen, and von that has preceded it. Controversially, Wallerstein (1995) Werlhof 1988), a view that can be traced back to Rosa argues that the end of the cold war, rather than mark- Luxemburg’s claim regarding the role of the colonies in ing a triumph for liberalism, indicates that the current international capitalism (Luxemburg 2003 ). system has entered its ‘end’ phase—a period of crisis In the wake of the attacks of 9/11, and the subsequent that will end only when it is replaced by another sys- response by the US administration of George W. Bush, tem. On Wallerstein’s reading, such a period of crisis questions of imperialism returned to the political and is also a time of opportunity. In a time of crisis, actors academic agenda. A number of authors called for the have far greater agency to determine the character of creation of a new empire with the United States at its the replacement structure. Much of Wallerstein’s recent centre, supposedly recreating the stabilizing and posi- work has been an attempt to develop a political pro- tive role that Britain had played in the nineteenth cen- gramme to promote a new world system that is more tury (Ferguson 2003). A number of Marxist-influenced equitable and just than the current one (Wallerstein authors responded with critiques both of empire and of 1998, 1999, 2006; see also Wallerstein et al. 2013). US foreign policy after 9/11 (for example, Harvey 2003). From this perspective, to focus on globalization is to ignore what is truly novel about the contemporary Key Points era. Indeed, for Wallerstein, current globalization dis- course represents a ‘gigantic misreading of current Marxist theorists have consistently developed an analysis of the global aspects of international capitalism—an aspect reality’ (Wallerstein 2003: 45). The phenomena evoked acknowledged by Marx, but not developed in Capital. by ‘globalization’ are manifestations of a world system that emerged in Europe during the sixteenth century World-systems theory can be seen as a direct development of Lenin’s work on imperialism and the Latin American to incorporate the entire globe: a world system now in Dependency School. terminal decline. Feminist Marxists have also played a significant According to world-systems theorists, the three zones of the world economy—the core, periphery and semi- role in theorizing the development of an international periphery—are linked together in an exploitative capitalist system. A particular concern of feminist writ- relationship in which wealth is drained away from the ers (often drawing their inspiration from Engels’s 1884 periphery to the core. work The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the Feminist writers have contributed to the analysis of international capitalism by focusing on the specific roles of State) has been the role of women, both in the work- women. place and as the providers of domestic labour necessary Gramscianism Antonio Gramsci—the importance a neo-Gramscian or ‘Italian’ school is flourishing. Here of hegemony we shall discuss Gramsci’s legacy and the work of Robert This section examines the strand of Marxist theory that W. Cox, the contemporary theorist who did most to intro- has emerged from the work of the Italian Marxist Antonio duce his work to an International Relations audience. Gramsci. Gramsci’s work has become particularly influen- Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937) was a Sardinian and tial in the study of international political economy, where one of the founding members of the Italian Communist 122 stephen hobden ∙ richard wyn jones Party. He was jailed in 1926 for his political activities Several important implications flow from this and spent the remainder of his life in prison. Although analysis. The first is that Marxist theory needs to take many regard him as the most creative Marxist thinker superstructural phenomena seriously, because while of the twentieth century, he produced no single, inte- the structure of society may ultimately be a reflection of grated theoretical treatise. Rather, his intellectual legacy social relations of production in the economic base, the has been transmitted primarily through his remarkable nature of relations in the superstructure is of great rel- Prison Notebooks (Gramsci 1971). The key question evance in determining how susceptible that society is that animated Gramsci’s theoretical work was: why to change and transformation. Gramsci used the term had it proven to be so difficult to promote revolution ‘historic bloc’ to describe the mutually reinforcing and in Western Europe? After all, Marx had predicted that reciprocal relationships between the socio-economic revolution, and the transition to socialism, would occur relations (base) and political and cultural practices first in the most advanced capitalist societies. But, in (superstructure) that together underpin a given order. the event, it was the Bolsheviks of comparatively back- For Gramsci and Gramscians, to reduce analysis to the ward Russia that had made the first ‘breakthrough’, narrow consideration of economic relationships, on the while all the subsequent efforts by putative revolution- one hand, or solely to politics and ideas, on the other, aries in Western and Central Europe to emulate their is deeply mistaken. It is their interaction that matters. success ended in failure. The history of the early twenti- Gramsci’s argument also has crucial implications eth century seemed to suggest, therefore, that there was for political practice. If the hegemony of the ruling class a flaw in classical Marxist analysis. But where had they is a key element in the perpetuation of its dominance, gone wrong? then society can only be transformed if that hegemonic Gramsci’s answer revolved around his use of the con- position is successfully challenged. This entails a coun- cept of hegemony, his understanding of which reflected ter-hegemonic struggle in civil society, in which the his broader conceptualization of power. Gramsci devel- prevailing hegemony is undermined, allowing an alter- oped Machiavelli’s view of power as a centaur—half native historic bloc to be constructed. beast, half man—a mixture of coercion and consent. Gramsci’s writing reflects a particular time and a In understanding how the prevailing order was main- particular—and in many ways unique—set of circum- tained, Marxists had concentrated almost exclusively stances. This has led several writers to question the on the coercive practices and capabilities of the state. broader applicability of his ideas (see Burnham 1991; On this understanding, it was simply coercion, or the Germain and Kenny 1998). But the most important test, fear of coercion, that kept the exploited and alienated of course, is how useful ideas and concepts derived from majority in society from rising up and overthrow- Gramsci’s work prove to be when they are removed ing the system that was the cause of their suffering. from their original context and applied to other issues Gramsci recognized that while this characterization and problems. It is to this that the chapter now turns. may have held true in less developed societies, such as pre-revolutionary Russia, it was not the case in the Robert W. Cox—the analysis of ‘world order’ more developed countries of the West. Here the system was also maintained through consent. It was the Canadian scholar Robert W. Cox (1926– Consent, on Gramsci’s reading, is created and 2018) who arguably did most to introduce Gramsci to recreated by the hegemony of the ruling class in the study of world politics. He developed a Gramscian society. It is this hegemony that allows the moral, approach that involves both a critique of prevailing political, and cultural values of the dominant group theories of international relations and international to become widely dispersed throughout society and political economy, and the development of an alterna- to be accepted by subordinate groups and classes as tive framework for the analysis of world politics. their own. This takes place through the institutions of To explain Cox’s ideas, we begin by focusing on one civil society: the network of institutions and practices particular sentence in his seminal 1981 article, ‘Social that enjoy some autonomy from the state, and through Forces, States, and World Orders: Beyond International which groups and individuals organize, represent, and Relations Theory’. The sentence, which has become express themselves to each other and to the state (for one of the most often-quoted lines in all of contem- example, the media, the education system, churches, porary International Relations theory, reads: ‘Theory and voluntary organizations). is always for some one, and for some purpose’ (R. Cox  Chapter 7 Marxist theories of international relations 123 1981: 128). It expresses a worldview that follows logi- interests, and have done so not only as a result of their cally from the Gramscian, and broader Marxist, posi- coercive capabilities, but also because they have man- tion that has been explored in this chapter. If ideas and aged to generate broad consent for that order, even values are (ultimately) a reflection of a particular set among those who are disadvantaged by it. of social relations, and are transformed as those rela- For the two hegemons that Cox analyses (the UK tions are themselves transformed, then this suggests and the US), the ruling hegemonic idea has been ‘free that all knowledge (of the social world at least) must trade’. The claim that this system benefits everybody has reflect a certain context, a certain time, a certain space. been so widely accepted that it has attained ‘common Knowledge, in other words, cannot be objective and sense’ status. Yet the reality is that while ‘free trade’ is timeless in the sense that some contemporary realists, very much in the interests of the hegemon (which, as for example, would like to claim. the most efficient producer in the global economy, can One key implication of this is that there can be no produce goods which are competitive in all markets, so simple separation between facts and values. Whether long as it has access to them), its benefits for periph- consciously or not, all theorists inevitably bring their eral states and regions are far less apparent. Indeed, values to bear on their analysis. This leads Cox to many would argue that ‘free trade’ is a hindrance to suggest that we need to look closely at each of those their economic and social development. The degree to theories, those ideas, those analyses that claim to be which a state can successfully produce and reproduce objective or value-free, and ask who or what is it for, its hegemony is an indication of the extent of its power. and what purpose does it serve? He subjected realism, The success of the United States in gaining worldwide and in particular its contemporary variant neorealism, acceptance for neoliberalism suggests just how domi- to thoroughgoing critique on these grounds. According nant the current hegemon has become. to Cox, these theories are for—or serve the interests But despite the dominance of the present world of—those who prosper under the prevailing order: the order, Cox did not expect it to remain unchallenged. inhabitants of the developed states, and in particular Rather, he maintained Marx’s view that capitalism is the ruling elites. The purpose of these theories, whether an inherently unstable system, riven by inescapable consciously or not, is to reinforce and legitimate the contradictions. Inevitable economic crises will act status quo. They do this by making the current con- as a catalyst for the emergence of counter-hegemonic figuration of international relations appear natural and movements (see Case Study 7.2). The success of such immutable. When realists (falsely) claim to be describ- movements is, however, far from assured. In this sense, ing the world as it is, as it has been, and as it always will thinkers such as Cox face the future on the basis of a be, what they are in fact doing is reinforcing the ruling dictum popularized by Gramsci—that is, combining hegemony in the current world order. ‘pessimism of the intellect’ with ‘optimism of the will’. Cox contrasted problem-solving theory (that is, the- ory that accepts the parameters of the present order, and Key Points thus helps legitimate an unjust and deeply iniquitous system) with critical theory. Critical theory attempts to challenge the prevailing order by seeking out, analys- Drawing on the work of Antonio Gramsci for inspiration, writers in an ‘Italian’ school of International Relations have ing, and, where possible, assisting social processes that made a considerable contribution to thinking about world politics. can potentially lead to emancipatory change. One way in which theory can contribute to these Gramsci shifted the focus of Marxist analysis more towards superstructural phenomena. emancipatory goals is by developing a theoretical understanding of world orders that grasps both the Inconsent particular, Gramsci explored the processes by which for a particular social and political system was sources of stability in a given system, and also the produced and reproduced through the operation of dynamics of processes of transformation. In this con- hegemony. Hegemony allows the ideas and ideologies of text, Cox drew on Gramsci’s notion of hegemony and the ruling stratum to become widely dispersed, and widely transposes it to the international realm, arguing that accepted, throughout society. hegemony is as important for maintaining stability and Thinkers such as Robert W. Cox have attempted to ‘internationalize’ Gramsci’s thought by transposing continuity there as it is at the domestic level. According several of his key concepts, most notably hegemony, to to Cox, successive dominant powers in the interna- the global context. tional system have shaped a world order that suits their 124 stephen hobden ∙ richard wyn jones Critical theory Both Gramscianism and critical theory have their roots In other words, in classical Marxist terms, the focus of in Western Europe in the 1920s and 1930s—a place and critical theory is almost entirely superstructural. a time in which Marxism was forced to come to terms Another key feature is that critical theorists have not only with the failure of a series of attempted revo- been highly dubious as to whether the proletariat in lutionary uprisings, but also with the rise of fascism. contemporary society does in fact embody the potential However, contemporary critical theory and Gramscian for emancipatory transformation in the way that Marx thought about international relations draw on the ideas believed. Rather, with the rise of mass culture and the of different thinkers, with differing intellectual concerns. increasing commodification of every element of social There is a clear difference in focus between these two life, Frankfurt School thinkers have argued that the strands of Marxist thought, with those influenced by working class has simply been absorbed by the sys- Gramsci tending to be much more concerned with issues tem and no longer represents a threat to it. This, to use relating to the subfield of international political econ- Marcuse’s famous phrase, is a one-dimensional society, omy than critical theorists. Critical theorists, on the to which the vast majority simply cannot begin to con- other hand, have involved themselves with questions ceive an alternative. concerning international society, international ethics, Finally, critical theorists have made some of their and security (the latter through the development of crit- most important contributions through their explora- ical security studies). This section introduces critical tions of the meaning of emancipation. Emancipation, theory and the thought of one of its main proponents in as we have seen, is a key concern of Marxist thinkers, the field of International Relations, Andrew Linklater. but the meaning that they give to the term is often very Critical theory developed out of the work of the unclear and deeply ambiguous. Moreover, the his- Frankfurt School. This was an extraordinarily tal- torical record is unfortunately replete with examples ented group of thinkers who began to work together of unspeakably barbaric behaviour being justified in in the 1920s and 1930s. As left-wing German Jews, the the name of emancipation, of which imperialism and members of the school were forced into exile by the Stalinism are but two. Traditionally, Marxists have Nazis’ rise to power in the early 1930s, and much of equated emancipation with the process of human- their most creative work was produced in the US. The ity gaining ever greater mastery over nature through leading lights of the first generation of the Frankfurt the development of ever more sophisticated technol- School included Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, ogy, and its use for the benefit of all. But early critical and Herbert Marcuse. A subsequent generation has theorists argued that humanity’s increased domina- taken up the legacy of these thinkers and developed it tion over nature had been bought at too high a price, in important and innovative ways. The best known is claiming that the kind of mind-set that is required for Jürgen Habermas, who is regarded by many as the most conquering nature slips all too easily into the domina- influential of all contemporary social theorists. Given tion of other human beings. In contrast, they argued the vast scope of critical theory writing, this section that emancipation had to be conceived of in terms of a can do no more than introduce some of its key features. reconciliation with nature—an evocative, if admittedly The first point to note is that their intellectual con- vague, vision. By contrast, Habermas’s understand- cerns are rather different from those of most other ing of emancipation is more concerned with commu- Marxists: they have not been much interested in the nication than with our relationship with the natural further development of analysis of the economic base world. Setting aside the various twists and turns of of society. They have instead concentrated on questions his argument, Habermas’s central political point is relating to culture, bureaucracy, the social basis and that the route to emancipation lies through radical nature of authoritarianism, and the structure of the democracy—a system in which the widest possible family, and on exploring such concepts as reason and participation is encouraged not only in word (as is the rationality as well as theories of knowledge. Frankfurt case in many Western democracies) but also in deed, by School theorists have been particularly innovative in actively identifying barriers to participation—be they terms of their analysis of the role of the media, and social, economic, or cultural—and overcoming them. what they have famously termed the ‘culture industry’. For Habermas and his many followers, participation is  Chapter 7 Marxist theories of international relations 125 not to be confined within the borders of a particular nurture—tendencies that exist in the present conjunc- sovereign state. Rights and obligations extend beyond ture that point in the direction of emancipation. On state frontiers. This, of course, leads Habermas directly this basis, Linklater (very much echoing Habermas in to the concerns of International Relations, and it is this regard) identifies the development of the European striking that his recent writings have begun to focus on Union as representing a progressive or emancipatory the international realm. In particular, he has become tendency in contemporary world politics. If true, this an impassioned defender of European integration. suggests that an important part of the international However, thus far, the most systematic attempt to think system is entering an era in which the sovereign state, through some of the key issues in world politics from a which has for so long claimed an exclusive hold on its recognizably Habermasian perspective has been made citizens, is beginning to lose some of its pre-eminence. by Andrew Linklater. Given the notorious pessimism of the thinkers of the Linklater has used some of the key principles and Frankfurt School, the guarded optimism of Linklater precepts developed in Habermas’s work to argue that in this context is indeed striking. emancipation in the realm of international relations should be understood in terms of the expansion of Key Points the moral boundaries of a political community (see Ch. 11). In other words, he equates emancipation with a process in which the borders of the sovereign state lose Critical School. theory has its roots in the work of the Frankfurt their ethical and moral significance. At present, state Critical theorists have tended to focus their attention on culture (in particular the role of the media), bureaucracy, borders denote the furthest extent of our sense of duty the social basis and nature of authoritarianism, and the and obligation, or at best, the point where our sense of structure of the family, and on exploring such concepts as duty and obligation is radically transformed, only pro- reason and rationality. ceeding in a very attenuated form. For critical theorists, this situation is simply indefensible. Their goal is there- Jürgen Habermas is the most influential contemporary advocate of critical theory; he advocates radical fore to move towards a situation in which citizens share democracy as a means of unlocking the emancipatory the same duties and obligations towards non-citizens as potential inherent in the realm of communication. they do towards their fellow citizens. Andrew Linklater has developed critical theory themes to argue in favour of the expansion of the moral boundaries To arrive at such a situation would, of course, entail of the political community, and has pointed to the a wholesale transformation of the present institutions European Union as an example of a post-Westphalian of governance. But an important element of the criti- institution of governance. cal theory method is to identify—and, if possible, to New Marxism is not hard to characterize. They are Marxists who have ‘New Marxists’ returned to the fundamental tenets of Marxist thought This section examines the work of writers who derive and sought to reappropriate ideas that they regard as their ideas more directly from Marx’s own writings. To having been neglected or somehow misinterpreted by indicate that they represent something of a departure subsequent generations. On this basis, they have sought from other Marxist and post-Marxist trends, we have both to criticize other developments in Marxism, and to termed them ‘new Marxists’. They themselves might well make their own original theoretical contributions to the prefer to be described as ‘historical materialists’ (one of understanding of contemporary trends. the key academic journals associated with this approach The most outstanding advocate of what one might is called Historical Materialism); however, as that is a term ‘the return to Marx’ is the geographer David self-description which has also been adopted by some Harvey, whose explorations and explanations of Marx’s Gramsci-inspired writers, the appellation may not be masterpiece Capital have reached an enormous online particularly helpful for our present purposes. At any rate, audience as well as being published in book form (see even if there is (at present) no settled label for this group davidharvey.org; Harvey 2018). In another important of scholars, the fundamental approach that they embody contribution, Kevin B. Anderson’s Marx at the Margins 126 stephen hobden ∙ richard wyn jones (2010) focuses on Marx’s little-known writing on the states that had started earlier, because they had access world politics of his day to recover his ideas about to investment and technology that had not been previ- nationalism, ethnicity, and race. ously available. However, this came at a potential cost: a distorted political structure. Whereas in Britain, the country on which Marx had focused his attention, the Uneven and combined development political system had evolved over a lengthy period of Meanwhile, in a series of articles Justin Rosenberg time and was relatively stable, in Russia the political (1996, 2013; also see Callinicos and Rosenberg 2008) structure that emerged from a rapid process of mod- has developed an analysis based on Leon Trotsky’s ernization was highly unstable. It was characterized idea of uneven and combined development, which by an authoritarian state leading the process of devel- Trotsky outlined primarily in his history of the Russian opment in conjunction with international finance, a Revolution. Contrary to the traditional Marxist line, growing but concentrated working class, an enormous Trotsky observed that capitalism was not having the peasantry on which the state was reliant for raising tax, effects that were anticipated. Certainly it was spreading but only a small and weak bourgeoisie. Hence the social around the globe at a rapid rate as Marx and Engels had formation in Russia was markedly different from that of predicted in the Communist Manifesto. However, Marx Britain, and its structure made sense only in the context and Engels had predicted that capitalism would cre- of the international development of capital. ate a world ‘after its own image’. Elsewhere Marx (1954 While Trotsky used the concept of uneven and com- : 19) had stated that ‘the country that is more bined development to analyse the events leading up developed industrially only shows, to the less devel- to the Russian Revolution, Kamran Matin (2013) has oped, the image of its own future’. Marx at this point employed it to consider the history of Iran. Criticizing appeared to have a unilinear perspective on historical Eurocentric accounts of historical progress that focus development and, while there is evidence in some of his on European states as the model for state development, later writing that he became sceptical about this view, it Matin argues that while the study of International was not an issue that he had time to develop. Therefore it Relations is crucial to understanding Iran’s history, it became Marxist orthodoxy that capitalist development has to be considered in conjunction with an assessment was a singular road, with countries joining the process of Iran’s domestic history. Matin shows how Iran’s at different times. There was just one route through cap- history is a complex interaction between its domestic italist modernization, the path having been mapped out social and economic systems and the priorities of inter- by Britain as the pioneering capitalist economy. While national politics and economics. The country’s histori- some countries would start the journey at different cal progress has been impacted by both the influence times, the sequence and destination would be the same. of events, such as the Russian Revolution, and the eco- Trotsky’s insight was that paths to development were nomic and political incursions by European countries indeed uneven in that different countries started the and subsequently the United States. This has resulted road to capitalism at different times, and from differ- in a largely unstable combination, in which attempts ing starting points. They were also, however, combined, at modernization, for example by the last Shah, have in the sense that the development of capitalism in the faced a system combining a modern industrial sector, states that were already started on the process had largely dominated by the state in collaboration with implications for those that followed. In other words, foreign capital, and a small cosmopolitan middle class the context for capitalism in any one country would be combined with a large agricultural and merchant class set by all the other countries that had already embarked with established institutions and close links to the reli- on capitalist development. Hence the process in Russia gious establishment. During the economic downturn occurred in the context of capitalist developments else- of the 1970s and in conjunction with pressure from the where and particularly in Western Europe. The advance US Carter administration, this combination became of capitalism can thus be seen as an international pro- increasingly unstable until the revolutionary overthrow cess with latecomers having certain disadvantages but of 1979. Development in Iran, then, Matin argues, can also some advantages. One particular advantage was be understood only as uneven, in that Iran commenced what Trotsky called the ‘privilege of historic backward- on the capitalist path at a later time and from a different ness’ (cited in Rosenberg 1996: 7). Countries joining starting point, yet combined in terms of the influence the capitalist road had the possibility of leapfrogging of already existing global capitalism.  Chapter 7 Marxist theories of international relations 127 Key Points New Marxism is characterized by a direct re-engagement with and reappropriation of the concepts and categories Uneven and combined development suggests that rather than all countries following a single path of economic and developed by Marx himself or other classic Marxist thinkers. political development, each country’s path will be affected One example of New Marxist scholarship is Justin by the international context. Rosenberg’s work on uneven and combined development, which draws on Trotsky’s examination of the development of The uneven and combined development approach has been utilized to analyse Iran’s economic and political development Russia in the global political economy. in the twentieth century. Conclusion As outlined in the first chapter of this book, globaliza- even if it is only recently that growing environmental tion is the name given to the process whereby social degradation has finally caused this fact to permeate transactions of all kinds increasingly take place with- public consciousness. out accounting for national or state boundaries, with While the intensity of cross-border flows may be the result that the world has become ‘one relatively bor- increasing, this does not necessarily signify the fun- derless social sphere’. Marxist theorists would certainly damental change in the nature of world politics pro- not disagree that these developments are taking place, claimed by so many of those who argue that we have nor would they deny their importance, but they would entered an era of globalization. Marxist theorists insist reject any notion that they are somehow novel. Writing that the only way to discover how significant contem- in the mid-nineteenth century, Marx and Engels were porary developments really are is to view them in the clearly aware not only of the global scope of capital- context of the deeper structural processes at work. ism, but also of its potential for social transformation. When this is done, we may well discover indications In a particularly prescient section of the Communist that important changes are afoot. For example, many Manifesto, they argue: Marxists regard the delegitimation of the sovereign The bourgeoisie has through its exploitation of the state as a very important contemporary development. world market given a cosmopolitan character to pro- However, the essential first step in generating any duction and consumption in every country...  All old- understanding of those trends regarded as evidence established national industries have been destroyed or of globalization must be to map the contours of global are daily being destroyed. They are dislodged by new capitalism itself. If we fail to do so, we will inevitably industries, whose introduction becomes a life and death fail to gauge the real significance of the changes that question for all civilized nations, by industries that no are occurring. longer work up indigenous raw material, but raw mate- Another danger of adopting an ahistoric and uncrit- rial drawn from the remotest zones; industries whose ical attitude to globalization is that such an attitude can products are consumed, not only at home, but in every blind us to the way in which reference to globalization quarter of the globe. has become part of the ideological armoury of elites in the contemporary world. ‘Globalization’ is now regu- (Marx and Engels 1967 : 83–4) larly cited as a reason to promote measures to reduce workers’ rights and lessen other constraints on busi- According to Marxist theorists, the globe has long been ness. Such ideological justifications for policies that dominated by a single integrated economic and politi- favour the interests of business can only be countered cal entity—a global capitalist system—that has gradu- through a broader understanding of the relationship ally incorporated all of humanity within its grasp. In between the political and economic structures of capi- this system, all elements have always been interrelated talism (see Opposing Opinions 7.1). The understanding and interdependent. The only thing that is ‘new’ is an proffered by the Marxist theorists suggests that there is increased awareness of these linkages. Similarly, eco- nothing natural or inevitable about a world order based logical processes have always ignored state boundaries, on a global market. Rather than accept the inevitability 128 stephen hobden ∙ richard wyn jones Opposing Opinions 7.1 The global economy is the prime determinant of the character of global politics For Against Economic power determines states’ capability to project The balance of power determines the character of inter- military power. Economic resources are needed to purchase national politics. Periods of relative balance coincide with military equipment or to maintain the research and develop- greater stability in the international system. The ‘long peace’ of ment necessary to keep military capability at the highest level. the second half of the twentieth century occurred because there It is no coincidence that the most militarily powerful states in was a relative balance of power between the United States and the international system (the US and China) are also the most the Soviet Union, particularly since ‘mutual assured destruction’ economically powerful. meant that neither side could ‘win’ a nuclear conflict. The current instability in the international system derives from the relative Periods of economic turmoil are linked to increased insta- decline of the United States. bility in the international system. The Second World War was preceded by a long period of economic instability caused by the The spread of democracy produces greater global stability. Great Depression. Marxists, following Lenin, locate the cause of While we may not have reached ‘the end of history’ in Francis the First World War in the competition among capitalist states Fukuyama’s term, the claim that democracies don’t go to war with for control over the colonies. Since the economic crisis of 2008, each other retains its validity, and democracy promotion is the international tensions have been mounting, particularly between best hope for a more peaceful and stable future. Europe, which Russia and the United States. By contrast, the ‘long peace’ of the is now a peaceful community of democracies, was, historically, cold war was marked by a period of relative economic stability. the most war-torn region in the world. With the exception of the break-up of post-communist Yugoslavia, Europe has not experi- Capitalist interests determine states’ foreign policy. For enced a major conflict since the end of the Second World War. example, Paul Wolfowitz, who was Deputy Secretary of Defense in the George W. Bush administration, openly declared that the Reducing state behaviour to the expression of capitalist 2003 invasion of Iraq was about securing access to oil. There is a interests does not explain actions that appear at least partly long history of large corporations influencing US policy towards motivated by genuine altruistic or other concerns. Behaviour Latin America. For instance, United Fruit played a key role in such as contributions to United Nations peacekeeping operations, lobbying for the overthrow of the Arbenz administration in for example, or pressure-group-inspired debt forgiveness, cannot Guatemala in 1954. readily be explained in terms of the operation of crude economic interests. More controversially, it might even be argued that some behaviours—such as the United States’ continuing and largely uncritical support for Israel—may well work against the state’s long-term economic interests. Simplistic, reductionist readings of the influences on state behaviour are almost always inadequate. 1. Does the balance of power provide a better explanation for periods of stability than economic prosperity? 2. Can state actions be reduced purely to economic interests? 3. What is the connection between economic power and military capability? For advice on how to answer these questions, see the pointers www.oup.com/he/baylis8e of the present order, the task facing us is to lay the foun- own. In our world of multiple crises, Rosa Luxemburg’s dations for a new way of organizing society—a global observation that we have a choice between socialism or society that is more just and more humane than our barbarism appears more relevant than ever. Questions 1. How would you account for the continuing vitality of Marxist thought? 2. How useful is Wallerstein’s notion of a semi-periphery? 3. Why has Wallerstein’s world-systems theory been criticized for its alleged Eurocentrism? Do you agree with this critique?  Chapter 7 Marxist theories of international relations 129 4. In what ways is ‘combined and uneven development’ a useful lens through which to view the development of world politics? 5. In what ways does Gramsci’s notion of hegemony differ from that used by realist International Relations writers? 6. How might it be argued that Marx and Engels were the original theorists of globalization? 7. What do you regard as the main contribution of Marxist theories to our understanding of world politics? 8. How useful is the notion of emancipation employed by critical theorists? 9. Do you agree with Cox’s distinction between ‘problem-solving theory’ and ‘critical theory’? 10. Assess Wallerstein’s claim that the power of the United States is in decline. Test your knowledge and understanding further by trying this chapter’s Multiple Choice Questions www.oup.com/he/baylis8e Further Reading Anderson, K. B. (2010), Marx at the Margins: On Nationalism, Ethnicity and Non-Western Societies (Chicago: University of Chicago Press). A brilliant reconstruction of Marx’s own writing on world politics. Brincat, S., Lima, L., and Nunes, J. (eds) (2012), Critical Theory in International Relations and Security Studies: Interviews and Reflections (London: Routledge). Interviews with some of the key proponents of critical theory in the field, along with further reflections both supportive and more critical. Cox, R. W. (1981), ‘Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory’, Millennium, 10(2): 126–55. Cox’s much-quoted essay continues to inspire. Derluguian, G. M. (2005), Bourdieu’s Secret Admirer in the Caucasus: A World-System Biography (Chicago: University of Chicago Press). This unconventional book is a dazzling display of the insights generated by the world-system approach. Eagleton, T. (2018), Why Marx was Right (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press). A short, highly entertaining and deceptively erudite defence of the core tenets of Marx’s worldview. Lenin, V. I. (1917), Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism (multiple editions available). While of limited contemporary relevance, it is still worth reading this once-influential pamphlet. Linklater, A. (2007), Critical Theory and World Politics: Sovereignty, Citizenship and Humanity (London: Routledge). An important book from one the most influential critical theorists working on international relations. Marx, K., and Engels, F. (1848), The Communist Manifesto (multiple editions available). The best introduction to Marx’s thinking. Essential reading even after 150 years. Wallerstein, I., Collins, R., Mann, M., Derluguian, G., and Calhoun, C. (2013), Does Capitalism Have a Future? (New York: Oxford University Press). A fascinating exploration of the problems of contemporary global capitalism by prominent world-system theorists and their (sympathetic) critics. To find out more about theories of world politics follow the web links www.oup.com/he/ baylis8e