After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War between the Western Bloc and Eastern Bloc, the enduring ideological conflict between communism and capitalism was seen to come to an end. The global order has since entered into a neo-liberal capitalist era, with neo-liberal ideologies characterizing the various dimensions of the global order, such as international politics and economics. As the world is homogenizing into neo-liberal capitalist orders, the rich substances of the Marxist school on international relations seem rather distanced. However, this essay will argue the contrary. It seeks to justify that, instead of being irrelevant under the contemporary international relations, Marxism offer vital tools to contest …show more content…
Capitalism and neo-liberal ideologies have been adopted by the world as the natural orders, and relevant policies are taken as the common sense policies to be adopted for nations to prosper (Hobden & Jones, 2011). This can be represented by the policy union of nations around the world, particularly, developing countries. Many developing countries, more often than not, pursue neo-liberal policies, namely trade liberalization and reductions in state expenditure in the attempt to attain economic growth and sustain prosperity. In the private sector, entrepreneurism, risk-taking, and profit maximization are seen to be the drivers for sustaining prosperity and growth. Individual prosperity and happiness are seen as being intimately tied to monetary gain and materialism. This union of ideologies, be them at the national, economical, or individual level, do not take place in isolated regions. Rather, they are widely adopted, and its spread is accelerating under globalization.
In the contemporary globalizing world economy that is converging on capitalist principles, various issues arise in the realm of international relations. One of them is capitalist imperialism. Given the power of capitalists enhanced by technological advances, mobility, and easing of regulations, they are able to extend their power to almost every corner of the world. Often time, their activities are linked to exploitations of the labour, resources, economic and political
Throughout history, many powerful nations interfered with nations that were weaker than they were. This form of sabotaging a nation is economic, political or cultural life is called as imperialism. Imperialism is often separated into two sects. The first one is old imperialism, which was the period from the 1500s to the 1800s, where European nation started to colonize many areas such as the Americas, and parts of Southeast Asia. On the other hand, the new imperialism was the period between the years “1870-1914”, where Europe became more focused on expanding their land into Asia and Africa. Imperialism had many pros and cons. In addition, it also had many causes led by the feeling of nationalism.
The early 20th century socialist revolutionary theorists Vladimir Lenin, Rosa Luxembourg and Leon Trotsky believed that the withering away of the state and the removal of the capitalist mode of production was a necessary outcome if the individual was to ever realize their true nature as being free, equal and self-determining. This, however, could only be achieved through the development of the proletariat’s class consciousness and their defeat over the bourgeoisie. It is in this manner where both socialist revolutionary theory and practice share a dialectical relationship. However untied in their revolutionary visions of this international process, these theorists differ in what the role and functions of the revolutionary party should be in the historical development of the new socialist state.
Throughout John Knowles’ A Separate Peace, Gene’s internal struggle is reflected in the war taking place. In the beginning of the story, Finny tells Gene that he was reading the paper and saw that “[the United States] bombed Central Europe...”(25). At this point in the story, it is 1942, which is the midst of World War II. This reflects Gene’s attitude toward Finny. As the war starts to escalate and the United States enters, Gene starts to loathe Finny for reasons that are entirely from Gene’s head. When Finny returns to Devon for the winter session, he has convinced himself, and soon convinces Gene, that “there isn’t any war”(115). Around this time, Gene pushes away his hateful thoughts towards Finny and convinces himself that Finny and him
At this point in time, the main actors in the international system are nation-states seeking an agenda of their own based on personal gain and national interest. Significantly, the most important actor is the United States, a liberal international economy, appointed its power after the interwar period becoming the dominant economy and in turn attained the position of hegemonic stability in the international system. The reason why the United States is dominating is imbedded in their intrinsic desire to continuously strive for their own national interest both political and economic. Further, there are other nature of actors that are not just nation-states, including non-states or transnational,
on the nerve near the ear) was greater on the side of the head that the cell phone was held.[13]
Gronow, Jukka. “Imperialism as the Truth about Capitalism.” On the Formation of Marxism: Karl Kautsky’s Theory of Capitalism, the Marxism of the Second International and Karl Marx’s Critique of Political Economy, Brill, LEIDEN; BOSTON, 2016, pp. 151–156. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1163/j.ctt1w8h23p.15.
The Industrial Revolution (1750-1850) had brought about significant changes in agriculture, mining, manufacturing, transportation and technology and subsequently established an era of unprecedented economic growth in capitalist economies. It was within this era that Karl Marx had observed the deprivation and inequality experienced by men of the proletariat, the working class, who had laboured excessively for hours under inhumane conditions to earn a minimum wage while the bourgeoisie, the capitalist class, reaped the benefits. For Marx it was this fundamental inequality within the social and economic hierarchy that had enabled capitalist societies to function. While Marx’s theories, in many instances have been falsified and predictions
The United States denied the fact about its imperialist’s role in the world and the author felt guilty about his role in the global movement. Although, we all should recognize that the American capitalism we are trying to spread in other countries might not be what’s best for rest of the world. Author now spends his life trying to educate people about role of the Economic Hit Men, and how we all can end their practices for more prosperity, and global peace by transforming our society. He says we can’t blame this movement on a conspiracy only, because “the empire depends on the efficacy of big banks, corporations, and government – the corporatocracy. This corporatocracy is ourselves – we make it happen – which of course, is why most of us find it difficult to stand up on and oppose it.
Neo-liberalism is a political ideology that suggests that ‘human well-being can be advanced by the maximisation of entrepreneurial freedom, characterised by private property rights, individual liberty, free markets and free trade’ (Geografiskar, A 2006). In today’s modern society neo-liberalism is widespread around the globe with various stakeholders offering conflicting views. Some advocates, namely the capitalistic portion of society argue that a liberal market is
Since International Relations has been academically studied Realism has been the dominant theory of world politics. The theory’s inability to explain the end of the Cold War, however, brought strength and momentum to the Liberalism theory. Today Realism and Liberalism are the two major paradigms of International Relations. The aforementioned theories focus on the international system and the external factors that can lead to two phenomena - conflict and cooperation. Realism believes that as a result of anarchy and the security dilemma, conflict is inevitable. Liberalism argues that this conflict can be overcome through cooperative activities amongst states and international organizations. This paper will explore as well as compare and contrast the strengths and weaknesses of both theories. It will also debate which of the two theories is more valuable in the
According to the proponents of Economic Imperialism, neoliberal policies are driven by the logic of private accumilation of capital based on the exploitation of labour throughout the world, which has in turn caused a world-wide system of production and labour exploitation, with extreme levels of inequality and a system of dependency relations as a result. It becomes quickly clear, when defining economic imperialism, that it looks very unfavourably towards both the developed West and neoliberalism. Whether this can be justified however,
According to Marxism, there is a struggle or conflict between individual rights and social rights. In many regards, Marxism places more emphasis on societal rights than it does on individual rights. In fact, some critics even state that Marxism ignores the rights of the individual altogether. As can be observed when Marxism is implemented under the umbrella of communism. However, Marxism takes into account the inequality and unfairness that exists in society. The inevitable truth is that contrasting groups in society will always conflict with one another and will be unable to agree on the way in which resources should be distributed. Furthermore, there is also a difference between genders, specifically in terms of the equity of how the roles
In this essay the conservative theories of Realism and Liberalism will be compared and contrasted in connection with the study of International Relations. Post World War I International Relations was established as a formal discipline with the eructation of the Woodrow Wilson Chair at the University of Wales, given the worldwide urgency to create international order and stability in the wake of the war. Realist in International Relations view human nature and the states behaviour practically and truthfully, adopting a matter-of-fact attitude instead of visualising how the political institutions ought to function. Liberalists
When trying to comprehend international politics, current events, or historical context, having a firm grasp on the various international relations theories is essential to understanding patterns when looking at interstate affairs. Realism, liberalism, constructivism, and marxist radical theory are used to provide a framework by which we can dissect international relations.
There are a million ways to read a story, a million perspectives to choose from, a million lenses to closely examine every carefully written word. When taking on a reading persona, when looking through one of these lenses, the story can be seen in a light completely alien to what is shown on the surface. One can see the story through the eyes of the famous communist politician Karl Marx, the psychologist Sigmund Freud, or even the feminist Susan B. Anthony. With each of these perspectives comes a set of important analytical questions that break the story apart and delve deeper into the author’s true meaning. One such author famous for hiding a deeper meaning beneath the surface of his stories is Ernest Hemingway. By analyzing literature through the Marxist and Postcolonial lenses, one can see Hemingway’s inner thoughts about how people view and interact with each other, on both a classist and racist level.