Neo-Gramscianism
Neogramscianismus is a relatively new direction in the studies International relations and international political economy, which attempts to break the long-standing standstill between the school of thought of realism and liberal theories. It is based in their critical approach to the political philosophy of the Italian Communist Antonio Gramsci.
The former director of the International Institute for Labour Studies of the International Labour Organisation ( ILO), Robert W. Cox, the first political philosophy Antonio Gramsci made to the understanding of international relations fruitful ( cf. Cox 1977).
Scientific understanding of neo- Gramscianism
The Neo - Gramscianism based on a post- positivist scientific understanding. Robert W. Cox subdivided refer to the theories of international relations in problem-solving theories and critical theories. The former assume that certain properties of the existing world order are permanent. Within these they then try to solve isolated problems. Critical theories, however, assume the existing world order not as a given, but question them. For one, how did it come, what is your instantaneous actual state and on the other, how and who could change it.
Cultural hegemony
The hegemony - term ( " cultural hegemony ") of the Neo - Gramscianism differs from the classical theories of international relations, as that not including the economic and military dominance of a single country is understood within the state system. Hegemony is rather the ability of the ruling class to universalize their interests and beliefs so broad strata of society consider to be desirable, even if they conflict with their personal interests. Hegemony is achieved, for example, if all employees the sentence " If the economy is doing well, it's all good" would agree.
Levels and elements of hegemony
The struggle for cultural hegemony is articulated in contrast to the classical Gramscianism not only at national level but also takes place on three levels. Within the given relations of production, at the level of states and the existing world order. This is done using the following elements of hegemony: Material capacities ( means of production ), ideas ( theories and ideologies ) and institutions (contracts, organizations).
Historical block
Succeed in a dominant class, the emergence of a hegemony by means of all elements at all levels of the international system, so to speak, the representatives of Neogramscianismus based on Gramsci of a historic block. In recent decades, a block of managers, business people, academics and government representatives began to emerge, based on the values of neoliberalism. Robert W. Cox and Stephen Gill denote this block either as a transnational capitalist class or transnational managerial class. An important role in the formation of this historic block play on the one hand, informal parties, such as the Mont Pelerin Society, and the Trilateral Commission, but also international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and international business schools, in which the offspring of this class is formed.
Disciplining neoliberalism and New Constitutionalism
Despite its strong dominance of neo-liberalism, it is so far not managed to achieve cultural hegemony within the meaning of Antonio Gramsci. The previous Universialisierung his thoughts good can not superimpose its contradictions. Here are particularly noteworthy:
- Discrepancy between the power of capital and its democratic control
- Intensification of discipline in the workplace at the same time precariousness and marginalization of employment
- Expansion of neoliberal discipline in areas that were formerly protected from the market
The hegemony of neoliberalism therefore increasingly no longer based on consensus, but coercion. Stephen Gill speaks of a disciplinary neoliberalism, which is increasingly subjecting all aspects of the life of market discipline. On the political- institutional level, this disciplinary neoliberalism is anchored by a new constitutionalism. This tries to entdemokratisieren policy decisions and to cement a neo-liberal policies by international treaties. An example of this is the Maastricht criterion makes (see EU convergence criteria), which forces national governments to fiscal discipline and an alternative economic policy impossible.
Criticism of the neo- Gramscianism
- Constraints of the capitalist system are underestimated and capabilities of the actors operating in
- Dominance of the capitalist system is based primarily on coercion rather than consensus
- Neo - Gramscians tend partially to an elite fixation and neglect beyond the influence of other actors
- The role of the nation state is marginalized in favor of international civil society. States will be expected to play in many Neo - Gramscianern a subordinate role ( like a " transmission belt " ) and have within the existing world order hardly maneuver
Neo - Gramscian analysis
Further inspired by Gramsci analyzes can be found at the Canadian Political Scientist Stephen Gill and in Germany, for example, Hans -Jürgen Bieling / Jochen Steinhilber, Erik Borg and Christoph Scherrer. The central category for the analysis of rule still forms the hegemony. Hegemony by Gramsci is a form of political rule, which is based on consensus. With the hegemony of neo- term Gramscianism continues the debate about the decline of U.S. hegemony since the 70s on ( "American Decline "). Stephen Gill examined the Trilateral Commission as an example of the role of transnational policy networks for the emergence of neo-liberal hegemony in international relations ( cf. Gill 1990). Recent work examining the political character of globalization.
Antonio Gramsci is an important source for this direction, there are further also Eric Hobsbawm, Karl Polanyi, Karl Marx, Max Weber, Niccolò Machiavelli added in, as well as more recent sources, Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida and Stuart Hall. This direction is often referred to as the critical theory of international relations.