1

Marxism and Realism: Economic and International Political Interaction are Zero-Sum Games

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course

Instructor

Date
 2

Marxism and Realism: Economic and International Political Interaction are Zero-Sum

Games

Game theory is a decision-making approach, which is the premise on the rationality of an

actor or actors in the situation of a competition (Hornborg, 2003). Ideally, competitive actors aim

at maximizing the gains or minimize the losses under the underlying conditions of uncertainty or

incomplete information; hence, the need to rank preferences in order of importance, estimate

probabilities, or discern the moves each competitor would make. According to Rubin (2018), in a

two-person zero-sum game, if an actor wins, the other losses. Marxist's school of international

relations focuses on different questions different from the proponents of realism and liberalism.

The link between the world's political and economic systems is a primary focus of Marxism

concerning the international political economy. Ideally, both Marxist and realism assertions

postulate the role of economic and political power in international relations in their claims on a

zero-sum game.

Marxism school of international relations focuses on the interaction between politics and

economics with enormous latitude given to economic freedoms. Besides, Marxism is closely

associated with the international political economy aspect that investigates the link between

political and economic systems (Larsen et al., 2014). The international political economy

concept embraces the assumption that actors tend to harness their economic advantage to gain

political power. Additionally, the international political economy hypothesizes that actors tend to

leverage their political power to increase their economic advantage. Marxism aims to explain

capitalism based on the global system of distribution and distribution premised ion market

relations. The spread of the economic system has contributed to two social-economic classes in

constant competition to influence the world's capitalist economy (Larsen et al., 2014).
 3

Subsequently, the dominant type in the socioeconomic relationship is the bourgeoisie that uses

economic wealth and uses the political power to access more economic wealth. According to

Marxism, this dynamic has led to creating a world of unequal global economic and political

relationships. The outcome of such a relationship is the situation where economically powerful

bourgeois nations are the core of the world's capitalist system that dominates and exploit actors

who are economically underdeveloped proletarian periphery.

Marx's vision of the modern economy as a zero-sum game is primarily based on

exploitation. The applicability of Marx's economic theory highlights the fundamental construct

of resilience, mostly through understanding Karl Marx's economy. Karl Marx postulated that

proletarians have to sell labor to capitalists because capitalists offer the means of production,

hence in a position to provide employment. Marxism asserts exploitation is inherent in the

capitalist economy across the world, which defines the fundamentals of international relations. A

zero-sum game is an aspect of game theory in which an actor's gain is equivalent to another's

loss; hence, the net change in wealth or benefit is zero (Larsen et al., 2014). Marxism's argument

defines the free enterprise of many people through a portrayal of a system of dog-eat-dog

competition where winners always create losers. Marxist argument explores the involvement of

the political system in reinforcing the economic power of the bourgeoisie by promoting business,

passing anti-union laws, and disregarding the voices of the poor. Marxists claimed that the world

must be understood as a function of socioeconomic systems. Besides, the zero-sum game's

assertion highlights the materialistic approach that assumes that the global or international order

is a product of economic interactions essential in generating political, cultural, and social

systems, which are the foundation of international relations (Hornborg, 2003). In the capitalist

world, political, social, and cultural systems play an essential role in reinforcing economic
 4

hierarchies. Marxists assert that the material dynamic of international relations depends on

means of production and relations of production. Besides, Marxists view economics as an

essential determinant of political and social outcomes; hence, the uneven economic structure is

reflected in the international distribution of social and political power.

The realism school of through explains international relations in terms of power. The

power of politics is influenced by numerous factors concerning states' ability to exercise their

power towards each other. According to Kat (2015), power is the fundamental concept of

international relations-though difficult to measure. Kat(2015) notes that realism is one of the

oldest international political economy and international relation paradigms, which consist of a

spectrum of ideas that play an essential role in determining the behavior between states.

Subsequently, realists believe in the lack of centralized global authority that limits sovereign

states or determines their actions; hence, nations are lawful actors in international affairs.

Consequently, the concept of national interest or self-help highlights the prevalence of policy of

survival within the international system. Realism emphasizes political interactions and

international security. Additionally, realism is relevant in the international political economy

because of the aspect of power and military abilities, which primarily depend on economic

development and capital accumulation. The zero-sum game is an essential principle of realism

that examines the aspect of economic nationalism and economic relations' role in international

relations. Ideally, economic relation should be an idea of relative gains; hence, international trade

can be defined as a zero-sum game where one-state or nation gains while the other losses. For

instance, in contemporary society, the developed world uses industrialization, a strong economy,

and military power to dominate low-income states. According to Rossi and Sleat (2014),

economics science presumes any political order and cannot be profitably examined in isolation
 5

from politics. The realism paradigm of international political economics examines the concept

of international relations. Notable, realism assumption that all international political interactions

are zero-sum games where industrialized states make economic and political policies because of

their economic power (Hornborg, 2003). The practice of international trade between

'bourgeoisie' nations and 'proletarian' nations reflect the zero-sum game interaction where

industrialized nation receive raw materials then undertake value addition.

Overall, both Marxism and realism postulate that economics and international political

interaction are zero-sum games since there are clear winners and losers. Marxism and realism

theories are relevant in the study of international political economics based on competing

paradigms. Besides, the two ideologies are premised on the aspect of power. Economic power

play an essential role in achieving political power. The game theory defines international

relations by contrasting analogical and metaphorical use of games and capturing essential

contextual features of the international system; hence, Realism and Marxism follow the decision

–approaching assuming actions rationality in a competition situation through maximization

minimization of losses under a condition of uncertainty.

 6

References

Hornborg, A. (2003). Cornucopia or a zero-sum game? The epistemology of

sustainability. Journal of world-systems research, 205-216.

Larsen, N., Nilges, M., Robinson, J., & Brown, N. (2014, April). Marxism and the Critique of

Value. MCM.

Kat, M. (2015). A Conceptual Analysis of Realism in International Political Economy. E-

International Relations Students, 16.

Rossi, E., & Sleat, M. (2014). Realism in normative political theory. Philosophy Compass, 9(10),

689-701.

Rubin, P. H. (2018). Zero-sum thinking and economic policy. Behavioral and Brain

Sciences, 41.