Marxism in IR

1. Introduction
 When Karl Marx co-wrote the Communist Manifesto with Fredrich Engels in 1848, he had no
idea that his work would still be affecting the social sciences over 150 years later.
 Demise of Marxism has been predicted many times most recently it happened when USSR
collapsed in 1991. However, 29 years later, Marxism remans a powerful intellectual force.
 The collapse of USSR has opened new space for Marxist analysis of international relations as
earlier western analysts risked to be labeled as sympathizers of USSR.
 Stripped of its Soviet connotations it has once more become a powerful philosophical
critique of capitalism.
 Unlike two mainstream theories of IR Marxism focuses on the economic foundation of IR.
 It argues that the distribution of wealth has at least as much impact on IR as political and
military relationships.
 Marxism presents an unsettling and unfamiliar image of IR – overturns many realist and
liberalist assumptions.
 Focuses on how rich and powerful classes dominate the poor around the world.
 It relegates states to secondary importance in the world, viewing them as reflections of the
socioeconomic elites that run them.
 Presents an entirely new picture of IR by changing the focus of analysis.
2. Assumptions / Principles
a. Marxism’s main organizing principle is capitalism.

b. In human terms capitalism has produced two socioeconomic classes – Bourgeoise and the
Proletariat.

c. History of capitalism has been a history of struggle between these two socioeconomic classes
with the proletariat trying unsuccessfully to free itself from the economic hegemony of the
bourgeoise.

d. Marxism concerns itself with IPE – a branch of IR that investigates links between the world’s
political and economic systems.

e. Whereas liberal institutionalism asks how to build a more peaceful world and realisms asks why
wars persist, Marxism asks how to achieve emancipation for the proletariat.

f. The goal of Marxism is to create a society in which justice determines a fair distribution of
wealth – something that closely resembles the argument of John Locke that unjust orders prove
unstable.

g. Marxism identifies socioeconomic classes as the main unit of analysis and states are relegated to
a secondary level as mere puppets of the socioeconomic elite.

h. State’s national interest is determined by the interests of its bourgeoise.

I. Wars are fought on behalf of bourgeois interests.

J. In order to motivate the proletariat on behalf of its bourgeois masters, states use the language
of nationalism.
3. Analysis
a. None of Karl Marx’s writing contains a fully developed theory of IR.

b. Marxist IR developed with different analysts and practitioners used Marxist ideas to analyze
various aspects of international affairs. One example is Immanual Wallerstin’s (an American
sociologist who presented his theory in 1970s) World System Theory, which divides the world in
three types of states (i) core states (ii) peripheral (iii) semi-peripheral.

c. Thanks to core countries access to international capital and resources, economic activity in the
world capitalist system tends to reinforce the cores dominant international position.

d. Marxists see economics as determining political and social outcomes.

e. Comparison between Marxism, realism and liberalism.

(i) Power pursuit: it is interpreted as a primary driver of international behavior of states in both
of the theories – Marxism also focuses the importance of power, Bourgeoise role in controlling
the economic power.

(ii) Unlike realism, Marxism does not take sovereign state as its unit of analysis, rather gives
priority to socioeconomic classes, as states are just masks used by the capitalists.

(iii) States are “of the bourgeoise, by the bourgeoise, for the bourgeoise” apology to Abraham
Lincoln.

(iv) Like liberal institutionalism Marxism accepts a range of non-state actors as participants in IR
– International bourgeoise MNCs.

(v) Shows no faith in regimes and non-state actors’ ability, views them mere masks.

(vi) Marxism interprets the world through the lens of historical materialism – that all political
phenomenon can be explained through the lens of economics.

4. Application
a. Marxism uncovers economic relationships that are often masked by theoretical approaches such
as realism, liberalism and the English school.

b. It is a powerful critical theory.

c. It helps us to understand the nexus among bourgeoise living in various countries, watching their
vested interests and also Marxism sets a normative standard to hope for transnational alliances
between proletariat groups living in different countries. In such a contest, Marxists think that the
capitalist class would win because this class controls the levers of power in economy and in the
political super-structures that support it – Bretton Woods. State’s hostile reaction to popular
uprisings such as the Arab Spring and the Occupy Movement may support this argument.

d. Marxism and the first World War: Rise of Lenin 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. Lenin’s pamphlets
just few days before World War I “Imperialism”. In this pamphlet he held western capitalism
responsible for the war by saying that capitalist elite in the west used nationalism to turn global
proletariat against itself – to convince workers to kill their fellow workers in the name of national
interest.
5. Conclusion
a. Marxist critique of IR introduces a new element into IR analysis; economic determinism.

b. It investigates how distribution of economic power affects the organization of the international
political system.

c. After global financial crisis 2008 – 2009 and COVID-19 pandemic 2020, Marxism still has a lot to
teach us about the world in which we live.

Sources
 Andrew Haywoods – Global Politics
 Introduction to IR by Robert Jackson.