Neo-Gramscianism
is a relatively new approach to the
study of
International Relations
(IR) and the
International Political
Economy (IPE) that explores the
interface of ideas, institutions and
material capabilities as they shape
the specific contours of the
state
formation. It analyzes how the
particular constellation of social
forces, the state and the dominant
ideational configuration define and
sustain world orders. In this sense,
the neo-Gramscian approach breaks
the decades-old stalemate between
the so-called realist schools of
thought, and the
liberal
theories by
historicizing the very
theoretical
foundations of the two streams as
part of a particular world order,
and finding the interlocking
relationship between
agency and
structure. The
theory is heavily
influenced by the writings of
Antonio Gramsci. Furthermore, Karl
Polanyi,
Karl Marx,
Max Weber, Niccolò Machiavelli
The beginning of the neo-Gramscian perspective can be traced to York University professor emeritus, Robert W. Cox's article "Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory", in Millennium 10 (1981) 2, and "Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in Method", published in Millennium 12 (1983) 2. In his 1981 article, Cox demands a critical study of IR, as opposed to the usual "problem-solving" theories, which do not interrogate the origin, nature and development of historical structures, but accept for example that states and the (supposedly) "anarchic" relationships between them as Kantian Dinge an sich.
However Cox disavows the label Neo-Gramscian despite the fact that in a follow-up article, he showed how Gramsci's thought can be used to analyze power structures within the GPE. Particularly Gramsci's concept of hegemony, vastly different from the realists' conception of hegemony, appears fruitful. Gramsci's state theory, his conception of "Historic Blocks" -- dominant configurations of material capabilities, ideologies and institutions as determining frames for individual and collective action -- and of élites acting as "organic intellectuals" forging Historic Blocks, is also deemed useful.
The Neo-Gramscian approach has also been developed along somewhat different lines by Cox's colleague, Stephen Gill, distinguished research professor of political science at York University in Toronto. Gill contributed to showing how the elite Trilateral Commission acted as an "organic intellectual", forging the (currently hegemonic) ideology of neoliberalism and the so-called "Washington Consensus" and later in relation to the globalization of power and resistance in his book Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Palgrave 2003). Outside of North America, the so-called "Amsterdam School" around Kees van der Pijl and Henk Overbeek (at Free University of Amsterdam) and individual researchers in Germany, notably in Düsseldorf, Kassel and Marburg as well as at the Centre for Global Political Economy at the University of Sussex in the UK, and other parts of the world, have adopted the neo-Gramscian critical method.
In the mainstream approaches to international or global political economy the ontological centrality of the state is not in question. In contrast, Neo-Gramscianism, using an approach which Henk Overbeek calls transnational historical materialism, "identifies state formation and interstate politics as moments of the transnational dynamics of capital accumulation and class formation". It contrasts with the positivism and social constructivist approaches of mainstream perspectives through "a rejection of the separation between subject and object... and the adaptation of a dialectic understanding of reality as a dynamic totality and as a unity of opposites."
The neo-Gramscian view of hegemony is distinct from the realist view of hegemony. Realists view hegemony as a the "predominant power of a state (or a group of states)." Gramscians look at hegemony in terms of class relations. A class is considered hegemonic if it has legitimized its dominance through institutions and concessions. When a class has established dominance in this way, as well as in the formal political structural of a state, then it constitutes a historic bloc. Neo-Gramscians argue that, because of globalization, a neoliberal transnational historic bloc exists or is coming into existence.
A
counterhegemony refers to an
alternate normative interpretation
of the functioning of social,
economic, and political
institutions. If a
counterhegemony
grows large enough it is able to
subsume and replace the historic
bloc it was born in.
Neo-Gramscians use the Machiavellian
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Neo-Gramscianism".