Neo-Gramscianism

Keywords capitalism, crisis, global, internal relations, war Bieler and Morton's Global Capitalism, Global War, Global Crisis makes an important and timely contribution to the academic study of the international political economy. 1 Based on the philosophy of internal relations, the book seeks to challenge the 'ontologi-cal exteriority' that is typically posited between key elements of the international system, such as ideas, the social relations of production, the workplace, the 'social factory', and the market, state and interstate system. While the authors draw on a range of theoretical resources and approaches, it is the historical materialism of Antonio Gramsci that provides the key intellectual resource for the numerous theoretical interventions made in the book. For example, Gramsci's critique of economism and statology provides the basis of an insightful intervention into the structure-agency debate by emphasising the intersections between the social relations of production and class struggle. Gramsci's theory of hegemony and the integral state, on the other hand, provides the basis of an understanding of the material structure of ideology. As such, Bieler and Morton further strengthen the case for the relevance of Gramsci's writings not just for the field of International Political Economy but for social theory more broadly. Any critical engagement with the book should thus recognise its ambition and scope. Yet, for all this dense theoretical discussion, it is the three empirical chapters on the rising powers, the Iraq war, and global financial crisis that provide the opportunity for the authors to demonstrate that theoretical framework centred on the philosophy of internal relations lives up to its potential in terms of offering novel and compelling explanations of contemporary international affairs. In my comments, therefore, I will reflect primarily on the chapter on rising powers, and as with the chapter itself, on the case of the rise of

China is becoming increasingly assertive in international relations, raising questions regarding the  future of the American-led liberal international order. With Chinese military, economic, ideational  and institutional power increasing, analysts often compare American and Chinese power in these  terms. The problem with such an approach is that, while it informs the debate on Chinese or
American power strictly in these terms, it does little to address the issue of hegemony. Under a  Neo-Gramscian framework, material, ideational and institutional power combine to formulate  hegemony. In this vein, this paper combines the different academic materials on these mechanisms  of power to assess the extent to which US hegemony is embedded and whether China will be able  to supersede the US in any of these areas, thus ending American hegemonic rule.
Drawing from a wide range of recently published secondary sources, this analysis uses  qualitative and quantitative data to assess the threat that China poses to the American-led liberal  order. Occasionally, where more recent data is not available or where the source provides a  theoretical contribution that complements the Neo-Gramscian framework, this essay uses data  more than a decade old. Under Neo-Gramscianism, the three mechanisms of power are  inseparable, and if the hegemon loses dominance over one of these mechanisms it is no longer  hegemonic. Analysis of the data available demonstrates that, despite China’s goal to establish a  counterhegemonic order, the US retains dominance over material capabilities, ideas and  institutions, and American hegemony remains deeply embedded. However, it is recommended that  policy makers and analysts do not underestimate how an increasingly dominant China will shape  international relations, even if it does not have the power to fundamentally change the international  order. Further research is needed to understand the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and Trump  presidency on Chinese and American power.

This article is an attempt to contribute to current debate on the historical relations, linkages and changing potentials between the recent rise of right-wing populism, autocratic regimes and fascism(s) using the case of Turkey. The scope of this article is limited to events and discussions until the legalization of Erdogan’s one-man regime.

It is possible to draw upon Marx’s thinking without emphasizing an automatic relationship between an economic ‘base’ and a political ‘superstructure’. The development of capitalism must then be understood as resulting from the ‘conceptual separation’ of the economic and political issues. However, the research that favours this approach fails to provide the tools for a precise and systematic study of the political work which makes this separation possible. For his part, through the development of field theory and the emphasis on the notion of symbolic power, Pierre Bourdieu offers the means to analyse the political work of multiple agents, but he does not formulate a theory of capitalism tailored to his findings. It seems worthwhile to take up and extend some of his proposals to open up avenues of thought in this direction. It is then about considering that different fields coexist, each of which lends itself to a political struggle based on the assertion of symbolic power; each field contributes to a ‘conceptual separation’ of the economic and political issues, which is itself constitutive of capitalism. As a result, production and trade operations seem to be part of a natural and autonomous process. Capital can thus be accumulated without necessitating the direct use of force. The combination of fields can lend itself to certain variations. It always shapes the political structures of accumulation.

The Routledge Handbook to Global Political Economy provides a comprehensive guide to how Global Political Economy (GPE) is conceptualized and researched around the world. Including contributions that range from traditional International Political Economy (IPE) to GPE approaches, the Handbook gathers the investigations, varying perspectives and innovative research of more than sixty scholars from all over the world.

Providing undergraduates, postgraduates, teachers and researchers with a complete set of traditional, contending and regional perspectives, the book explores current issues, conceptual tools, key research debates and different methodological approaches taken.

Structured in five parts methodologically correlated, the book presents GPE as a field of global, regional and national research:

• historical waves and diverse ontological axes;

• major theoretical perspectives;

• beyond traditional perspectives;

• regional inquiries;

• research arenas.

Carefully selected contributions from both established and upcoming scholars ensure that this is an eclectic, pluralist and multidisciplinary work and an essential resource for all those with an interest in this complex and rapidly evolving field of study.

Welcome to another episode of Fully Automated!

Today, we’re bringing you an interview with Dr. Vanessa Bilancetti, Lecturer in Political Sociology at UniNettuno University, in Rome. Vanessa is one of those rare scholars who can bring together Foucault and Marx, and apply them both to the interesting empirical questions of our time. In this episode, she’ll be talking with us about how we can approach their scholarship as a toolbox for analyzing European Governmentality in the context of post-financial crisis political economy.

Vanessa’s research interests include the European Union, financialisation, feminist political economy and critical European studies. I had the good fortune of meeting Vanessa at an online conference this summer, held by the Critical Political Economy Research Network. Vanessa was presenting a paper, called ‘How to study the commodification of social services following a gender perspective.’ Between sessions, we got talking about Foucault and how he is used in political economy, and I found Vanessa’s take on the inherent compatibilities between Foucault and Marx to be really interesting. She later sent me some of her research, which I read, and .. well, that’s when I decided I had to have her on for an interview!

Vanessa is an advocate of allowing the methods of Foucault with that of what she calls, “an anti-essentialist Marxism and a critical feminist political economy approach.” So, in this interview you’re going to hear me ask her to elaborate on that. We’re also going to talk about the case studies she presents in her published work, on the European Fiscal Compact. I’m very grateful to Vanessa for coming on the show, and I hope you enjoy the conversation.

Before I sign off here, just wanted to thank everyone who shared and commented on last week’s “special commentary episode” on the prominence of the K-Hive, in academia. Hope to do more of those “essay”-style pods, in the future.

We never ask for money for this show. However, if you enjoy it, please feel welcome to leave a rating on Apple Podcasts, or the podcast app of your choice. The ratings help improve the standing of the show, and help me book future guests for the show!

GRAMSCI E IL POPULISMO,  a cura di Guido Liguori. Collana della International Gramsci society -  EDIZIONI UNICOPLI
Il populismo è oggi al centro del dibattito politico e culturale, e Gramsci-soprattutto grazie agli importanti scritti di Ernesto Laclau e Chantal Mouffe è uno dei principali autori chiamati in causa dai sostenitori o detrattori di questo nuovo approccio alla politica. Intorno alle questioni del populismo in Gramsci e del Gramsci maggiormente "usato" dai populisti si confrontano nel volume autrici e autori di diversi "specialismi", e anche di opinioni non sempre coincidenti, che danno vita a una vivace discussione sia sull'autore dei Quaderni del carcere e su alcuni suoi concetti fondamentali (nazionale-popolare, egemonia, nazione, Risorgimento), sia su alcune esperienze di "populismo di sinistra" contemporanee-in particola-re quella di Podemos che anche a Gramsci fanno riferimento.

How successful have emerging powers been at increasing their representation within the secretariats of international organizations (IOs)? We examine the representation of the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) in the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the United Nations (UN) System, including the UN Secretariat, over the last two decades. The analysis reveals four major findings. First, some redistribution of staff positions from established to emerging powers has taken place, but it has been relatively minor. Second, nationals from emerging powers are still strongly under-represented in international secretariats in comparison with those from established powers. Third, emerging powers' representation at the IMF and WTO increased more than in the UN, where it actually declined. Fourth, there is strong variation between emerging powers: India appears to be the most successful emerging power in sending its nationals to the secretariats of IOs, Brazil's and China's records are mixed, and Russia has fared poorly. We interpret our findings in light of international relations theories and theories of institutional path dependence. The results suggest that staffing patterns are only loosely related to shifts in economic size and are subject to strong independent institutional dynamics.

Resumen: Hegemonía y orden internacional hegemónico son ontologías clave para la disciplina y la teoría de las Relaciones Internacionales, y por ello, se trata de conceptos en permanente disputa académica. En un escenario mundial caracterizado por la crisis de la globalización, que puede interpretarse como crisis de hegemonía, vuelve a ser oportuna la revisión de estos conceptos. Este capítulo reexamina el concepto de hegemonía a partir tanto de las aproximaciones clásicas, como de una teorización crítica que se basa en la sociología histórica. Desde el concepto de hegemonía de Antonio Gramsci, se examina la aportación de la escuela neogramsciana de Relaciones Internacionales, que, frente a conceptos como primacía o polaridad, propone una visión estructural y socio-histórica de la hegemonía y de la globalización como un orden internacional hegemónico específico de esta etapa histórica. 

Abstract: Hegemony and international hegemonic order are key ontologies for both the discipline and the theory of International Relations, and therefore, these are concepts in permanent academic dispute. In a global scenario characterized by the crisis of globalization, which can be interpreted as a crisis of hegemony, the revision of these concepts is timely again. This chapter re-examines the concept of hegemony from both the classical approaches and critical theorizations based on historical sociology. Grounded on Antonio Gramsci's concept of hegemony, the contribution of the Neogramscian school of International Relations is examined, which, in the face of concepts such as primacy or polarity, proposes a structural and socio-historical vision of hegemony, and of globalization as a specific hegemonic international order in this historical stage.

Abstract

As a global community, we need to understand better how a just transition can shift development paths to achieve net zero emissions and eliminate poverty. Our past development trajectories have led to high emissions, persistent inequality and a world that is fragmented across multiple contradictions.  How can countries shift to development pathways that deliver zero poverty and zero carbon?  In developing a theory of just transition, the article begins by reviewing a range of theoretical approaches from different traditions, building in particular on neo-Gramscian approaches. It applies and modifies core components of Gramsci’s approach, building a neo-Gramscian theory of just transitions around concepts of ideology, hegemony, change agents and fundamental conditions. The theory suggests how coalitions of change agents can come together behind a just transition. The coalition needs to gain broader support, establish a new cultural hegemony in support of just transitions and be able to transform the fundamental conditions of the 21st century. The article briefly considers how this better understanding can be applied to the practice of shifting development pathways. The penultimate section reflects on limitations, including that a fuller development of a theory of just transition will require application for detailed concrete examples and a community effort. Together, we might address the multiple challenges of our present conditions to transition to development that enables human flourishing and a healthy planet.

At a time when the region of Central and Eastern Europe is considered a dominant example of democratic backsliding with authoritarian tendencies, this monograph aims to provide a critical approach to minority issues. By carving out the philosophical implications of the notion of subalternity, Trupia draws particularly on Antonio Gramsci’s philosophy of praxis and his scholarly legacy in order to debunk societal models of liberal multiculturalism and their hegemonic discourse. This monograph is not only an attempt to unravel power-centred fabrication of subordination resulting from hierarchic methods of doing politics and imposing cultural ascriptions upon certain segments of society. It also deals with subalternity as a “perspective of opportunity” through the lens of complex identity positions of minority groups and their changes through time.

Nel 1991 diversi intellettuali del PCI che erano contrari al suo scioglimento, aderirono alla Rifondazione Comunista e si impegnarono a preservare l'eredità gramsciana da letture e interpretazioni moderate-riformiste funzionali alla liquidazione di una forte organizzazione comunista con autonomia teorico-politica. Tra questi, Andrea Catone e Ferdinando Dubla, intellettuali impegnati in Puglia nella ricostruzione di un partito comunista di quadri e di massa. Il saggio, pubblicato sulla rivista Marx 101, fu tradotto in portoghese sulla rivista Vertice! sul nr.43 dell'ottobre 1991 ("O NOSSO GRAMSCI - GRAMSCI PARA LER , E MUDAR, O NOSSO PRESENTE") e in catalano sulla rivista Realitat, nr.34 del gennaio 1993 ("NUESTRO GRAMSCI - GRAMSCI PARA LEER Y CAMBIAR NUESTRO PRESENTE"). Il saggio si compone dei seguenti paragrafi:
- La concezione del partito comunista
- Per l’analisi del capitalismo contemporaneo
- La concezione del socialismo
- Le contraddizioni insuperabili (la teoria della crisi)
- Critica al sistema capitalista e alla sua egemonia culturale
- Gramsci e le forme della transizione in Occidente (e limiti della prassi riformista)
- Internazionalismo e vie nazionali (a proposito di "interdipendenza")
- Una critica moderna dell’alienazione (un altro esito possibile dell’antieconomicismo)

В диссертации  предложен анализ концепций идеологии Грамши и Альтюссера в широком контексте развития марксистской традиции на Западе; прослежена эволюция (пост)альтюссерианской теории идеологии (1970-1990-е гг.), сопряженная с “поворотом к Грамши” в современной марксистской мысли (Э.Балибар, М.Пеше, Ж.Рансье, Н.Пуланцас, П.Херст, Г.Терборн, Т.Иглтон, С.Холл и британские культуральные исследования, Э.Лакло, Ш.Муфф, С.Жижек и ряд других авторов). Показано значение и актуальность концепций Грамши и Альтюссера для анализа взаимосвязей дискурсивных практик, субъективности и социальных отношений доминирования – междисциплинарной проблемной области, являющейся ключевой для современных направлений критической социальной мысли.

Emerging in the late 1970s, the Amsterdam School’s (AS) most distinctive contribution to international political economy was the systematic incorporation of the Marxian concept of capital fractions into the study of international politics. Contending that politics in advanced capitalist countries takes place in a fundamentally transnationalized space in which the distinction between ‘domestic’ and ‘international’ has blurred, it shows how in this space, politics is structured by competing comprehensive concepts of control.
Presenting a concise and instructive introduction to the origins, development and significance of this distinct approach, this book provides a unique overview of the School’s contemporary significance for the field. Offering a new generation of critical scholars the opportunity to become acquainted at first hand with some of the contributions that have shaped the work of the AS, the contributions present critical commentaries, discussing the merits and shortcomings of the AS from a variety of perspectives, and undertake a (self-)critical evaluation of the current place and value of the AS framework in the broader landscape of approaches to the study of contemporary capitalism.
Written for scholars and students alike, it will be of interest to those working in international political economy, international relations and political science, political sociology, European studies and branches of academic economics such as regulation theory and institutional economics.

Antonio Gramsci saß in den Kerkern des faschistischen Italien der 1930er Jahre. Er verfasste dort die «Gefängnishefte», eine Art tagebuchähnlicher Arbeitshefte, in denen sich der kommunistische Politiker und Intellektuelle daranmacht, marxistisches Denken zu erneuern. Viele revolutionäre Bewegungen waren gescheitert. So fragt Gramsci nach der Bedeutung des Staates, der Kultur und der Intellektuellen für die Organisation von Herrschaft in kapitalistischen Gesellschaften. Die Gefängnishefte mit ihren vielfältigen Notizen sind ein fragmentarisches Werk, in dem sich bis heute aktuelle Fragen und Problemstellungen aufspüren lassen:

    Wie wird die freiwillige Unterwerfung und Zustimmung der Menschen zu Herrschaft organisiert?
    Welche Grabenkämpfe werden in der Zivilgesellschaft ausgetragen?
    Wie verändert sich in Krisenzeiten das Verhältnis von Zwang und Konsens?

Das Webinar will gemeinsam Wege durch den Steinbruch der Gefängnishefte und das Denken Gramscis finden. Wir wollen nicht über Gramsci reden, wir wollen ihn lesen. Das macht zusammen mehr Sinn und Spaß als allein. Wir diskutieren ausgewählte Passagen und kurze Stellen. Dabei folgen wir dem Verlauf der Hefte, um die verwobene Entwicklung der Passagen nicht zu zerstören. Zur Vertiefung wichtiger Fragen und Begriffe gibt es Hinweise auf aktuelle Texte. Als Grundlage nutzen wir den Auswahlband «Gramsci lesen - Einstiege in die Gefängnishefte».