Marxism focuses on how economic relationships explain state behavior and views capitalism as exploitative, traditionally through class exploitation. However, the decline of the Soviet Union reduced Marxist thinking until the 2008 financial crisis provoked a resurgence. Marxism in international relations sees class exploitation occurring internationally and imperialism as a means for developed countries' elites to exploit resources. Gramscianism reformulated Marxism to emphasize elites' cultural hegemony and control of civil society. Critical theory argues ideology, not economics or culture, best explains state behavior. Both Marxism and critical theory offer unique perspectives on exploitation that realism and liberalism lack. However, they are also seen as overly utopian and not offering practical solutions for national security

1. Marxism and Critical
Theory
OWEN BELL

2. Marxism in Brief
Focuses on the role of economic relationships in explaining the behaviour of states
The core theory of Marxism is the belief that the capitalist system is exploitative.
This is traditionally understood in terms of class exploitation.
The fall of the Soviet Union resulted in a decline in Marxist thinking.
But the 2008 financial crisis has provoked a Marxist mini-resurgence.

3. Marxism and IR
As capitalism developed, class exploitation took place on an international level
Elites in developed countries were able to use their wealth to buy off the working class in the
developed world.
Imperialism was the means by which demand for resources and new markets was met.
Lenin- WW1 was a capitalist war
Globalisation has replaced imperialism; the global elite exploit the proletariat in all countries

4. Gramscianism
Gramsci reformulated Marxism in terms of the elites’ control of the culture- cultural hegemony
Domination of civil society allows the bourgeois to hold on to power
The revolution would have to be cultural as well as economic
Examples: Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, Imperial Europe
Examples today: Southern State USA, Russia, Eastern Europe

5. Critical Theory
Ideology, not culture or economics, is key to explaining state behaviour
Habermas: revolution can be achieved through communication, radical democracy and political
participation beyond the state
Revolutions shouldn’t be constrained by state boundaries; role of international institutions
Feminist CT: women have played a subordinate role in spreading capitalism
CT places an emphasis on social movements: anti-globalisation, environment etc…

6. Strengths of Marxism and CT
Looks at IR from a perspective largely ignored by Realists and Liberals
Has been reformulated to take into account new events: imperialism, world war, globalisation
Offers perspectives on ideology (unlike realism), and how it is used to exploit people (unlike
liberalism)
It accepts the Social Darwinist nature of the world; necessity to achieve relative strength
Offers an ideal to work towards

7. Weaknesses of Marxism and CT
Over-emphasis on the role of economic structures
Ambiguous as to what the international system should be
Relies on revolution/overthrow of the state
Utopian to expect state not to act selfishly, or out of their own interests
Unlike liberalism, offers no concept of respect for individual rights

8. Conclusion
Marxism offers a unique insight into how states develop. Teleological.
Offers hope of a better world than the status quo.
But like liberalism, it is too utopian.
It seeks to impose its vision on the world, rather than treating the world how it is.
No insight into how to deal with national security threats, i.e. the War on Terror.