Geopolitical economy

Last updated

Geopolitical economy is a contemporary Marxist approach to understanding the capitalist world historically. [1] It was proposed by Radhika Desai in her Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire [2] as a critique of contemporary mainstream theories of International political economy (IPE) and International relations (IR). [3] Geopolitical economy's critique rests on a rejection of orthodox views of the world economy as a seamless whole, united either by markets or by a single leading state, as in free market, free trade "globalization" and "hegemony" theories respectively. [4] Instead, geopolitical economy emphasizes the interplay of political entities, namely, states, in the development of capitalism by going back to classical political economy and to the Marxist theories of imperialism, which geopolitical economy argues should be considered the first theories of international relations. [3]

Contents

Background

The terms "geo-political economy" and "geo-politics’ had been used by British geographer Stuart Corbridge in his work relating to human geography in a 1991 article seeking to designate an approach "which builds upon uneven development theory and which affirms, once again, the insistently spatial foundations of capitalist production, exchange, and regulation." [5] Around the same time Edward Luttwak, economist and author of military-strategy books also made use of similar terms to proclaim a shift from "geopolitics" to "geo-economics" as the Cold War ended. [6] Desai's work has operationalized the term geopolitical economy into a full-fledged approach to understanding the international relations of the capitalist world. Her geopolitical economy approach has traced its roots in the works of Marx and Engels and other Marxists, linked that tradition to the developmental state tradition and placed the dialectic of imperialism and anti-imperialism, or what Leon Trotsky called Uneven and combined development, at the centre of the understanding of world affairs. [7] [8]

Components

The three main components of the geopolitical economy analysis are the "materiality of nations" thesis, the argument that capitalism develops in an uneven and combined fashion resulting in the tendency towards multipolarity, and geopolitical economy's skepticism towards theories of globalization and US hegemony.

Geopolitical economy's "materiality of nations" thesis [9] [10] insists on the key role of states in capitalism based on an understanding of capitalism as contradictory value production, and the fact that these contradictions must be managed by social agents (pre-eminently states). [7] [11] Geopolitical economy therefore puts imperialism and anti-imperialism, whose interplay Leon Trotsky dubbed that of the Uneven and Combined Development of capitalism, at the heart of both IR and IPE as the motor that drives the international relations of capitalism. [7] [8] In arguing that states are material agents, geopolitical economy also connects Marxism with the literature on "developmental states", focusing on the central role of states in the economic development of today's first world countries, which geopolitical economy understands as the imperial core of capitalism, and for any other countries, socialist or otherwise, which have advanced development after them. [12] Essentially, geopolitical economy argues that while imperialism seeks to produce and maintain the unevenness of capitalist development (development in capitalism's core and underdevelopment elsewhere), developmental states (or "contender states" [13] ) are essential to preventing or counteracting imperialism. [14] This tenet of geopolitical economy, the centrality of states throughout capitalism's history, leads geopolitical economy to conclude that ideas such as "globalization", in which no state matters, or those of "US hegemony" or "empire", in which only one does, were never accurate. [15]

The "materiality of nations" also insists that, thanks to its contradictions, and resulting imperialism, capitalism is necessarily characterized not just by a state but by multiple states locked in struggle over uneven and combined development, or what geopolitical economy argues is the same thing, imperialism and anti-imperialism. [16]

In this struggle, geopolitical economy argues that in the dialectic between dominant states’ desire to maintain the unevenness of capitalism, and that of states resisting such domination through capitalist or socialist combined development, the latter has prevailed, in the long run and against great odds. [7] That is why, geopolitical economy argues, ideas about the capitalist world expanding peaceably through markets or through a succession of hegemonies of leading capitalist states – the Italian city states, the Dutch United Provinces, the United Kingdom and the United States – were never accurate. In relation to theories of hegemony, geopolitical economy argues that while British dominance, for a time, was inevitable given the historical priority of Britain's industrial revolution, so were challenges to it. By the late nineteenth centuries, such challenges, from the US, Germany and Japan, to name the most successful, had already created a multipolar world, making US hegemony impossible. [17] Though it sought to emulate the sort of dominance Britain enjoyed in the nineteenth century in the twentieth, not only did the US have to lower its sights, forsaking the acquisition of a formal empire, and settling for making the dollar the world's money, geopolitical economy argues it failed to realise even this diluted ambition. [18] Geopolitical economy articulates how these efforts foundered first on its deficits, as the Triffin dilemma predicted, leading in 1971 to the end of the dollar's gold link, [19] and then repeatedly on the financializations, vast expansions of financial demand for the dollar to counteract downward pressure on the dollar thanks to the still effective Triffin Dilemma, on which it came to depend. [20]

Finally, geopolitical economy argues that "globalization" and "US hegemony/empire" were not theories but ideologies, discourses articulating distinct phases of the US's increasingly desperate pursuit of its formatively vain hegemonic ambition. Globalization was the rhetoric of the Clinton administration designed to encourage flows of foreign capital into the US stock market, [21] and US hegemony/empire, a ruse for the projection of a flailing US power abroad unilaterally. [22]

In proposing these theses, geopolitical economy seeks to make the emergence of multipolarity, which none of the orthodox theories of IR anticipated, comprehensible, and enables an appreciation of the potential in it since it brings the perspective of the Third World and the centrality of developmental concerns to the foreground. [17] It shows that the uneven and combined development of capitalism, the dialectic and contest between imperialism and anti-imperialism, has been the historical motor driving the evolution of the capitalist world and that, since the peak of imperialism in 1914, combined development/anti-imperialism has increasingly prevailed, making for the more than century long trend toward multipolarity. [7]

Notes

  1. Shariati, Shahrouz; Masoud, Ghaffari (2019). "The Iran-Iraq War: Geopolitical Economy of the Conflict". Geopolitics Quarterly. 14 (52): 47–48.
  2. Desai, Radhika (2013). Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire. London: Pluto.
  3. 1 2 Desai, Radhika (2015). "Marx and Engels' Geopolitical Economy". In Bagchi, Amiya; Chatterjee, Amita (eds.). Marxism: With And Beyond Marx. India: Routledge. pp. 75–77. doi:10.4324/9781315734705. ISBN   9781315734705.
  4. Gürcan, Efe Can (2020). "The construction of "post-hegemonic multipolarity" in Eurasia: A comparative perspective". The Japanese Political Economy. 46 (2–3): 130–131. doi:10.1080/2329194x.2020.1839911. S2CID   228949715.
  5. Corbridge, Stuart; Agnew, John (1991). "The US trade and budget deficits in global perspective: an essay in geopolitical-economy". Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. 9 (1): 88. Bibcode:1991EnPlD...9...71C. doi:10.1068/d090071. S2CID   143669935.
  6. Luttwak, Edward N. (1990). "From geopolitics to geo-economics: Logic of conflict, grammar of commerce". The National Interest. 20: 17–23.
  7. 1 2 3 4 5 Kurečić, Petar (2015). "Geoeconomic and geopolitical conflicts: Outcomes of the geopolitical economy in a contemporary world". World Review of Political Economy. 6 (4): 524–525. doi:10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.6.4.0522.
  8. 1 2 Desai, Radhika (2022). "Marx's Geopolitical Economy: "The relations of producing nations"". Capital & Class. 46 (1): 3–10. doi:10.1177/03098168211017433. S2CID   236225728.
  9. Desai, Radhika (2015). "Introduction: The materiality of nations in geopolitical economy". World Review of Political Economy. 6 (4): 449–458. doi:10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.6.4.0449.
  10. Desai, Radhika (2013). Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire. London: Pluto. pp. 29–63.
  11. Saidi, Hamed (2021). "The Geopolitical Economy of Chinese Influence in Iran: Empire of Capital and Uneven Development". PhD Diss., Leiden University: 30–31.
  12. Wolf, Christina (2016). "China and latecomer industrialization processes in sub-Saharan Africa: a case of combined and uneven development". World Review of Political Economy7. 7 (2): 251–252. doi: 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.7.2.0249 .
  13. Van der Pijl, Kees (2018). "A transnational class analysis of the current crisis". Transnational Capital and Class Fractions. Routledge. p. 242. doi:10.4324/9781351251945-21. ISBN   9781351251945. S2CID   240304134.
  14. Hoffmann, Sophia (2022). "The geopolitical economy of state-led intelligence-commerce: two examples from Iraq and West Germany". Globalizations: 3. doi: 10.1080/14747731.2022.2075527 . S2CID   249328382.
  15. Desai, Radhika (2013). Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire. London: Pluto. pp. 6–7.
  16. Desai, Radhika (2015). "Introduction: The materiality of nations in geopolitical economy". World Review of Political Economy. 6 (4): 451–452. doi:10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.6.4.0449.
  17. 1 2 Hudson, Michael (2016). "Ukraine and the new economic Cold War". International Critical Thought. 6 (4): 556–557. doi:10.1080/21598282.2016.1242344. S2CID   157588950.
  18. Desai, Radhika (2013). Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire. London: Pluto. pp. 260–261.
  19. Desai, Radhika (2013). Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire. London: Pluto. pp. 103–106.
  20. Desai, Radhika (2013). Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire. London: Pluto. pp. 119–123.
  21. Desai, Radhika (2013). Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire. London: Pluto. pp. 224–225.
  22. Desai, Radhika (2013). Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire. London: Pluto. pp. 124–125.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Imperialism</span> Extension of rule over foreign nations

Imperialism is the practice, theory or attitude of maintaining or extending power over foreign nations, particularly through expansionism, employing both hard power and soft power. Imperialism focuses on establishing or maintaining hegemony and a more or less formal empire. While related to the concepts of colonialism, imperialism is a distinct concept that can apply to other forms of expansion and many forms of government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hegemony</span> Political, economic or military predominance of one state over other states

Hegemony is the political, economic, and military predominance of one state over other states, either regional or global.

Superpower describes a state or supranational union that holds a dominant position characterized by the ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale. This is done through the combined means of economic, military, technological, political, and cultural strength as well as diplomatic and soft power influence. Traditionally, superpowers are preeminent among the great powers. While a great power state is capable of exerting its influence globally, superpowers are states so influential that no significant action can be taken by the global community without first considering the positions of the superpowers on the issue.

A state-owned enterprise (SOE) is a government entity which is established or nationalised by a national or provincial government, by an executive order or an act of legislation, in order to earn profit for the government, control monopoly of the private sector entities, provide products and services to citizens at a lower price, implement government policies, and/or to deliver products & services to the remote locations of the country. The national government or provincial government has majority ownership over these state owned enterprises. These state owned enterprises are also known as public sector undertakings in some countries. Defining characteristics of SOEs are their distinct legal form and possession of financial goals and developmental objectives. SOEs are government entities established to pursue financial objectives and developmental goals.

Media imperialism is an area in the international political economy of communications research tradition that focuses on how "all Empires, in territorial or nonterritorial forms, rely upon communications technologies and mass media industries to expand and shore up their economic, geopolitical, and cultural influence." In the main, most media imperialism research examines how the unequal relations of economic, military and cultural power between an imperialist country and those on the receiving end of its influence tend to be expressed and perpetuated by mass media and cultural industries.

Hegemonic stability theory (HST) is a theory of international relations, rooted in research from the fields of political science, economics, and history. HST indicates that the international system is more likely to remain stable when a single state is the dominant world power, or hegemon. Thus, the end of hegemony diminishes the stability of the international system. As evidence for the stability of hegemony, proponents of HST frequently point to the Pax Britannica and Pax Americana, as well as the instability prior to World War I and the instability of the interwar period.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Samir Amin</span> Egyptian-French economist and political scientist (1931–2018)

Samir Amin was an Egyptian-French Marxian economist, political scientist and world-systems analyst. He is noted for his introduction of the term Eurocentrism in 1988 and considered a pioneer of Dependency Theory.

<i>Imperialism</i> (Hobson book)

Imperialism: A Study (1902), by John A. Hobson, is a politico-economic discourse about the negative financial, economic, and moral aspects of imperialism as a nationalistic business enterprise. Hobson argues that capitalist business activity brought about imperialism.

Polarity in international relations is any of the various ways in which power is distributed within the international system. It describes the nature of the international system at any given period of time. One generally distinguishes three types of systems: unipolarity, bipolarity, and multipolarity for three or more centers of power. The type of system is completely dependent on the distribution of power and influence of states in a region or globally.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criticism of capitalism</span> Arguments against the economic system of capitalism

Criticism of capitalism is a critique of political economy that involves the rejection of, or dissatisfaction with the economic system of capitalism and its outcomes. Criticisms typically range from expressing disagreement with particular aspects or outcomes of capitalism to rejecting the principles of the capitalist system in its entirety.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Giovanni Arrighi</span> Italian economist and sociologist (1937–2009)

Giovanni Arrighi was an Italian economist, sociologist and world-systems analyst, from 1998 a Professor of Sociology at Johns Hopkins University. His work has been translated into over fifteen languages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ellen Meiksins Wood</span> American-Canadian Marxist scholar (1942–2016)

Ellen Meiksins Wood was an American-Canadian Marxist political theorist and historian.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michael Hudson (economist)</span> American economist

Michael Hudson is an American economist, Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri–Kansas City and a researcher at the Levy Economics Institute at Bard College, former Wall Street analyst, political consultant, commentator and journalist. He is a contributor to The Hudson Report, a weekly economic and financial news podcast produced by Left Out.

Uneven and combined development, unequal and combined development, or uneven development is a concept in Marxian political economy intended to describe dynamics of human history involving the interaction of capitalist laws of motion and starting world market conditions whose national units are highly heterogeneous. The concept is used by Marxist scholars concerned with economic development. David Harvey is an advocate of the usefulness of this theory to reconstruct historical materialism on Modern terms. It is an accepted key concept in academic economic geography.

<i>Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism</i> 1917 book by Vladimir Lenin

Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, originally published as Imperialism, the Newest Stage of Capitalism, is a book written by Vladimir Lenin in 1916 and published in 1917. It describes the formation of oligopoly, by the interlacing of bank and industrial capital, in order to create a financial oligarchy, and explains the function of financial capital in generating profits from the exploitation colonialism inherent to imperialism, as the final stage of capitalism. The essay synthesises Lenin's developments of Karl Marx's theories of political economy in Das Kapital (1867).

<i>Marxs Revenge</i> 2002 book by Meghnad Desai

Marx's Revenge: The Resurgence of Capitalism and the Death of Statist Socialism is a 2002 book about the contemporary relevance of the philosopher Karl Marx by the economist Meghnad Desai.

Post-Marxism is a perspective in critical social theory which radically reinterprets Marxism, countering its association with economism, historical determinism, anti-humanism, and class reductionism, whilst remaining committed to the construction of socialism. Most notably, Post-Marxists are anti-essentialist, rejecting the primacy of class struggle, and instead focus on building radical democracy. Post-Marxism can be considered a synthesis of post-structuralist frameworks and neo-Marxist analysis, in response to the decline of the New Left after the protests of 1968. In a more broader sense, post-Marxism can refer to Marxists or Marxian-adjacent theories which break with the old worker's movements and socialist states entirely, in a similar sense to post-Leftism, and accept that the era of mass revolution premised on the Fordist worker is potentially over.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anti-imperialism</span> Political stance in opposition to interventionist or expansionist policies

Anti-imperialism in political science and international relations is opposition to imperialism or neocolonialism. Anti-imperialist sentiment typically manifests as a political principle in independence struggles against intervention or influence from a global superpower, as well as in opposition to colonial rule. Anti-imperialism can also arise from a specific economic theory, such as in the Leninist interpretation of imperialism, which is derived from Lenin's 1917 work Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. People who categorize themselves as anti-imperialists often state that they are opposed to colonialism, colonial empires, hegemony, imperialism and the territorial expansion of a country beyond its established borders.

The theory of imperialism refers to a range of theoretical approaches to understanding the expansion of capitalism into new areas, the unequal development of different countries, and economic systems that may lead to the dominance of some countries over others. These theories are considered distinct from other uses of the word imperialism which refer to the general tendency for empires throughout history to seek power and territorial expansion. The theory of imperialism is often associated with Marxist economics, but many theories were developed by non-Marxists. Most theories of imperialism, with the notable exception of ultra-imperialism, hold that imperialist exploitation leads to warfare, colonization, and international inequality.

Nick Dyer-Witheford is an author, and associate professor at the University of Western Ontario in the Faculty of Information and Media Studies. His area of study primarily focuses on the rise of technology and the internet, as well as their continuous impact on modern society. He has written six books, along with seventeen other publications.

References