With respect to Marxism approach to International Relations, explain Essay

With respect to Marxism approach to International Relations, explain how theoretical debates within a particular theory help us to define more precisely how best to use IR theory in practice - Essay Example This literature looks not only at the ways economic system has impact on the relations between the states, but it tried to analyze how the ideational and ideological factors help preserve and reinforce the legitimacy of the existing system through hegemony. In this paper, I would like to highlight the points of contention within Marxist approach in International Relations. First, I will outline the basic problems that are the center of the intra-paradigm debate in Marxism, from the Gramscian and Neo-Gramcian perspective. Second, I will bring the example of how the theoretical debates within Marxism contribute to differentiation in the analysis of contemporary international situation. Finally, based on the debates between Alex Callinicos and Kees van der Pijl this paper will conclude if there is an inherent contradiction between the capitalist states or, as Neo-Granscianism claims, capitalist states, driven by the social forces represented by bourgeoisie elites, will come to consensus on the common exploitation of the world-system. One of the basic concepts in Gramsci’s writings is hegemony. By hegemony, Gramsci meant the permeation throughout society of an entire system of values, attitudes, beliefs and morality (common sense) that has the effect of supporting the status quo in power relations. Individual actors are not aware of the bigger picture simply because they are not capable of overcoming the routines of maintaining their living. (Boggs, 1976: 121-122) Neo-Gramscianism applies this idea to the peripheral and semi-peripheral states in the capitalist world-system. Cox, criticizing Realist approach, argues that â€Å"dominance by a powerful state may be a necessary but not a sufficient condition for hegemony†. (Cox, 1981: 139) He suggests that power can be exerted through ideas and institutions not less efficiently than through material capabilities of state.