1 marxism and the study of foreign policy. 2 what is marxism? some questions what is marxism? what...

1

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

marxism and the study of foreign policy

2



what is marxism? some questions

what is marxism? what does the term suggest to you?

is marxism dead? did it die with the failureof communism in the former soviet union?

is marxism relevant to the study ofu.s. foreign policy? after all, american policy

makers aren’t marxists

introduction to marxismmarxism foreign policy

3



what is marxism? key points

first and foremost, marxism is a theory of history:it’s a theory of how history unfolds and of the primaryforces that shape history

second, marxism is a theory of capitalism: it’s a theory about the dynamics and logic of capitalism

third, marxism is a preeminently structuraltheory


4





what is marxism?

marxism as a theory of history is premised on the concept of historical materialism

the fundamental proposition of historical materialism

is embedded in the following quote by marx …


5





what is marxism?


It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that

determines their consciousness.

It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that

determines their consciousness.

6



what is marxism?

historical materialism is premised on a fundamental “fact”: in order for human beings to

survive from generation to generation, it is necessary for them to produce and reproduce the

material requirements of life

this basic insight has profound implications: for one, it tells us that societies are governed

by the forces of production

more simply, those who control the forces of production,

control society


7



what is marxism?

control of society by those who dominate or own the forces of production is pervasive, although

not always obvious

the key is to recognize that the economy is the foundation of any society, and that social

institutions serve to maintain the foundation: this is encapsulated in marx’s concept of base

and superstructure


Base

Superstructure

8



The educational system of capitalism is designed to produce a mass of good, disciplined “worker

bees”

Religion is the “opium of the masses”; designed to keep workers

docile and obedient

“The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent

and repress them”

Justice system protects “private property” first; police, courts

serve the interests of the dominant class

“The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas,

i.e., the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at

the same time its ruling intellectual force.”

9



what is marxism? relevance to foreign policy

marxism tells us the world is dominated by the capitalist class, who control not only the means of production, but the dominant institutions of

society

these institutions, to repeat, include the state and all its agencies--including the military,

the police and the courts

to understand marxism’s relevance to foreign policy, then, one must recognized that much of

what happens in the world, domestically and internationally, is an expression of the

interests and power of the dominant classes


10

QuickTime™ and a

TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor




what is marxism? relevance to foreign policy

marxism tells us that class interests--not national interests--are behind most important action of states: from wars, to free trade agreements, to foreign aid, to alliances and so on

to put it bluntly: marxist analysis tells us that state actors are merepuppets of the capitalist class


capitalists

11

this cartoon provides another good illustration--albeit very simplified--of themarxist perspective on foreign policy

12

the influence of american capitalists on u.s. foreign policy can be seen veryclearly in the activities of such companies as the United Fruit Company

video intentionally removedcheck CourseSite

13







what is marxism? some caveats

most contemporary marxists are careful not to reduce everything to class interests and power

most recognize, for example, that states are not purely instruments of the dominant class; they acknowledge, in other words, that states have

relative autonomy

in the complex capitalist societies of today, marxists also recognize that class interests are

rarely defined in black and white: even among capitalists, interests can diverge in dramatic ways (in this way, marxists analysis also tells

us to examine intra-class struggles)


14

QuickTime™ and a decompressor


applying marxist analysis:marxism and the invasion of iraq

15



applying marxism: behind the war in iraq

to understand the iraq war, we need to begin with a basic recognition of how world capitalism

shapes the behavior of states, and, in particular, creates a framework in which state power is used to protect, secure, and enhance

the interests of the dominant class

iraq is a microcosm of how class interests have shaped foreign policy, not just in the u.s. but

also among western powers in general

to see this consider the following quote, from more

than 80 years ago …

introduction to marxismmarxism and foreign policy

16




“in Baghdad an authoritarian regime, backed by military force, exercises a powerful grip over

Iraq and poses a direct strategic threat to the interests of the major Western power in the

region. A military expedition against the regime is mounted and, after a campaign that proves more difficult and costly than anticipated,

Baghdad is captured and a new political order established under Western military and political

control

But just as it seems that direct foreign rule is establishing the shape of the future for Iraq,

rebellion breaks out …on the streets of Baghdad and throughout the Shi'ite centre and south of

the country, putting the whole enterprise in jeopardy.”


17




what does the preceding quote tell us?

do events from more than 80 years agohave relevance today, especially in

explaining u.s. foreign policy toward iraq?


18



behind the war in iraq: basic points

understanding the history of western action toward iraq is

important in that is helps us see more clearly that iraq has always been much less a threat

than an opportunity

iraq’s history with the west also allows us to uncover important patterns or themes …


what are these? what do the authors tell us? what is the central argument in “behind the

war in iraq”?

19




applying marxism: behind the war in

iraq

three themes

domination exclusion

resistance

In march 1917, British commander Lt.-General Stanley Maude, issued a proclamation upon entering Baghdad declaring that “Our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators.” British “liberators” proceeded to use poison gas against Iraqi rebels.

20

introduction to marxismmarxism and foreign policy: a background video

video removedcheck CourseSite

21





behind the war in iraq: the three themes

domination

the attempt by imperialist powers (representing major economic interests) to dominate Iraq--and other oil-producing countries in the region--in

order to grab its vast oil wealth

in this regard there is hardly a dividing line between oil corporations and their home

governments, with the governments undertaking to promote, secure, and

militarily protect their oil corporations.






behind the war in iraq: the three themes

remember: in the marxist framework, “capital” plays a central role in shaping state behavior …

in iraq and the middle east, major oil companies

were the key players

for much of the 20th century, these were known as the seven sisters: the Anglo-Persian Oil

Company (later British Petroleum), Royal Dutch Shell (Dutch/British), Standard Oil*,

Gulf Oil and Texaco

* There were three Standard Oil Companies: New Jersey, New York and California. They later became known as Esso, Mobil and Chevron respectively -- subsequent years brought mergers and more name changes


23





behind the war in iraq: three themes

exclusion

the attempt by each imperialist power to exclude

others from the prize


early 20th century: the british attempted to exclude other western powers, especially

germany and france mid-20th century: the united states attempted

to exclude the soviets

late 20th century until today: the u.s. wants total domination, but especially keen on

freezing out france, russia, and china

24



behind the war in iraq: three themes

resistance

the vibrancy of nationalist opposition among the people of Iraq and indeed the entire region to

these designs of imperialism

this is manifested at times in mass upsurges and at other times in popular pressure on whomever

is in power to demand better terms from the oil companies or even to expropriate them

historically, resistance provokes a very strong, usually very violent counter-reaction on the

part of imperialists (those who resist imperialists are often branded aggressors or

terrorists)


25




the three themes--domination, exclusion, and resistance-- provide the critical

context within which to examine recent american policy towards iraq and the

middle east

such context is essential the decisions the united states has made: from

supporting saddam during the iran-iraq war, to encouraging his invasion of kuwait, to the decision to decimate

iraq’s infrastructure after the invasion of kuwait, to the imposition of

sanctions,to the pre-emptive war against iraq, to the last five years of nation-

building

let’s consider briefly these decisions and events …

26



why did the u.s. support iraq against iran?

(consider from a marxist and realist perspective)


27



an aside: during the iran-iraq war, the united states was complicity

in iraq’s use of chemical and biological weapons: “it

was just another way of killing people …” according to one official of the pentagon

28



why did the not prevent iraq’s invasion of kuwait? why did the u.s. destroy iraq’s civilian

infrastructure ? why did the u.s. let saddam survive?


29

“sanctions [were] … an important instrument for the united states

to prevent other imperialist powers from getting a foothold in

iraq”


30

sanctions proved to be double-edged sword: they were effective in excluding other

imperial powers, but they also precluded american

exploitation of iraq’s oil (with an estimated value of

several trillion dollars)

when, in june 2001, france and russia proposed removing restrictions on foreign

investment in the iraqi oil industry, the “united states”

knew it had to act …


31

world systems theory and u.s. foreign policy


32

world systems theory (wst)

wst is a contemporary version of marxist analysis

wst is based on holistic understanding of the world: the basic unit of analysis is the world-

system itself

the modern era is marked by two interrelated, but competing sub-systems: global capitalism and

the interstate system


33

world systems theory

global capitalism is based on openness or transnationalism—i.e., the maximum fluidity and mobility of goods, capital, and labor in order

to secure greater profits

the interstate system is basically closed and biased toward nationalism: the maximization of

power, status, territory and security for individual states

thus, the capitalist world system is founded on two contrary tendencies among its subsystems:

this has driven the system for half a millennium


34

world systems theory

in understanding the capitalist world system, we must be aware of its four main attributes …

possesses spatial limits (in principle) posits a complex, symbiotic division of labor

among core, semi-peripheral and peripheral units division of labor is hierarchical and inherently

exploitative mobility for individual units within division of

labor is possible: core states can move down, peripheral states can move up


35

world systems theory: focus on the united states

how can we use world systems theory to explain u.s. foreign policy?


36


most generally, we can use wst to explain the rise of the united states to its hegemonic position

in the 20th century

we can also use wst to explain u.s. behavior as a hegemonic power-… and do so in a way that is

more sophisticated and more accurate than realism


37


consider the following questions …

why did the u.s. subsidize the rebuilding of europe after the second world war?

why did the u.s. allow japan, south korea, and taiwan to rebuild their economies through neo-mercantilist

policies (and why does the u.s. no longer support these same policies)?


38


consider the following questions …

why did the u.s. underwrite the postwar bretton woods system?

why did the u.s. intervene in korea and vietnam?

why does the u.s. persistently and intensely claim to be the leader of the “free world”? and why is such rhetoric

seemingly so important?


39


one of the best ways to understand the logic of wst

is to consider the falling dominoes scenario, which was used to justify u.s.

military intervention, first in vietnam, but later in

dozens of small conflicts around the world …


Video RemovedCheck CourseSite

40





but, what did it really matter if a bunch of small countries fell to “communism”?

why would that threaten u.s. national security and interests, especially in those

countries half way around the world?

in the 1950s, why did the u.s. care an iota about vietnam--a country few americans had

even heard of and one that could pose no direct threat to the united states?

41



consider the falling statement by dwight d. eisenhower,

the first articulation of the following dominoes principle


42



response to a reporter’s question on the strategic importance of indochina

“You have, of course, both the specific and the general when you talk about such things. First of all, you have the specific value of a locality in its production of materials that the world needs. Then you have the possibility that many human beings pass under a dictatorship that is inimical to the free world.

Finally, you have broader considerations that might follow what you would call the "falling domino" principle. You have a row of dominoes set up, you knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is the certainty that it will go over very quickly. So you could have a beginning of a disintegration that would have the most profound influences (…)

Now, with respect to the first one, two of the items from this particular area that the world uses are tin and tungsten. They are very important.

43



Then with respect to more people passing under this domination, Asia, after all, has already lost some 450 million of its peoples to the Communist dictatorship, and we simply can't afford greater losses.

But when we come to the possible sequence of events, the loss of Indochina, of Burma, of Thailand, of the Peninsula, and Indonesia following, now you begin to talk about areas that not only multiply the disadvantages that you would suffer through loss of materials, sources of materials, but now you are talking really about millions and millions and millions of people.

Finally, the geographical position achieved thereby does many things. It turns the so-called island defensive chain of Japan, Formosa, of the Philippines and to the southward; it moves in to threaten Australia and New Zealand. It takes away, in its economic aspects, that region that Japan must have as a trading area or Japan, in turn, will have only one place in the world to go -- that is, toward the Communist areas in order to live.

Date post:	27-Dec-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	brittney-barnett
View:	223 times
Download:	0 times

1 marxism and the study of foreign policy. 2 what is marxism? some questions what is marxism? what...

Documents