Postcolonial Theorists Concerns and Marxists Thinking on International Relations - Essay Example

Lecturer Post Colonial theorists Concerns and Marxists Thinking on international Relations Introduction Post colonial theories entails featuring approaches of intellectual discourse which explain, respond and analyze the cultural implications of imperialism and colonialism; to the human aspects of controlling the country and implementing settlements for economic exploitation for the land and its native populace (Sadiki 2004). Post colonial theories study the political knowledge, through understanding the functional relations of political and social power that ensures colonialism and neocolonialism. This enhances the aspects of representations of the imperial regime; for instance cultural, social and political representations; of the colonizer, and the colonized populace. As an approach to contemporary history; post colonialism influences the cultural perception modes. Post colonial theories analyze the human relations within colonial nations and the people exploited through colonial rule (Chirot, 2006). Critical theorists who analyze post colonialism, explain the ideologies of neocolonialism through humanities examples; for instance, philosophy and Marxists theory, history, political science, sociology religion, feminism and linguistics. These humanities provide the anti-conquest narrative which illustrates the stories of subjugation by colonialists (Fisher 2011). Marxist international relations theory entails the ideas which dispute the realist or liberal perception of state cooperation and conflict. It instead focuses on material or economic aspects. These theories strive to reveal how economics is more significant than the other concerns; hence it focuses more on class aspects (Fanon, 2003). Marxists theories are very influential in the social and political issues of South Eastern Asia, Latin America, Africa, and some areas of Europe like Italy, France and Greece. However, the theory receives inadequate attention in the USA; due to insignificant influence in mainstream politics, even for democratic socialists’ political parties. Realists together with the liberals criticize the Marxists theories due to consequentiality and also ideological reasons. Post positivists do not agree with the significance of class conflicts for Marxists; as the key human life aspect, and the approach to understanding human behavior and history (Gregory, 2009). Post Colonial Theorists Concerns The post colonial theorists who are discussed in this paper are; Frantz Fanon, Edward Said, Gayatri Spivac and Dipesh Chakrabarty. Frantz Fanon, a psychiatrist, studied and medically illustrated the colonialism nature as basically destructive. The effects on the society, imposition of colonial identity, are not appropriate for the mental health of the individuals subjugated into colonies (Chirot, 2006). Fanon illustrates that the ideological aspect of colonialism is similar to denying humanity attributes of the colonized individuals. This dehumanization is realized through mental and physical violence, through which the colonialists enhance servile mentality on natives. According to Fanon, violent colonialism resistance should be applied. This will ensure colonial servility is removed from the psyche of the natives; and hence gives back self respect of the subjugated (Sadiki, 2004). Hence, he totally supported the Algerian War for independence, 1954 to 1962, from France. The mental health studies of imperialism and colonialism, as part of the post colonial praxis by Fanon, and the relevant economic theories; are partially retrieved from the 1916 literature, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, wherein Vladimir Lenin illustrates colonial imperialism as an inappropriate capitalism form, that needs greater levels of human exploitation so as to realize continuous investment profits (Wallerstein, 2004). Another theorist, Edward Said, illustrates the binary social relation concept employed by the Western Europe to separate intellectually the world into; Orient and Occident. The cultural critic initiated orientalism term; which is a history term illustrating Western depictions of the orient study (Chirot, 2007). The cultural separation arising from the “us-and-them” relations entail social construct that’s mutually constitutive. Each construct exists for the other, and because of the other. The West started the cultural issue of the East. Said illustrates that this enabled Europeans to greatly suppress and exploit people from Middle East, Indian Subcontinent and Asia; from representing themselves as unique people or culture. Orientalism hence reduced non-Western societies as homogeneous entity known as the East. The Orientalist concept ensured the European scholars analyze the Oriental societies as inferior, wild and irrational, contrary to Western Europe which was considered superior, progressive, civil and rational (Qayson, 2000). Said illustrates Orientalism as a thought process based on the West-East acrimony in world views, and also corporate institution of Orient dealing. Said explained that knowledge and power are inseparable aspects of intellectual binary relationship where Occidentals illustrate knowledge of Orient. Applied power of this cultural knowledge enabled Europeans to control, rename and redefine oriental things, people and places, into imperial colonies. Power and knowledge binary concept is significant in understanding European colonialism and colonialism broadly (Hart, 2003). Gayatri Spivak initiated the words strategic essentialism and essentialism so as to illustrate social functions and issues of post colonialism. Essentialism explains perceptual dangers that are needed in reviving subaltern issues through simplifying cultural identity of the heterogeneous societies, and hence initiate stereotyped illustrations of diverse identities of individuals who form a particular society (Gregory, 2009). Strategic essentialism represents temporary group identity in praxis discourse among individuals. Essentialism is also applicable in facilitating subaltern’s communication. Strategic essentialism is easily accepted through popular majority in the process of inter group relations. Strategic essentialism takes into consideration diverse identities of social groups. Strategic essentialism also temporarily reduces inter-group diversity, so as to ensure essential group identity (Gregory, 2009). Spivak applied the term epistemic violence in illustrating the destruction of non-Western approaches of viewing the world; leading to dominance of western approaches of viewing the world. Epistemic violence significantly applies to the women. This is because colonial destruction of her ways of life (culture) reduced her non-Western aspects of knowing the world. Dipesh Chakrabarty initiated the subaltern history illustrating India’s independence struggle, and countered the western scholarship on non-Western cultures, through proposing Western Europe should be viewed as equal to the other diverse world cultures; hence, one region in many, in human geography (Wallerstein, 2004). Marxist Thinking on International Relations Marxists theorize that the wealthy capitalists initiated the state system to enhance growth of their wealth. Based on this concept, three international relations theory developed; Leninism, dependency theory and world system theory (Said, 1998). Leninism, as an aspect of political theory, explains the achievement of the dictatorship of the ploretariat, and the democratic aspects of revolutionary vanguard party. This theory was developed by the Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin, who later on became the Soviet Premier (Sadiki, 2004). Leninism entails socialist economic and also political theories developed through Marxism. It was also developed through Marxists theories interpretation by Lenin; during application of socio political aspects in early 20th century. Leninism represented Russian usage of Marxist political and economic philosophy, realized through the Bolshevik Party that led struggle of working class’s political independence. Leninist Vanguard Part gave working class adequate political consciousness, and revolutionary leadership required to remove capitalism ideologies in Imperial Russia. In political practice, the theory was adopted in the global political arena, despite Russian origin. Communist Party of China borrowed ideas heavily from the Vanguard Party Revolution. Marxism-Leninism in China was implemented according to appropriate socio-economic environment. In Singapore, People’s Action Party, was started based on Leninist ideologies. The party had internal democracy that started the single party dominance of state operations that is even experienced presently (Quayson, 2000). The world systems theory entails multidisciplinary approach to social change and world history that promote world system (as opposed to nation states). The world system is interregional, and entails transnational labor division; which separates the world into; periphery countries, semi periphery countries, and core countries (Kumaraswamy, 2006). The core countries demonstrate capital intensive production and superior skills. On the contrary, the other countries concentrate on labor intensive production, inadequate skills, and raw materials extraction. This factor continuously increases the dominance and significance of core countries. The world system is presently dynamic; this is due to improvements in transport technology, and hence, countries can lose or gain their status with time (Sadiki, 2004). The world system also illustrates that some states are global hegemon; this is because the system has increased geographically and economically. For instance, the world hegemon status has shifted from the Netherlands to the UK, and currently to the United States. New issues in world system entail analysis of cyclical processes, gender roles, cultures, slavery studies, and introduction of new regions in the system. As from 2000, the most significant issues in the world system are environmental issues; where countries analyze appropriate ways of minimizing environmental pollution. The start of the world system can be traced to the 16th century, when the Americas were discovered by West European explorers; this ended during the 1640 English revolution. The pre-modern World system existed during the 13thh century before formation of the current modern world system. The Mongol Empire ensured a significant role of connecting Chinese, Europe, Muslim and Indian regions (Kumaraswamy, 2006). Dependency theory illustrates that resources move from the ‘periphery’ of the undeveloped states to the wealthy states’ core. This enriches the wealthy states, at the expense of poor or undeveloped states. This theory explains that the undeveloped states are impoverished and poor, and that rich states get more wealth; due to integration in the world system (Hart, 2003). This theory was initiated in response to the modernization theory; which explains states develop through similar patterns of development. Dependency theory disputed this view by stating that poor states are not primitive versions of wealthy countries, but protect unique features, and also poor states are in that position due to the world market economy which does not favor them. Some researchers support the dependency theory due to its ideas on the global wealth division. The dependency theory is based on two significant basics. Firstly, poor nations provide the much needed resources to the developed nations. These resources include; raw materials, cheap labor, and ready market (Quayson, 2000). Without adequate supply of these resources, the wealthy states could not have their present wealth levels. Secondly, wealthy nations ensure dependence of poor states through several approaches. These approaches are multifaceted and entail media control, education, politics, sports and economics. Conclusion The most significant example of real world Marxism is the USSR implementation of the theory. Vladimir Lenin tried to spread the Marxism ideas globally, illustrating that the concept cannot applied in only one country. These attempts were unsuccessful, and Lenin died when the Marxist ideas were still weak. The ideas were effectively embraced after the Second World War. However, during the later stages of the Cold War Marxism reduced its significance worldwide. The information provided by the Marxist theory are currently considered irrelevant and obsolete, hence, the theory turns to other related international relations theories to ensure appropriate balance worldwide. Post colonialism illustrates critical purpose of accounting for effects of colonialism on the people. These effects can be social, cultural, economic and political. Post colonial theorists implement aspects affecting the non-Western societies. Critical perspectives to this issue are also adequately addressed by researchers. Bibliography Chirot, Daniel. (2006). Social Change in the Modern Era. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Chirot, Daniel. (2007). Social Change in the Twentieth Century. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Fanon, Frantz (2003). The Wretched of the Earth. New York: Grove Press. Fischer-Tiné, Harald (2011). "Postcolonial Studies". European History Online. Gregory, Derek (2009). Dictionary of Human Geography. Hoboken,NJ.: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing. Hill, Christopher. (2001). Lenin and the Russian Revolution. Penguin Books: London p. 35. James, Paul (2007). "Post-Dependency: The Third World in an Era of Globalism and Late Capitalism". Alternatives: Social Transformation and Human Governance. Lenin, V. (1994). “United States of Europe Slogan.” Collected Works. Moore, Jason. (2000). "Environmental Crises and the Metabolic Rift in World-Historical Perspective," Organization & Environment. Raffer K. (2003), Trade, transfers, and development: problems and prospects for the twenty-first century. Aldershot, Hants, England; Brookfield, Vt., USA: E. Elgar Pub. Co. Sadiki, Larbi (2004). The Search for Arab Democracy: Discourses and Counter-Discourses. India: C. Hurst & Co. Ltd. Said, Edward (1998). Orientalism. New York: Pantheon. Sunkel O. (2004), Rebuilding capitalism: alternative roads after socialism and dirigisme. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press Tausch A. and Christian Ghymers (2006). A quantitative analysis on globalization, development and global governance. Hauppauge, New York: Nova Science. Townson, D. (2001). The New Penguin Dictionary of Modern History: 1789–1945 London. Wallerstein, Immanuel. (2004). The Modern World System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the 16th Century. New York: Academic Press. Read More