Marksističke teorije međunarodnih odnosa na početku 21. veka
MARXIST THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AT THE BEGINNING OF 21st CENTURY

Summary/Abstract: After one hundred years since the Russian October Revolution it seems appropriate to consider and point out some of the key topics, dilemmas, and theoretical considerations of Marxist theories of International Relations. The cyclical movement of global capitalism in the period from 1990 to 2017 contributed to the revival of the Marxist thesis about capitalism and the search for ways to overcome it. Most of the solutions are connected to the more equal distributions and competition capitalism, less in socialist revolutions. That is the reason why in the future we can expect more attention given to the original Marx’s theses. Research questions that Marxist thought in international relations today consider are: Redirection of the focus from the East-West relations to the North-South relations, which are characterized by inequality, injustice, dependency and exploitation of countries of the South by the developed countries of the North; The changed role of the state – the transformation of state functions to fit the needs of transnational capital (transnational state); The combination of force and consent in the creation of a hegemonic world order; The global economic crisis of 2007–8 the crisis of the Euro-zone in 2011 and the crisis of the developing economies, especially after 2015; Application of austerity measures in response to said crisis, which leads to the impoverishment of the already poor, and a large gap between rich and poor; Strengthening anti-capitalist and “anti-system” organization, movements and political parties, and their unification at the international level, as well as their links with countries such as Russia and Latin American countries. The study of these questions are addressed through Neo-Marxist and Post-Marxist approaches, with additional consideration of the “New Marxism”, which represents a re-reading of Marx, his texts that have not been analysed by now and attitudes toward non-European area. Response to the current crisis is such that the policies of states are being nationalized and tend to become the opposite of what was advocated at the end of the Cold War by the leaders of liberalism. By 2016, such a shift is made that the leader of globalization and the spread of international organizations – the United States – have found itself in the opposite position of what it stood for – open markets, democracy and integration. China is trying to bring other countries in the fight against climate change and supports the continued functioning of the global open market and Russia is becoming a major initiator of the creation of new international institutions in the Asian, European and Latin American continent. Struggle between these new contradictions can only be overcome in some new synthesis – the new world order

• Details
• Contents