Research of the international New Gramscian School

• Main Authors: Nien-hsuan Wang, 王念萱
• Other Authors: Yi-ren Tseng
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2004
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/53681882406057781136

碩士 === 國立中山大學 === 政治學研究所 === 92 === Abstract This essay elaborates the international New Gramscian School, which is one branch of critical theory, through comparing with mainstream international relation theories, limited in Waltz’s structural realism, Gilpin’s theory of hegemonic stability and neoliberal institutionalism Keohane & Nye devised. Meanwhile, this essay is divided into three parts, from lower level of relation between state and society (relation of structure and agent), hegemony and international regime, to higher level of post-Cold War world order, according to the critique Susan Strange refers to the mainstream international studies. Finally, I will make a normative statement about the School and suggestion related to the development of IR discipline. The purpose of this essay is to introduce a new approach that adopts historical materialism and denies the dichotomy of subject and object. Further, it assumes the importance of social science to build up a research method suitable for itself but different with natural science, and reassesses Enlightment Project. In brief, the context of the New Gramscian School could be derived from the following thinking of three scholars, including neo-Marxist Gramsci ’’cultural hegemony’’ which stresses non-material dimension of hegemony, Poulantzas ‘’relative autonomy of state’’ and ‘’dialectical structural analysis ’’, highlighting non-determinist characteristic of neoMarxism and putting emphases on the functions of anti-hegemonic social movements rather than seizing state machine by forces directly or radical revolutionary path, and Socialist Polanyi ‘’double movement’’, which tries to verify that market itself plays only subordinate role in pre-capitalism period and indicate the fallacy of the self-regulating market itself. With these perspectives above, the School develops a quite different historical approach to interpret international phenomenon and tend to transform the given unjust and unfair world order. In sum, though mainstream IR theories are good at prediction of behaviors in few strong states, there are still a lot of questions unsolved and much space left for IR discipline to have a dialogue with competitive theories, especially the Left had been marginalized for a long time. Accordingly, it’s important and constructive to establish a communicative community in the foreseeable future.