当前位置：和泉文库 > 思想政治 > 《国际政治经济学》文献资料（Marxism and Constructivism in Political Economy）International Political Economy in the Age of Open Marxism

《国际政治经济学》文献资料（Marxism and Constructivism in Political Economy）International Political Economy in the Age of Open Marxism

文件格式：PDF，文件大小：678.32KB，售价：8.42元

文档详细内容（约29页）

Review of International Political Economy 1:1 Spring 1994 International political economy in the age of open Marxism Andre C.Drainville Assistant Professor,International Political Economy,Laval University ABSTRACT In the last decade or so,transnational historical materialism has fashioned the most ambitious,and perhaps the most politically conscious,expression of critical epistemology in the analysis of global accumulation.It has made an immense contribution to the understanding of the structural power of capital in the world economy,and has been especially important in the analysis of the transnational construction of neo-liberalism,and of the mechanisms by which global imperatives of accumulation have installed themselves as overdetermining principles of political unity. However,though it has claimed the heritage of Gramsci's philosophy of praxis,transnational historical materialism has not seriously addressed questions of political strategy in the world economy,and has not been able to define a political practice adapted to the global social formation that it has defined as its object of analysis. This article proposes both a critical reassessment of the epistemological claims of open Marxism,and an examination of the political strategy it invites. Parochial taxonomies are a curse of intellectual life. Stephen Jay Gould Time's Arrow,Time's Cycle In the last decade or so,the study of international political economy has moved from a peripheral position,'outside the main concerns of any of the established disciplines of politics,economics and international rela- tions'(Tooze,1984:637),to the center stage of social sciences.This passage is clearly inscribed in,and confidently validated by,fashionable academic vernacular.Increasingly,scholars 'do'IPE,faculty members teach,and students learn,the lessons of IPE.The incorporation of the recognizable acronym in the title of a new scientific journal(RIPE,The Review of...)further strengthens the impression that international polit- ical economy has become an acknowledged entity,and that it harbors a coherent intellectual project.At a certain level,that of Gould's tax- CA.C.Drainville 1994 0969-2290 This content downloaded from 202.120.14.129 on Mon,01 Feb 2016 23:51:55 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Review of International Political Economy 1:1 Spring 1994 International political economy in the age of open Marxism Andre C. Drainville Assistant Professor, International Political Economy, Laval University ABSTRACT In the last decade or so, transnational historical materialism has fashioned the most ambitious, and perhaps the most politically conscious, expression of critical epistemology in the analysis of global accumulation. It has made an immense contribution to the understanding of the structural power of capital in the world economy, and has been especially important in the analysis of the transnational construction of neo-liberalism, and of the mechanisms by which global imperatives of accumulation have installed themselves as overdetermining principles of political unity. However, though it has claimed the heritage of Gramsci's philosophy of praxis, transnational historical materialism has not seriously addressed questions of political strategy in the world economy, and has not been able to define a political practice adapted to the global social formation that it has defined as its object of analysis. This article proposes both a critical reassessment of the epistemological claims of open Marxism, and an examination of the political strategy it invites. Parochial taxonomies are a curse of intellectual life. Stephen Jay Gould Time's Arrow, Time's Cycle In the last decade or so, the study of international political economy has moved from a peripheral position, 'outside the main concerns of any of the established disciplines of politics, economics and international relations' (Tooze, 1984: 637), to the center stage of social sciences. This passage is clearly inscribed in, and confidently validated by, fashionable academic vernacular. Increasingly, scholars 'do' IPE, faculty members teach, and students learn, the lessons of IPE. The incorporation of the recognizable acronym in the title of a new scientific journal (RIPE, The Review of. . .) further strengthens the impression that international political economy has become an acknowledged entity, and that it harbors a coherent intellectual project. At a certain level, that of Gould's tax- ( A.C. Drainville 1994 0969-2290 This content downloaded from 202.120.14.129 on Mon, 01 Feb 2016 23:51:55 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ARTICLES onomies,this apparent coherence is misleading.IPE has not risen much above somewhat parochial disputes,where'new'and 'orthodox'IPEs are compared and contrasted(Murphy and Tooze,1991),and the perimeters of schools of analysis and 'islands of theory'are defined (Olson and Groom,1991).At another level,however,where epistemological ques- tions regarding the world economy as an object of analysis are situated, this impression of coherence is appropriate.Indeed,from(complex and neo)realism to the internationalization of capital approach(Palloix,1975; Bina and Yaghmaian,1991)and the postmodern rediscovery of the world economy(Linklater,1990),contemporary analyses share a growing preoc- cupation with the world economy as a separate realm of power,a space unto itself (Drainville,1992). Nowhere is this preoccupation better captured,or more self- consciously cultivated,than in the writings of what Stephen Gill has labeled 'transnational historical materialism'(Gill,1990a:46),that takes as its starting point Robert Cox's invitation to 'stand apart from the prevailing order of the world and ask how that order came about'(Cox, 1981/85).'From Cox's revision of international relations theory,helped along the way by Gramsci's Prison Notebook(Cox,1983),transnational historical materialism has blossomed into a constituted Gramscian school of analysis,an island of theory,where theoretical questions have given way to a quest for Gramscian applications(Tooze,1990),and where Gramsci himself has become a quotable authority on even the most mundane matters,for example,on skepticism towards common sense (Murphy and Tooze,1991:11).Gramscian transnational historical mater- ialism has spawned a fluid network of academics-a 'cluster of scholars working in ways that addresses some of the questions raised and posed in Gramscian terms'(Gill,1991b:52);introductory and advanced refer- ence manuals(Gill and Law,1988:Gill,1993)as well as original historical analyses(Van der Pijl,1984;Cox,1987;Gill,1990a;Overbeek,1990).It has established some institutional points of convergence (the United Na- tions University,for example [Cox,1991a]),and now an original publica- tion,RIPE,that proposed in its Manifesto to be the voice of the 'invisible college of International Political Economy.' The importance of Gramscian transnational historical materialism does not stem from its emergence as a school of analysis to be put alongside neo-functionalist and world-systems analyses in the picture gallery of IPE.Rather it comes from its position as the most ambitious, and perhaps the most politically conscious,expression of critical epis- temology in the analysis of global accumulation.As an epistemology, Gramscian transnational historical materialism exists as open Marxism in the tradition of Vico,Thompson,Braudel and Gramsci(Gill,1990b: 374);'a Marxism which reasons historically and seeks to explain,as well as to promote,changes in social relations'(Cox,1985:214).In the study of 106 This content downloaded from 202.120.14.129 on Mon,01 Feb 2016 23:51:55 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ARTICLES onomies, this apparent coherence is misleading. IPE has not risen much above somewhat parochial disputes, where 'new' and 'orthodox' IPEs are compared and contrasted (Murphy and Tooze, 1991), and the perimeters of schools of analysis and 'islands of theory' are defined (Olson and Groom, 1991). At another level, however, where epistemological questions regarding the world economy as an object of analysis are situated, this impression of coherence is appropriate. Indeed, from (complex and neo) realism to the internationalization of capital approach (Palloix, 1975; Bina and Yaghmaian, 1991) and the postmodern rediscovery of the world economy (Linklater, 1990), contemporary analyses share a growing preoccupation with the world economy as a separate realm of power, a space unto itself (Drainville, 1992). Nowhere is this preoccupation better captured, or more selfconsciously cultivated, than in the writings of what Stephen Gill has labeled 'transnational historical materialism' (Gill, 1990a: 46), that takes as its starting point Robert Cox's invitation to 'stand apart from the prevailing order of the world and ask how that order came about' (Cox, 1981/85).' From Cox's revision of international relations theory, helped along the way by Gramsci's Prison Notebook (Cox, 1983), transnational historical materialism has blossomed into a constituted Gramscian school of analysis, an island of theory, where theoretical questions have given way to a quest for Gramscian applications (Tooze, 1990), and where Gramsci himself has become a quotable authority on even the most mundane matters, for example, on skepticism towards common sense (Murphy and Tooze, 1991: 11). Gramscian transnational historical materialism has spawned a fluid network of academics - a 'cluster of scholars working in ways that addresses some of the questions raised and posed in Gramscian terms' (Gill, 1991b: 52); introductory and advanced reference manuals (Gill and Law, 1988: Gill, 1993) as well as original historical analyses (Van der Pijl, 1984; Cox, 1987; Gill, 1990a; Overbeek, 1990). It has established some institutional points of convergence (the United Nations University, for example [Cox, 1991a]), and now an original publication, RIPE, that proposed in its Manifesto to be the voice of the 'invisible college of International Political Economy.' The importance of Gramscian transnational historical materialism does not stem from its emergence as a school of analysis to be put alongside neo-functionalist and world-systems analyses in the picture gallery of IPE. Rather it comes from its position as the most ambitious, and perhaps the most politically conscious, expression of critical epistemology in the analysis of global accumulation. As an epistemology, Gramscian transnational historical materialism exists as open Marxism2 in the tradition of Vico, Thompson, Braudel and Gramsci (Gill, 1990b: 374); 'a Marxism which reasons historically and seeks to explain, as well as to promote, changes in social relations' (Cox, 1985: 214). In the study of 106 This content downloaded from 202.120.14.129 on Mon, 01 Feb 2016 23:51:55 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE AGE OF OPEN MARXISM the world economy,open Marxism proposes to go beyond problem- solving realism (Cox,1985),to rejuvenate and challenge the traditional agenda of IPE (Murphy and Tooze,1991),to move beyond 'marxist fundamentalism,'and to articulate a sweeping general critique of positi- vist,mechanical,and economistic perspectives within Marxism and other traditions'(Gill,1991b:52,75).For the politics of social forces in the world economy,open Marxism counsels a war of position,beginning with 'the long,laborious effort to build new historic blocs within national boundaries'(Cox,1983:174),and directed to the creation of 'alternative institutions and alternative intellectual resources within existing society and building bridges between workers and other subor- dinate classes'(p.165). These ambitions and this consciousness provide the motivation for this commentary.Thus far,neither the epistemological claims of open Marxism,nor the defensive political posture it counsels,has been the object of critical attention.In view of the importance of open Marxism in theorizing global accumulation in a critical decade of restructuring,this neglect is both surprising and politically dangerous. OPEN MARXISM AND THE STUDY OF THE WORLD ECONOMY Just as Braudel retained from Marx a certain nostalgia for social material- ism,3 open Marxism gives analytical priority to the 'real concrete'of global accumulation:to production as a social venture involving classes as historically bound social forces (Cox,1987:x-xii).The reference to Fernand Braudel,and by association to the broad Marxism of Annales historians'is,of course,not accidental.From Braudel,open Marxism has borrowed images(the nebuleuse to describe political power in the world economy,for example [Cox,1992:30;Braudel,1979b:83]),a certain artisanal approach to historical research(where Braudel 'puts the ship of capitalism to sea',Cox speaks of a 'tool kit of historical investigation [Cox,1987:4]),a concern for synchronicity and longue duree(Gill,1991a: 275-8),and a desire for total,interdisciplinary,history(Cox,1981:Over- beek,1990:17). The Braudelian parentage should not be given too much meaning.It is, after all,shared to a degree by all historical investigation of the world economy,from world system analysis broadly understood(Wallerstein, 1980:53)to the reformist world order model project(Olson and Groom, 1991:202-3).References to Braudel's work do,however,serve as a good point of entry into an analysis of the historicism of open Marxism and of its insistence on global accumulation as the specific social practice of identifiable agents. In the analysis of the world economy,open Marxism eschews mechan- ical structuralism,and proposes to investigate structures as concrete and 107 This content downloaded from 202.120.14.129 on Mon,01 Feb 2016 23:51:55 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE AGE OF OPEN MARXISM the world economy, open Marxism proposes to go beyond problemsolving realism (Cox, 1985), to rejuvenate and challenge the traditional agenda of IPE (Murphy and Tooze, 1991), to move beyond 'marxist fundamentalism,' and to articulate a sweeping 'general critique of positivist, mechanical, and economistic perspectives within Marxism and other traditions' (Gill, 1991b: 52, 75). For the politics of social forces in the world economy, open Marxism counsels a war of position, beginning with 'the long, laborious effort to build new historic blocs within national boundaries' (Cox, 1983: 174), and directed to the creation of 'alternative institutions and alternative intellectual resources within existing society and building bridges between workers and other subordinate classes' (p.165). These ambitions and this consciousness provide the motivation for this commentary. Thus far, neither the epistemological claims of open Marxism, nor the defensive political posture it counsels, has been the object of critical attention. In view of the importance of open Marxism in theorizing global accumulation in a critical decade of restructuring, this neglect is both surprising and politically dangerous. OPEN MARXISM AND THE STUDY OF THE WORLD ECONOMY Just as Braudel retained from Marx a certain nostalgia for social materialism,3 open Marxism gives analytical priority to the 'real concrete' of global accumulation: to production as a social venture involving classes as historically bound social forces (Cox, 1987: x-xii). The reference to Fernand Braudel, and by association to the broad Marxism of Annales historians4 is, of course, not accidental. From Braudel, open Marxism has borrowed images (the nebuleuse to describe political power in the world economy, for example [Cox, 1992: 30; Braudel, 1979b: 83]), a certain artisanal approach to historical research (where Braudel 'puts the ship of capitalism to sea', Cox speaks of a 'tool kit of historical investigation' [Cox, 1987: 4]), a concern for synchronicity and longue dure'e (Gill, 1991a: 275-8), and a desire for total, interdisciplinary, history (Cox, 1981: Overbeek, 1990: 17). The Braudelian parentage should not be given too much meaning. It is, after all, shared to a degree by all historical investigation of the world economy, from world system analysis broadly understood (Wallerstein, 1980: 53) to the reformist world order model project (Olson and Groom, 1991: 202-3). References to Braudel's work do, however, serve as a good point of entry into an analysis of the historicism of open Marxism and of its insistence on global accumulation as the specific social practice of identifiable agents. In the analysis of the world economy, open Marxism eschews mechanical structuralism, and proposes to investigate structures as concrete and 107 This content downloaded from 202.120.14.129 on Mon, 01 Feb 2016 23:51:55 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ARTICLES historically specific relationships(Cox,1987:1).A decade and a half after E.P.Thompson's celebrated attack on philosophical Marxism(1978b: 193-401 for example),the specter of Althusserian structural Marxism is raised again,this time in the company of the phantom of Poulantzas (Cox,1981/85:214;Gill,1991b:55).It is an association that even Thompson,in the most polemic passages of The Poverty of Theory,had been too cautious to propose(1978b:196). For open Marxism,agents are bearers of structures.Of course,not all agents bear a similar burden,and not all historical relationships are equally revealing of structures at work.As both Gramsci and Braudel emphasized,some actors occupy a privileged position,which makes their historical practice especially meaningful.For Gramsci,elites are interpreters of structures(Gramsci,1971:335),organizers of society(p.5). Intellectuals come equipped with an 'awareness of [their]own function not only in the economic but also in the social and political fields'(p.5); and political parties are particularly meaningful points of mobilization.3 For Braudel,world capitalism is an elite process: le capitalisme est un phenomene de superstructure,c'est un phe- nomene de minorite....Chaque fois que l'on considere de facon objective ce que j'appelle le capitalisme actif,on est tres surpris par le nombre restreint des personnes qui sont en jeu. (Braudel,1985:93-4) In Braudel's analysis,the essential mechanisms of capital accumulation are located above the murky and hesitant world of peasant markets.The realm of the Fuggers and the Medicis is le domaine par excellence du capitalisme.Sans [eux],celui-ci est impensable;il s'y loge,il y prospere' (Braudel,1979:8). Similarly,open Marxism conceptualizes global accumulation as a practice of the bourgeoisie,and the world economy as a society of capitalists.Kees Van der Pijl defines class formation in the world econ- omy exclusively in bourgeois terms.It is,of course,a process constrained by the exigencies of reproduction within national social formations,but it exists very much above and beyond the realm of social forces(Van der Pijl,1979).Stephen Gill writes of 'political gods at the center of the system'(Gill,1991b:64).Robert Cox,recalling Polanyi's emphasis on haute finance as the social linchpin of the 100 Years'Peace,speaks of bourgeois conquerants,and of 'those who control the big corporations operating on a world scale'(Cox,1987:358).In this spirit,what Braudel called the 'micro-sociologie des elites'(Braudel,1969:71),and what Gill termed the analysis of the process of elite familiarization and fraterniza- tion,mutual education and,broadly speaking,networking'(Gill,1990a: 122),become most revealing.Through transnational networks of interests 108 This content downloaded from 202.120.14.129 on Mon,01 Feb 2016 23:51:55 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ARTICLES historically specific relationships (Cox, 1987: 1). A decade and a half after E.P. Thompson's celebrated attack on philosophical Marxism (1978b: 193-401 for example), the specter of Althusserian structural Marxism is raised again, this time in the company of the phantom of Poulantzas (Cox, 1981/85: 214; Gill, 1991b: 55). It is an association that even Thompson, in the most polemic passages of The Poverty of Theory, had been too cautious to propose (1978b: 196). For open Marxism, agents are bearers of structures. Of course, not all agents bear a similar burden, and not all historical relationships are equally revealing of structures at work. As both Gramsci and Braudel emphasized, some actors occupy a privileged position, which makes their historical practice especially meaningful. For Gramsci, elites are interpreters of structures (Gramsci, 1971: 335), organizers of society (p. 5). Intellectuals come equipped with an 'awareness of [their] own function not only in the economic but also in the social and political fields' (p. 5); and political parties are particularly meaningful points of mobilization.5 For Braudel, world capitalism is an elite process: le capitalisme est un phenomene de superstructure, c'est un phenomene de minorite.... Chaque fois que l'on considere de facon objective ce que j'appelle le capitalisme actif, on est tres surpris par le nombre restreint des personnes qui sont en jeu. (Braudel, 1985: 93-4) In Braudel's analysis, the essential mechanisms of capital accumulation are located above the murky and hesitant world of peasant markets. The realm of the Fuggers and the Medicis is 'le domaine par excellence du capitalisme. Sans [eux], celui-ci est impensable; il s'y loge, il y prospere' (Braudel, 1979: 8). Similarly, open Marxism conceptualizes global accumulation as a practice of the bourgeoisie, and the world economy as a society of capitalists. Kees Van der Pijl defines class formation in the world economy exclusively in bourgeois terms. It is, of course, a process constrained by the exigencies of reproduction within national social formations, but it exists very much above and beyond the realm of social forces (Van der Pijl, 1979). Stephen Gill writes of 'political gods at the center of the system' (Gill, 1991b: 64). Robert Cox, recalling Polanyi's emphasis on haute finance as the social linchpin of the 100 Years' Peace, speaks of bourgeois conquerants, and of 'those who control the big corporations operating on a world scale' (Cox, 1987: 358). In this spirit, what Braudel called the 'micro-sociologie des elites' (Braudel, 1969: 71), and what Gill termed the analysis of the 'process of elite familiarization and fraternization, mutual education and, broadly speaking, networking' (Gill, 1990a: 122), become most revealing. Through transnational networks of interests 108 This content downloaded from 202.120.14.129 on Mon, 01 Feb 2016 23:51:55 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

点击进入文档下载页（PDF格式）

共29页，可试读10页，点击继续阅读 ↓↓

您可能感兴趣的文档

点击购买下载（PDF）

下载及服务说明

购买前请先查看本文档预览页，确认内容后再进行支付；
如遇文件无法下载、无法访问或其它任何问题，可发送电子邮件反馈，核实后将进行文件补发或退款等其它相关操作；
邮箱：

文档浏览记录