On imperialism 4/4

On Marx and IR 3/4

We cover my research on the Mekong region, Myanmar’s revolution, Marxist approaches to the international, and contemporary imperialism and sub-imperialism with reference to China and Thailand. 2/4

3/3 Full paper:

www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

2/3. Yet still I'm left speechless at the gall of this plan for incorporating Gaza into the India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor.

Summary of paper: developingeconomics.org/2021/07/13/e...

Congratulations! The cover looks great too!

I seem to remember Parit (Penguin), one of the first to go on hunger strike and a brilliant student of history, writing about his inspiration somewhere. The Irish republicans were among them, but I think there were local antecedents too.

Looking forward to reading this! I wonder how it compares with Thai activists' use of this tactic following the crackdown on the 2021 pro-democracy movement.

more sociologically grounded, praxeologically attuned, and normatively realist; more Hegel and Marx than Kant. The paper then outlines what this might entail.

@universitypress.cambridge.org

I argue that legitimate criticism of his neo-Kantian content of his project has detracted from its tripartite form and that the “hard” revolutionary tradition deserves greater prominence today:

Andrew was one of the “great” international theorists. However, his influence as a pioneer of critical IR waned in the latter half of his career, and his broader argument has been under appreciated.

accompanied Linklater’s insistence that an adequate International theory must be realist, rationalist, and emancipatory.

This was premised on what he called the necessarily tripartite structure of critical theory. This is the claim, inspired by Kant, Hegel, and Marx, that any theory remains incomplete unless it incorporates normative, sociological, and praxeological analysis,

Andrew’s project was a major contribution to the “soft” revolutionist tradition and an extension of the solidaristic approach to the English School. He wanted to incorporate and transcend the insights of realism, rationalism, and Marxism based on a commitment to human liberation.

Martin Wight once argued that there are three traditions of international theory: realism, rationalism, and revolutionism, conceding that the gulf between “soft” revolutionists like Kant and “hard” revolutionists like Marx meant that a quadruple classification might be more apt (1991: 267-8).