Abstract
This contribution to the forum on Alex Anievas’ Capital, the State and War takes issue with its reliance on a ‘lite’ version of Trotsky’s concept of uneven and combined development (UCD) cut out of the theory of permanent revolution. It argues that if Trotsky’s theory would have been taken seriously, a quite different reading of the world wars comes into view, in which ‘permanent counterrevolution’ as the overriding dynamic suggests an understanding of war as a link in that process. Permanent war as under the current War on Terror would fit into this. In Anievas’ version of UCD, the notion on the other hand functions in a quasi-Weberian actor theory of ‘the international’, which, like ‘the market’ in neoclassical economics, is assumed to be an ultimately unfathomable, regulatory instance. UCD then would serve as a reminder that there is social substance to ‘the international’—without specifying what that substance is. As a result, the entire procedure works to block the ability to really open up the inner workings of the global political economy as a process of class formation and struggle mediated by foreign and international relations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anievas, A. (2014) Capital, the State, and War. Class Conflict and Geopolitics in the Thirty Years’Crisis, 1914–1945. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan University Press.
Bull, Hedley, and Watson, Adam (eds.) (1984). The Expansion of International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Desai, R. (2013) Geopolitical Economy. After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire. London: Pluto Press.
Fischer, F. (1984) [1961]. Griff nach der Weltmacht. Die Kriegszielpolitik des kaiserlichen Deutschland 1914/18, abridged ed. Düsseldorf: Droste.
Frost, M. (1986). Towards a Normative Theory of International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gledhill, J. (1994). Power and its Disguises. Anthropological Perspectives on Politics. London: Pluto Press.
Gramsci, A. (1971) Selections from the Prison Notebooks [translated and editors Q. Hoare, and G. N. Smith]. New York: International Publishers [written 1929-’35].
Hallgarten, G.W.F. (1969). ‘Der Zusammenprall der Imperialismen im Jahre 1914’, in Das Schicksal des Imperialismus im 20. Jahrhundert. Drei Abhandlungen über Kriegsursachen im Vergangenheit und Gegenwart. Frankfurt: Europäische Verlagsanstalt.
Hume, D. (1739–40). A Treatise of Human Nature, fascimile ed. [A. Merivale, P. Millican, eds]. Vols. I and II: London: John Noon, 1739; Vol. III: London: Thomas Longman, 1740. www.davidhume.org, accessed 23 September 2012.
Hume, D. (1875) [1742, 1752] In T.H. Green, T.H. Grose (eds.) Essays. Moral, Political, and Literary, 2 vols. London: Longmans, Green & Co.
Ikenberry, G.J. (2011). The Future of the Liberal World Order. Internationalism After America. Foreign Affairs, 90(3), 1–14.
Jaffe, G. (2011). ‘A decade after the 9/11 attacks, Americans live in an era of endless war.’ The Washington Post, 4 September.
Jones, R.E. (1981). The English school—a case for closure. Review of International Studies, 7(1), 1–13.
Kautsky, K. (1914). ‘Der Imperialismus’, Die Neue Zeit, 1913–1914, p. 2. Band, pp. 908–922
Labriola, A. (1908) [1896]. Essays on the Materialistic Conception of History. [translated C. H. Kerr]. Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Co.
Löwy, M. (1981). The Politics of Combined and Uneven Development. The Theory of Permanent Revolution. London: Verso.
Marx, K. (1973) Grundrisse. Introduction to the Critique of Political Economy (Rough Draft) [introduction and translated M. Nicolaus]. Harmondsworth: Pelican. [written 1857–1858].
Milios, J., and Sotiropoulos, D.P. (2009). Rethinking Imperialism. A Study of Capitalist Rule. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Rosenberg, J. (2006). Why is There No International Historical Sociology? European Journal of International Relations, 12(3), 307–340.
Schmitt, B.E., and Vedeler, H. C. (1984). The World in the Crucible, 1914-1919. New York: Harper & Row.
Shirokogorov, S.M. (1970) [1931]. Ethnological and Linguistical Aspects of the Ural-Altaic Hypothesis [reprint of Tshing Hua Journal, vol. 6, Beijing; transcribed Shirokogoroff]. Oosterhout: Anthropological Publications.
Sohn-Rethel, A. (1970). Geistige und körperliche Arbeit: Zur Theorie der gesellschaftlichen Synthesis. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Teschke, B. (2001). ‘Geopolitik’. In W. F. Haug (ed) Historisch-Kritisches Wörterbuch des Marxismus. Hamburg: Argument Verlag. Vol. 5.
Teschke, Benno. (2008). Marxism. In C. Reus-Smit & D. Snidal (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Teschke, B. (2011). Advances and impasses in Fred Halliday’s international historical sociology: a critical appraisal. International Affairs, 87(5), 1087–1106.
Trotsky, L. (1971) [1906–1940]. De permanente of de verraden revolutie [ed. E. Mandel, trans. H. Hom]. Amsterdam: Van Gennep.
Trotsky, L. (1978) [1936]. Geschiedenis der Russische Revolutie, 3 vols [translated J. Valkhoff]. Amsterdam: Van Gennep.
Van der Pijl, K. (1996) [1993]. Vordenker der Weltpolitik Einführung in die internationale Politik aus ideengeschichtlicher Perspektive, rev. ed. [translated W. Linsewksi]. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
Van der Pijl, K. (2007). Nomads, Empires, States. Vol. I of Modes of Foreign Relations and Political Economy. London: Pluto Press.
Van der Pijl, K. (2010). The Foreign Encounter in Myth and Religion. Vol. II of Modes of Foreign Relations and Political Economy. London: Pluto Press.
Van der Pijl, K. (2014). The Discipline of Western Supremacy. Vol. III of Modes of Foreign Relations and Political Economy. London: Pluto Press.
Vollmer, G. (2013). ‘Wieso können wir die Welt erkennen?’ in Luc Saner, ed. Studium Generale. Auf dem Weg zu einem allgemeinen Teil der Wissenschaften. Wiesbaden: Springer Spektrum.
Waltz, K. N. (1959). Man, the State, and War. New York: Columbia University Press.
Weber, M. (1976). [1921]. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie, 5th (rev ed.). Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.
Wolfers, A., and Martin, L. W. (eds.) (1956). The Anglo-American Tradition in Foreign Affairs. Readings From Thomas More to Woodrow Wilson. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Van der Pijl, K. The elusive ‘International’. Int Polit 53, 628–646 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-016-0006-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-016-0006-8