International Politics

, Volume 53, Issue 5, pp 647–665 | Cite as

Confronting Eurocentrism, reductionism, and reification in International Historical Sociology: A reply

  • Alexander Anievas
Original Article


This article reiterates and further develops some of the core arguments of Capital, the State, and War in response to the criticisms articulated by John M. Hobson, Kees van Der Pijl, and William Mulligan. In so doing, it seeks to constructively engage with the potential problems of Eurocentrism, economic reductionism and reification of ‘the international’ raised by my interlocutors in relation to the theoretical and historical analysis of the book, while relatedly addressing the proper explanatory scope of the concept of capitalism in studying international relations. While endorsing the call to ‘recover’ the significance of non-Western agency in the making of modern world politics, the article re-affirms the need for a more historicist and genuinely international theoretical account of the Thirty Years’ Crisis of the two World Wars which places the violently destabilizing consequences of capitalism at the forefront of analysis as provided by the perspective of uneven and combined development.


international historical sociology international relations theory two world wars capitalism eurocentrism uneven and combined development 



Many thanks to Nivi Manchanda for her helpful comments on an earlier draft of this piece and Mick Cox at International Politics for his assistance in organizing the symposium. I would also like to acknowledge the generous funding and support provided by the Leverhulme Trust.


  1. Anievas, A. (2014) Capital, the State, and War: Class Conflict and Geopolitics in the Thirty Years’ Crisis, 1914–1945. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anievas, A. (2015a) Deciphering ‘the International’ in theory and history: A Reply to The Disorder of Things Forum. The Disorder of Things. Available at:
  3. Anievas, A. (2015b) Rethinking the geopolitics of capitalist modernity in the Era of the Two World Wars. The Disorder of Things. Available at:
  4. Anievas, A. and Nisancioglu, K. (2013) What’s at stake in the transition debate? Rethinking the origins of capitalism and the ‘Rise of the West’. Millennium 42(1): 78–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anievas, A. and Nisancioglu, K. (2015) How the West Came to Rule: The Geopolitical Origins of Capitalism. London: Pluto.Google Scholar
  6. Barkawi, T. and Laffey, M. (2006) The postcolonial moment in security studies. Review of International Studies 32(2): 329–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bhambra, G. (2007) Rethinking Modernity: Postcolonialism and the Sociological Imagination. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  8. Clark, C. (2012) The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  9. Cooper, L. (2013) Can contingency be ‘Internalised’ into the bounds of theory? Cambridge Review of International Affairs 26(3): 573–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davidson, N. (2006) From uneven to combined development. In B. Dunn and H. Radice (Eds.), 100 Years of Permanent Revolution: Results and Prospects. London: Pluto.Google Scholar
  11. Eley, G. (2015) Germany, the fischer controversy, and the context of war: Rethinking German imperialism. In A. Anievas (Ed.), Cataclysm 1914: The First World and the Making of Modern World Politics (pp. 1880–1914). Brill: Leiden.Google Scholar
  12. Hobson, J.M. (2004) The Eastern Origins of Western Civilization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hobson, J. M. (2016) The lacuna of capital, the state and war? The lost global 4 history and theory of Eastern agency. International Politics. doi: 10.1057/s41311-016-0005-9.
  14. Long, D. and Schmidt, B.C. (2005) Imperialism and Internationalism in the Discipline of International Relations. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  15. Matin, K. (2013) Redeeming the Universal: Postcolonialism and the inner life of eurocentrism. European Journal of International Relations 19(2): 353–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mulligan, W. (2016) Capitalism returns. International Politics. doi: 10.1057/s41311-016-0001-0.
  17. Rosenberg, J. (1996) Isaac Deutscher and the lost history of international relations. New Left Review 215(1): 3–15.Google Scholar
  18. Rosenberg, J. (2006) Why is there no international historical sociology? European Journal of International Relations 12(3): 307–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rosenberg, J. (2009) Basic problems in the theory of uneven and combined development: A reply to the CRIA forum. Cambridge Review of International Affairs 22(1): 107–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rosenberg, J. (2013) The ‘Philosophical Premises’ of uneven and combined development. Review of International Studies 39(3): 569–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tenbruck, F. (1994) Internal history of society or universal history. Theory, Culture, and Society 11: 75–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Thomas, P. (2015) Uneven developments, combined: The first world war and marxist theories of revolution. In A. Anievas (Ed.), Cataclysm 1914: The First World and the Making of Modern World Politics. Brill: Leiden.Google Scholar
  23. Trotsky, L. (2008 [1930]) History of the Russian Revolution, 3 Volumes. Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books.Google Scholar
  24. van der Pijl, K. (2014) The Discipline of Western Supremacy: Modes of Foreign Relations and Political Economy (Vol. 3). London: Pluto.Google Scholar
  25. van der Pijl, K. (2016) The elusive ‘International’. International Politics. doi: 10.1057/s41311-016-0006-8.

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of ConnecticutStorrsUSA

Personalised recommendations