Towards a political economy of socialist international relations

O. Sanchez-Sibony
{"title":"Towards a political economy of socialist international relations","authors":"O. Sanchez-Sibony","doi":"10.1080/13507486.2023.2191617","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Several decades ago, the field of Cold War history banished political economy from its discussions. Political economy had been the main theoretical medium through which the first generation of Cold War historians had made its critique of power. But while subsequent historians banished political economy as an explicit theoretical tool of historical analysis, political economy remained very much present, only it took crude, unreflective neoclassical and even neoliberal forms that echoed the concerns of state and corporate power over efficiency, rather than more analytical concerns of social transformation. This was achieved through the thorough decoupling, indeed the binary reconstitution, of the ‘political’ and the ‘economic’. So, while historically informed political economic analysis thrived elsewhere, from the 1990s, so-called postrevisionist Cold War historians were free to celebrate a heroic United States, and an assumed capitalist dynamism triumphing over sclerotic socialism. Most surprisingly, these historical terms themselves (capitalism and socialism, usually juxtaposed with a ‘vs.’), so central to the analytical core of Cold War narratives, were left unexamined. Three decades hence, as capitalism continues to generate one crisis after another, this motivated ignorance so favourable to the exercise of state and corporate power has reached its limit. Any analysis of capitalism and socialism and the Cold War those social forms generated will need to once again ground itself in some conception of political economy. This article presents some ideas for that task.","PeriodicalId":151994,"journal":{"name":"European Review of History: Revue européenne d'histoire","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Review of History: Revue européenne d'histoire","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13507486.2023.2191617","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Several decades ago, the field of Cold War history banished political economy from its discussions. Political economy had been the main theoretical medium through which the first generation of Cold War historians had made its critique of power. But while subsequent historians banished political economy as an explicit theoretical tool of historical analysis, political economy remained very much present, only it took crude, unreflective neoclassical and even neoliberal forms that echoed the concerns of state and corporate power over efficiency, rather than more analytical concerns of social transformation. This was achieved through the thorough decoupling, indeed the binary reconstitution, of the ‘political’ and the ‘economic’. So, while historically informed political economic analysis thrived elsewhere, from the 1990s, so-called postrevisionist Cold War historians were free to celebrate a heroic United States, and an assumed capitalist dynamism triumphing over sclerotic socialism. Most surprisingly, these historical terms themselves (capitalism and socialism, usually juxtaposed with a ‘vs.’), so central to the analytical core of Cold War narratives, were left unexamined. Three decades hence, as capitalism continues to generate one crisis after another, this motivated ignorance so favourable to the exercise of state and corporate power has reached its limit. Any analysis of capitalism and socialism and the Cold War those social forms generated will need to once again ground itself in some conception of political economy. This article presents some ideas for that task.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
走向社会主义国际关系的政治经济学
几十年前,冷战史领域将政治经济学排除在讨论之外。政治经济学是第一代冷战历史学家对权力进行批判的主要理论媒介。但是,尽管后来的历史学家将政治经济学作为历史分析的明确理论工具,但政治经济学仍然存在,只是它采取了粗糙的,未经反思的新古典主义甚至新自由主义形式,这些形式反映了对国家和公司权力对效率的关注,而不是对社会转型的更多分析性关注。这是通过“政治”和“经济”的彻底脱钩,实际上是二元重构来实现的。因此,从20世纪90年代开始,当其他地方的政治经济分析蓬勃发展时,所谓的后远见主义冷战历史学家可以自由地庆祝一个英雄般的美国,以及一种假定的资本主义活力战胜了僵化的社会主义。最令人惊讶的是,这些历史术语本身(资本主义和社会主义,通常与“vs”并列),在冷战叙事的分析核心中如此重要,却没有得到检验。三十年后,随着资本主义继续产生一个又一个危机,这种有利于国家和企业权力行使的出于动机的无知已经达到了极限。任何对资本主义、社会主义和冷战的分析,这些社会形态的产生,都需要再次以政治经济学的概念为基础。本文为该任务提供了一些思路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Traces of youth: reconstructing Hungarian women’s lives during the Holocaust Health, home and hearth: how war nurses negotiated their place at the table during the dawn of Francoist Spain Una Coscienza Coloniale : forging imperial women in the Fascist Colonial Institute of Bologna Land, indigeneity and archaeological ruins in Ottoman Palestine: the people of Beit Jibrin and the Palestine Exploration Fund ‘Fragt denn da ein junger Mensch nach?’: Would a young person ask that? Growing up in the Reichsarbeitsdienst in 1942
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1